U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Michael Bennet
50%
50%
50%
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) Brian Mason
60%↑
30%↑
20%↓
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%↑
30%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Yadira Caraveo
45%↓
40%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
April 18, 2011 01:39 AM UTC
18 Comments
But Linkhart and Boigon would’ve been termed out of their council seats anyway, correct? They couldn’t have run again if they had wanted to.
Linkhart, Boigon, and Hancock were all elected in 2003.
Denver restricts council members to three terms of 4 years. If I remember correctly, Linkhart and Boigon came in when Sue Casey and someone else didn’t run again. Casey ran for mayor (and got crushed).
+1
She was the member for District 6. Charlie Brown was elected to her seat. Before LInkhart and Boigon, one of the at-large members was Susan Barnes-Gelt. I’m not sure who the other was, maybe Cathy Reynolds?
(random reference for you Johnny Cash fans out there).
Thanks — my memory starts to fade at some point.
It was a push poll for Romer. Not a heavy push, but used the newspaper endorsement to judge support of Romer campared to others.
Also polls in general are becoming less representative of the population as more and more people, particularly certain demographics, are moving away from land-lines phones and therefore will not be reached by polsters.
I would hazard a guess that “land-line likely” demographic would heavily correspond to the “voting for Romer’s name” demographic.
Carol Boigon withdrew from the race today, endorsing Michael Hancock. I’ve heard chatter among Linkhart supporters (just chatter among individuals, mind you) that they might consider supporting Mejia, who they feel to be the other progressive in the race. Romer is clearly aligning himself with conservatives. I’ve begun to feel that whoever gets in the runoff against Romer will win, but is it possible that Romer won’t even get in?
My guess (and this is only a guess) would be that Romer will make the run-off. The $64k question is who else will be there with him.
Right this second, my gut is saying Mejia, but ask me again in a couple of hours and I may feel differntly, that’s how nip-n-tuck this race is.
Suddenly, the race has caught my interest – it should be a fascinating next few weeks. Romer probably will make the run-off, but Hancock and Mejia will make it interesting. If, and this might actually be a big if (they’ve been going at each other a bit), Hancock and Mejia can avoid beating each other up, Romer is ripe for the picking in the run-off.
Just wanted to point out how wrong Denver Pols has been in their understanding of this race. Just a few days ago, they listed Boigon as second to Romer, with Mejia trailing and Hancock falling??
Wrong.
Anyone remotely familiar with Denver politics knew that Mejia and Hancock were on the rise. Romer had his initial support from his name, his father’s connections and his connections in the state legislature…but didn’t have much of a base outside of that.
There have been accusations by others on this blog that the editor is clearly and obviously anti-Hancock. I believe this is glaringly clear and completely detracts from the quality of the entire site.
And even comments regarding Mejia show limited understanding of local politics. “Too bad he doesn’t have enough money to reach voters.” What? Just how much money do you need in a city mayoral race. He seems to be doing just fine to me. I see his T.V. commercials, billboards, yard signs, etc. as much if not more than Romer.
Anyway. In my book, Denver Pols = FAIL. I for one, won’t be wasting any more time by checking this blog anymore.
In your one day of having a user account, you clearly haven’t read anything we’ve written.
We’ve loved Hancock’s TV ads. We’ve loved his story. We think it’s the kind of story that will get you elected.
He may have a shot at using it now. Either way, we’ve never been “anti-Hancock,” we just didn’t think he could win it.
With all due respect, I think it will take more than “having a nice story” and wonderful TV ads to get Michael Hancock elected mayor. I think everyone salutes him for overcoming the seemingly insurmountable obstacles that life has thrown at him. But that doesn’t mean he should be our mayor. I admire him, but won’t be supporting him in the first round of the mayoral election. I’m not thrilled with his stance on DPS and have serious concerns about his opposition to Mile High Cab’s bid to launch taxi service in Denver and the connection it may have to campaign contributions he has received from Metro Taxi.
He’s certainly an impressive man, but there are a couple of options for mayor in the first round that I like better.
What’s the timing of a new line now that your presumptive #2 is out of the race?
Perhaps some introspection and a new line on Pols having the right line?!?!
Preach on. I am not even supporting Hancock, but this blog is glaringly anti-Hancock. Just look at your line. Carol Boigon has never polled better than 8%, she had terrible ads and she had to loan herself money to be competitive. And she’s number two? I could go on, but suffice to say, this blog would be a lot more fun if it wasn’t so blatantly supporting other candidates.
I had to comment on this because it’s been annoying me for a while and it was good to hear someone else draw attention to the anti-Michael Hancock sentiment.
I think it was a very fair assessment of the poll. Hancock did gain, but Mejia gained more. In any event, clearly a 3 way race, with Hancock just a half step behind the other two.
I am satisfied with the outcome. The percentage of votes obtained by each candidate was what they all deserved.
Election news