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
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
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
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 28, 2010 07:56 PM UTC
19 Comments
Loading ...
I can’t see how any candidate for either Senate or Guv could be considered a lock. Or AG for that matter.
Given the odd political year we find ourselves in, the only sure thing is that the prognosticators will be disappointed with their predictions.
n/t
If they didn’t receive a single vote on the last poll — you can’t possibly be considered a “sure thing” if you don’t even get one vote.
Not really fair to have Norton on the list if Buck isn’t. After all the Big Line gives Buck a better chance than Norton.
McInnis – 1
Buck – 1
Bennet – 3
etc
you removed Suthers from the “LOCK” category because circumstances changed.
Well, thinks have certainly changed for Buck in the last month.
Note that you include Norton in the poll, and she is on the verge of conceding the race to Buck.
I would vote for Salazar, if the slate was completed, but it isn’t without Buck, who may get votes this time around, if he was included.
.
Just a mistake, then.
But as others have said, we have a hard time seeing how you could make a case for any of the Senate candidates as a lock.
.
I never make any, so I don’t always recognize mistakes when others do.
.
He’s an obvious lock. I’m leaning toward Bennet as a sure thing – but that would still be making a bet. Salazar I would bet on without having to worry too much.
John Salazar is a lock. Take him off.
Earlier in the week someone mentioned how Buck has a big leg up if the immigration issues stays strong through the election cycle. I got to say, that post really changed my opinion. If he can beat Jane, the immigration issue can provide some good red meat for the GOP base to keep them in the fight.
And unless CD-3 changes meaningfully, remove John Salazar. Tipton wasn’t a strong challenger last time, and I still can’t remember the name of the other guy on the GOP side, which I’ll take to mean he’s not a strong contender in the general election either. Salazar is about as sure a lock as you can get and still have a half-credible challenger.
Buck’s fortunes are changing, and I think his name has good vibes through the GOP community without having the negative build-up in the general election that Norton seems to have. I still think he’s an underdog compared to either Bennet or Romanoff, but…
That’s some TruckNutz.
That is the only LOCK.
Your poll falls short of the mark in so many ways – Buck being the most obvious. Why not make a serious effort to be impartial? Exhaustive coverage and offerings would allow you a chance at that objective.
Good luck with that.
The mainstream media hasn’t since before the WMD hoax? Impartial would only matter these polls had a direct influence on stopping the oil spill otherwise it is just a measure of who gets fired up over their candidates.
As far as it being a done deal for Ken Buck, you are more optimistic than a BP executive at a press conference or maybe just as deceptive about what a failure you have on your hands.