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%
June 30, 2010 07:28 PM UTC
49 Comments
AR to show he’d have any sort of prayer in the general election, and JN to show that she’ll have the means to go after Ken Buck.
Buck needs to show he can raise money for the same reason as AR, but with his “outside” support I think it’s less critical for him than for AR.
Especially on Romanoff. If he can’t show a truly dramatic, stop the presses surge at this point, he’s got nothing left.
I think the wild card for AR is Clinton’s endorsement. If AR can translate that into a significant improvement in fundraising, he has a valid reason to stay in the primary race. If not, not.
That said, Clinton’s endorsement was great news for a campaign that needed it. Even allowing for the reduced level of impact of a Clinton endorsement, I don’t see how people can see it as anything other than a positive for AR. I don’t think it’s enough, but we’ll see!
coming out 2 days before the end of the quarter, they only have so much ability to use it before they file. Realistically it will help a bit now, and help more in the coming weeks when they are ponying up money for TV.
Since the money it raises in the next few weeks won’t get reported on this filing, I would expect Pols and others to claim it did nothing, when in reality we won’t know until after the primary (except for guessing based on seeing what he’s spending).
I think the Clinton endorsement was established and released to over shadow AR’s poor fundraising. Unless it was released in the final push for higher numbers?
My guess is that his numbers will still be well well well below that of the Accidental Senator.
Can’t raise money, but I’m friends with Bill Clinton…it’s all about the “roots” baby.
wouldn’t it have come out closer to when numbers come out? Campaigns won’t release for a few weeks. That would be a smarter strategy.
I would think it was released when Clinton said he was supporting — that simple.
Well, you won’t be able to get the reports on the FEC’s website until they process the filings, which can take a while, but pretty much every other campaign besides Romanoff’s has been announcing theirs a week after the filing deadline.
If they had waited until when they usually announce their numbers, that would have put the Big Dog’s endorsement about 2 weeks before the primary election. Not a smart move.
And while it is a small portion of overall fundraising, the number that jumped out at me was the number of donors. Sen. Bennet has 10,852; AR has 2,317.
I think that disparity is problematic for AR, since it has not increased substantially over time, as Sen. Bennet’s has. That suggests to me that AR’s supporters have established themselves and that AR’s appeal beyond them (his base) is weak.
Of course, it’s difficult to read too much into ActBlue numbers, but I do remember AR’s team touting how he had more ActBlue contributors than did Sen. Bennet. And yes, I would think that many of Sen. Bennet’s new ActBlue contributors came from his appearance with President Obama. Still, the disparity looks disconcerting.
for some time, though he did at the start of his campaign. So those numbers aren’t a good comparison.
Sen. Bennet is trying to reach 20,000 donors by the end of the quarter. What is AR’s target? Does anyone know?
You gotta love the “we won’t know until after the primary” argument. I’m willing to predict now that AR hasn’t raised significant money for the 6/30 quarter, or for the entire primary.
As Gob Bluth (Arrested Development) would say, Andrew’s new catch phrase is: “I’ve made a huge mistake.”
but it’s a pretty big one for everyone.
Bennet will need to show he can dominate airwaves without Obama coming to town to raise money for him (and after he’s taken some hits from things like the assembly). In other words, given what he’s been spending, he needs a few million. If he wants to continue the message that he can outraise anyone else for the general, he needs to have a lot banked while spending a lot. Near as I can tell, that’s really Bennet’s strongest (only?) message.
Romanoff needs to show that he can get up on TV with one or two good ads, building the momentum from the assembly. No one expects him to match Bennet (though he has been on par with Norton/Buck, which is important). He just needs to show he can get up in time for the primary.
Norton, like Bennet, needs to show she is the financial powerhouse to keep Buck at bay.
Buck needs to show he doesn’t have to rely solely on 527 ads to fund his campaign, and needs to start raising more than he has been.
Hick/McInnis both need solid to start TV, but I think it will get less attention than the senate race unless someone is really good/bad. Without a dem primary, their numbers won’t get as much attention.
Maes would need amazing numbers to show he can break through, or everyone will quickly forget the assembly.
It’s also crucial for the local and downrace campaigns that rely on things like directmail. Unless they are in a primary they have one more quarter, but their respective state parties are going to start looking at who is viable and who isn’t and making decisions about where to put their resources.
..has been on par with Norton’s?
Romanoff showed a bit less on hand than Norton did, and far more than Buck. Actual in the door was again between the two.
In other words, his burn rate has been lower, so he has a comparable amount to spend to the two republicans (when you account for 527s helping Buck, Buck is on par as well).
Going into these crucial weeks, it looks like Romanoff is on course to go up on TV, right when you see Bennet going back up along with Norton (I would expect Buck to go up himself close to the time ballots drop as well).
It’s a complicated issue, looking at fundraising. If a candidate raised $10, but spends $8 raising it, they are less effective than the candidate that raises $5 but spends $1 doing so. That’s why I say Romanoff has been solid for what he’s spent, and is on par.
Additionally, it’s important to look how much is from so called “doublemax” donors. If a candidate like Bennet or Norton is burning primary dollars to raise general election dollars, it hurts going into the primary — they will have less to spend than it looks like to start with.
When referring to burn rates it’s important to consider TV ad placements which increases the burn rate but saves money down the road due to lower ad placement costs.
a candidate can spam TV with low dollar spots, running cable or during a rerun of the A-Team at 3am, or they can buy a few more watched spots during primetime.
Colorado is in several markets too (I know Denver, Springs, Fort Collins, and Grand Junction all have TV, but I’m not sure where else) which matters a lot too — you can’t just buy prime time Denver and win. This is especially true for republicans, who are more decentralized around the state (though a C Springs buy is obviously important for the primary).
In other words, finance and burn rate are really complicated. It pains me when I see the intricacies ignored and media reports that dumb it down to a simple “candidate X raised $10, candidate Y raised $8, therefore X is winning.”
I doubt that Romanoff’s name recognition, even within the Dem Party is over 35%. That’s going to take a lot of cable tv ads to overcome.
to those of us on the inside, Speaker of the House is a big deal. It should be — it’s the second most important job in state government. But to the public at large, not so much. Even in this group, here’s a reality check:
Who was speaker of the House BEFORE Andrew Romanoff?
The president of the Senate might beg to differ.
Romanoff probably has higher than average name ID for a former speaker because of his campaigning for Ref C, but let’s be real, that was five years ago.
Basically, because he combines the job of leader of his party and presiding officer. When I first covered the Senate, the Majority leader actually outranked the Senate President — he was chosen first by the caucus, made the key appointments, etc.
Since that day, the Senate President has become more powerful (remember, in that time, the lt. gov. actually presided over the Senate when it was in formal session and when he could stay awake.
But, overall, the speaker is still more powerful than the Senate president. Plus, the Senate is smaller and tends to have more prima donnas — the term herding cats applies. In the House, the authority of the speaker is rather more clear.
You mess with him or her at your peril.
Lola Spradley was Speaker before Romanoff.
Ms Spradley was indeed Romanoff’s predecessor and the first woman speaker of the House.
And her name ID statewide was … ?
And her name ID statewide was … ?
negative numbers.
He was taking in millions before the President came to town. I don’t think that will have stopped because of an assembly that went as expected.
and is hoping for 20,000 by day’s end. At the end of his campaign, Mark Udall only had 16,000. Bennet’s numbers will bolster his credentials as supported by the grass roots of the party. Obviously, the Obama visit helped bolster that tally, but any way you cut it, the sheer depth and breadth of Bennet’s support is striking. I’m about to send a modest contribution to Bennet in hopes of helping him top the 20K mark.
Do you think the Big Dog maxed out for AR? I’m looking forward to seeing how much he personally gave in the report. I assume it was over $200, and will be there.
Loyalty only goes so far. But I’m sure they’ll list him whatever it is.
… to every formerly prominent state legislator in every state who’d endorsed Hillary and now is running some longshot race? There have to be easily a hundred folks like Romanoff around the country now hitting up Bill to “return the favor,” and I doubt Bill has $100K+ to donate to the entire B-list…
That’s not what a C-note is.
Ten seconds on Google found that Billy made $52,000,000 from 2000 through 2007 from speeches alone. Together the Clinton’s made $109,000,000.
$100k to say thank you, not a problem. We are talking about a whole different world than you or I live in.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.co…
Doesn’t Maes have to man up today to show that he can do more than live off his donations?
You mean he should show donations made by others, as opposed to donations made by him personally? Is living off of your own means less manly than living off of the means of others?
Also, what does being a man have to do with either situation?
http://coloradoindependent.com…
Since you aren’t comfortable with Colorado slang let me restate the sentence in immigrant language:
“Maes needs to show decent fund raising abilities to compete head to head with Scott McInnis”.
Is that politically correct enough for you pilgrim?
I was making a joke about how important it is for you to deflect attention away from Maes by making the issue about something meaningless like a phrase.
The real question is whether Maes is capable of doing anything more than being a spoiler. Are you Maes man who can’t wait to find out how many true blue conservatives stampeded to his rescue? If he has a good quarter than the summer is going to tough on McInnis. If he is nothing more than a Tea Party poodle than McInnis can turn his attention to putting on his moderate mask to pander to the moderates. The Maes numbers are going to have a bearing on the governors race.
I’m figuring you’re a McInnis man/woman/bottle of Chardonnay who is desperately trying to get people to talk about anyone other than Maes. Maes hanging around and being to the right of McInnis makes life difficult for our local lobbyist in his quest to win the extremist vote which should have been a done deal by now.
Then again you just might be a redneck with a fancy name and a dГ©sir to rumble with vowels. Anything is possible when someone logs in with one of them there foreign sounding names.
Dan Maes needs to post at least $150k to even move McInnis a little. Based on all of the “hype” Maes has been building around himself this should be a legitimate fundraising mark. If he doesn’t raise at least $100k, he should fold up and go home.
And then he went on to win the assembly. I’d say Dan Maes remains a credible contender.
Sure, he draws fiery support from (a) conservative activists and (b) tea partiers who show up 80 folks at a time to complain that Obama should keep his government out of their Medicare or whatever. But what percent of the million-plus registered R voters in the state have ever heard of him??? Without ads — more than a mildly known guy like Romanoff needs — he’s a zero in a statewide race.
Maes is still down in the polls by 20+ points. He can’t win the primary or the general election. All he can do is hurt the GOP chances of beating Hick thus really going against what he says he is trying to do. Not a serious contender.
..as “Gilpin.” I must confess that, to my shame. Y’all got the internets up there and everythang? Or did you conjure up that “foreign-sounding” place so that you could claim to be from a mysteriously exotic locale?
Gilpin can only be considered exotic if you are on the high rollers list down in Black Hawk or you go off the trails in Golden Gate State Park. Actually GGSP is a lot of fun in the spring and fall before the Front Range Divide trails are accessible. The hike to Fraser Meadows is delightful like having a rainy day off and a case of Thunderbird.
Glad to make the acquaintance. Hope you don’t want to flog “man up” anymore as a colloquial expression.
But I am called on to patrol the blog site to call out the use of “man up.” Sorry. I might give you a free pass next time, though. Because I’m kind like that!
I’ll be on my toes next time with an even more colloquial way to say that Maes raising big bucks is bad news for McInnis. I’m thinking Buck is going to be the underdog who takes out a GOP corporatist but Maes might bloody McInnis and leave him badly depleted before he gets in the ring with Hickenlooper. If Maes tanks with no big donors then McInnis can mail in his appeals to the Tea Party extremists and focus on pandering to the moderates for the general. The Maes fund raising numbers are going to be intriguing for their strategic consequences.