President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
52%↑
48%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
January 01, 2008 01:38 AM UTC
6 Comments
Loading ...
Bloomberg’s considerable assets would make him viable in states that have shown an indie streak in the past such as Maine, Minnesota, Conneticut, and Alaska. There is a real possibilty that with his elective experience and his money that he could carry some states.
But three of those four are Democrat on the national level, and Bloomberg is socially liberal. He would probably hurt the Dems more at the end of the day
You are RIGHT on.
I had forgotten that Ross Perot had at one point in the ’92 election led in the polls. Then he pulled of the race, jumped back in with a bizarre story about his daughters wedding, and lost the momentum. Bloomberg has a similar bankroll but would be much better at running for the office. So it might not be impossible for him to win in certain states, given that there is a certain amount of disenchantment with politics as usual by the general public. A lot will depend on who the candidates are for the Dems and Reps.
Personally, and I’m obviously no election guru, I think Americans do not want to see a rich candidate jump in after all the other candidates had to go through the primaries and the scrutiny. It looks opportunistic and cynical. This election is too important for the Dems and I see Bloomberg hurting the Republicans more than the Dems.
He is a Democrat who turned GOP to run for mayor, then turned independent to run for president and wants to put a dove like Chuck Hagel on his ticket?
I don’t see why he has a chance. Dems are enthusiastic about their candidates and Mike isn’t the kind of guy who could excite independents, who are genetically cool.
I doubt whether Bloomberg has any realistic chance of winning if he enters the race. The question is what’s the impact on the other parties.
There have been four major third party candidates in my voting lifetime – winners and losers in two elections (2000 & 1968) were separated by less than 1%, so the third party candidate mattered a lot. In 1992, in my view, Perot took more voters from Bush than from Clinton.
2000 Nader 3%; Bush 48%; Gore 48%
1992 Perot 19%; Bush 37%; Clinton 43%
1980 Anderson 7%; Reagan 51%; Carter 41%
1968 Wallace 13%; Nixon 43%; Humphrey 43%
While he ran for NY mayor as a Republican, Bloomberg has been a lifelong member of the Democratic party. He is on the opposite side of virtually all social issues (abortion, gay marriage, gun control, death penalty, immigration, trans-fat bans on fast food restaurants) as traditional Republicans. He’s anti-tax, anti-union and anti-trade protectionism which aligns him with Republican economic positions.
In the end, if he runs, I think he will take more votes away from Democrats than Republicans.
If the Democratic candidate is “outside the box” of traditional Presidental candidates (i.e, either Hillary or Obama, not a white male in a blue suit with a red tie), Bloomberg’s impact on Democratic voters will be even greater.