CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 31, 2011 05:18 PM UTC
35 Comments
Loading ...
Puh-leeze. Personally unpopular candidates who are struggling financially to stay on air do not field “powerful GOTV armies.” If anything, Hancock’s is stronger.
This race is totally OVER.
Romer still has a chance.
There will be no recount.
I have no sense of either campaign team – though I know some of the staff and volunteers on both sides.
I have no idea if either can/ will have a bigger and better GOTV push than the other.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t conventional wisdom state that a low turnout in an election helps the candidate with the greater name ID? Higher turnout helps unknown candidates? Is that right?
So if conventional wisdom holds, seeing that the turnout may be lower than 20%, wouldn’t that help Romer?
There is also that market research that names with hard consonants (Ks and Xs) are more memorable. Think Xerox, Kodak, Ikea, Hancock…
Two great guys. Two totally forgetable names.
Hi Nancy. 🙂
Honk for Cronk?
Number one: CD6. Number two: Republican year. Number 3: He ran a shoestring campaign. Usual lack luster fund raising in safe R CD and he also refused to spend his own money. No surprise he didn’t do an iota better than past CD6 sacrificial D lambs. You don’t make a dent in obstacles 1 an 2 on the cheap.
If I had to bet, I’d say Hancock with a little less than “comfortable” but more than barely.
There were a lot of issues with the Flerlage run in CD6, but his impossible-to-remember-name didn’t help.
I was given a pronunciation by Flerlage himself that sounded like Fler to rhyme with her with the age in lage sounding like you say it tonnage, accent likewise on the first syllable. No doubt the Americanized version of the name.
It’s helpful to have a name that doesn’t require a guide but what are you supposed to do? Never run for office or change your name? Maybe a jingle with a catchy tune teaching the proper way to pronounce the name? Make that Flerlage. Rhymes with twirlage?
as in he was a fighter pilot, and not afraid to take on anything.
But it’s hard to blame CD6 Dem candidates for not wanting to dig deep to lend to their own campaigns. It’s not as if they’re going to win. It’s very generous of them to run at all so Dems don’t have to suffer the embarrassment of having no horse in the race at all. It’s a thankless task.
Where are you pulling that number from? The turnout so far is higher than it was during the first round. In the end, it will probably be slightly lower than the May 3 vote, if only because that’s the way it usually goes in Denver runoff elections.
But your other point is wrong. The lower the turnout, the lower the number of low-information voters cast ballots. So it’s a higher turnout that benefits the familiar name. And that’s the case here — the lower the turnout, the better Hancock does, and the higher the turnout the better Romer does.
For a person to vote in a low turnout election, it means a lot of those voters are people that consistently vote in all elections. For example, the little old lady that always sends in her ballot each year. She would recognize names that have been around more often and the majority of these voters would be infomred more so than a general election voter. General election voters are the low-information voters.
Good, because that’s the opposite of what I said.
Though you are right, there is a species of voter that votes in every election, no matter what. They tend to be older and have longer residencies than the electorate at large, and tend to be more partisan (identify themselves as Dems or Rep).
When I read this from you: “The lower the turnout, the lower the number of low-information voters cast ballots” my mind put the lowers all together and I misread it.
I guess I haven’t tkaen eougnh of tehse knid of tstes for my mind to read things correctly! 😉
Still, I think that the lower the turnout the better a candidate with greater name recognition does.
According to RSB below, it may all be irrelevant for this runoff anyway because both candidates’ name IDs are equal.
Both candidates are above 90% soft name ID now, and above 70% in hard name ID, according to the RBI poll from three weeks ago. That has to have gone up by now. Romer’s name ID advantage worked in the general, but it’s nonexistent now.
It’s against the conventional wisdom, but Hancock and Romer now both have essentially the same level of name rec.
I’m probably wrong, but this election has never failed to piss me off yet.
If we’re wrong, we can be wrong together. If we’re right, it’s women’s day on Pols. What did you say, MOTR?
From bullying the MMJ industry, to running for his House seat and then doing an about face and running for mayor, from his JP Morgan past and his ties to Josh Penry and shitty hit pieces I have to say the guy just flat out sucks. I can’t wait to see him go up in flames.
that hard-k sound is a huge electoral advantage . . . Go Dick!
http://twitter.com/#!/EliStoko…
As someone who’s heard Michael Hancock say in a city council meeting that he’s seen and held marijuana-addicted babies at Children’s Hospital, I trust and believe the man even less than I do Chris Romer.
No way. Really? What? No.
incredibly shocking given that there is no evidence of physical addictiveness in THC (psychological is a different and subject to debate).
My real question is “Why is this guy allowed to hold random babies at a hospital?
Well I give up. I now officially couldn’t care less which of these guys wins. You sure he didn’t say crack? Or heroin? I’m grasping at straws here. Creationism and marijuana-addicted babies? Please say I’m not going to wake up tomorrow to hear him relate his alien abduction. Him and the tooth fairy who was visiting at the time. Happier than ever not to be a Denver voter.
After 33 votes have been cast, the wisdom of Pols seems to be that Hancock will win. Combining guesses as to the margin of victory, Pols readers are predicting:
Hancock wins – 21 votes (63.63%)
Romer wins – 10 votes (30.3%)
Close enough for a recount – 2 votes (6.06%)
Conventional wisdom has Hancock ahead. What happened to Romer? He seemed to have it in the bag, especially with the Mejia endorsement. He flubbed the attack on Hancock’s city council salary increase, but as far as attack ads go, that one seemed pretty tame to me. Hancock, on the other hand, said creationism should be taught in public school and then tried to back pedal, claiming he misunderstood the question (an equally frightening stance given how easy a question it was). I know that a couple of Romer’s staffers quit, but other than the negative campaign tone (again, as compared to other campaigns, not so much), I’m not sure why. I feel like an idiot asking this question, but my curiosity is getting the best of me.
Romer’s Conservative base defected to Hancock, even as Hancock retained his commanding lead among Progressives. Moderates are split.
You mean because of the creationist stuff? Are there really that many fundies in the City of Denver? I find that kind of hard to believe.
I only know what happened, I don’t know why. Nobody does, unless someone begins a public tracking poll.
http://www.coloradopols.com/sh…
. Focus on the family, and Secure Communities….
But not by much. Will likely be very close, but hopefully the negative campaign works against Romer. It seems to be going that direction currently.
I just finished making calls for Chris Romer for Denver Mayor with Sec. Federico Pena and James Mejia. We need a big Latin turnout. I spent 10 tears living with undocumented workers in Denver, and Secure Communities needs to be challenged.Vote Romer