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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 01, 2011 10:13 PM UTC

Denver Line Updated

  • 22 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

At long last, we’ve updated The Denver Line. We won’t delve into more detail on the other races here so that we can focus on the Mayoral Line and a quick explanation for how we see the race today. This all may change once the new finance reports are made available next week, but here’s our view today:

Chris Romer

Romer is the favorite at this point for two big reasons: Fundraising and name ID. This has been an incredibly quiet race for one of the biggest prizes in Colorado politics, and that gives a huge advantage to the son of a popular former governor (Roy Romer). Whether or not Romer can win a runoff is a different question, but it’s hard to see how he won’t at least make it into the top two in April.

James Mejia

For someone who started his campaign well before any of the other candidates, Mejia should be in a better position than he is. His fundraising has been disappointing, and that’s his biggest problem; Mejia has no built-in name recognition from holding prior office, so he must be able to have a strong paid media presence to have any hope of winning. If Mejia had a poor February raising money, he’ll need a minor miracle to have any real chance at winning.

Carol Boigon

We wouldn’t normally put much stock in a message of “Denver’s first female mayor” (ask Hillary Clinton how much the “first female” thing mattered), but the Mayoral race has been so boring and devoid of interesting story lines that it might actually get some traction. Boigon’s biggest advantage, however, is the fact that she’ll be able to raise or contribute whatever she needs financially — that alone puts her in a great position coming down the stretch.

Michael Hancock

Hancock’s campaign was clearly designed to make him look like the frontrunner from the beginning, but the problem with that approach is that it leaves you with nowhere to go but down. His comments that the Denver Mayor should oversee the school system looked like a bit of a Hail Mary to us, and in a close race it’s going to cost him dearly. Voters may not be happy with the school district, but the idea of putting all control in the hands of one person won’t ease their concerns. The fact that Hancock hasn’t heavily promoted his “Mayoral control” idea tells us that it wasn’t well-received.

Momentum is definitely not on Hancock’s side, but there’s time to fix that. The concern now is whether he’ll be able to afford the kind of TV presence to compete with Romer and Boigon’s money.

Doug Linkhart

Linkhart has not been raising much money and thus suffers the most from the lack of media coverage of the race. Linkhart’s not a bad candidate — he’s just not interesting enough to intrigue voters without paid or earned media support. Unless Linkhart has a couple of aces up his sleeve, we just don’t see how he’s going to be able to get attention once the TV ads begin.

Theresa Spahn

If there was ever a race where a relative nobody had a chance to pull off the upset, this is it. If she can go up on TV with a big buy, then anything goes…but we kind of doubt that’s going to happen. Her campaign touts that she “is on the list of the Top 6 Mayoral fundraisers,” which would be cool if there was a prize for sixth place.

Tweet
Share

Comments

22 thoughts on “Denver Line Updated”

  2. Will be interesting to see how the school issue will work for Hancock, I know there are some influential people who are inclined to agree with his position.

    My biggest contention is probably with the at-Large race, I think the pack is much tighter than you indicated (full disclosure: I am working with the Davies campaign).

    Wondering how you determined who to include on the council lines and who to exclude?

    1. I would think the two better known names (Ortega and Gonzales) would have the advantage. Would love why Kniech was given top spot.

      As for Davies, he is REALLY working it, so I would not be susrprised to see him do well.

      For the record, I have not endorsed anyone in this race (and likely will not) so my comments are strictly as an observer.

    2. When the next finance reports come out, we’ll have a better idea of who goes where. In the meantime, please let us know who you think we missed.

  3. It really helps make this a relevant site: it was pretty outdated before.

    Not a complaint, but I was hoping you might give a few more thoughts on a few of these.  

    I think you’re spot on with Romer.  His name ID will carry him into the runoff.  Then…who knows?  I wonder if people supporting others will rally behind the “not Romer” candidate?

    Mejia seems like he’s running a really active campaign — his people have already called me a few times.  He seems to be competitive but not amazing with fundraising.  If he can do enough in March to get some TV in April, I think he could do well, but if not it might be hard to break out of the crowd.

    Boigon surprised me.  I know she is wealthy so I expect to see a lot of TV and mailers, but I don’t really see a natural base for her.  Sure she’s a woman, but so is Theresa Spahn.  I thought she would be at around Hancock.  What do you see that puts her above?  I just haven’t heard much from her campaign.  No calls, just a few facebook invites.

    Hancock I thought was about right — he has a base, but doesn’t seem to be moving.  The school comment was weird — I think a lot of people won’t like it.  At the same time, he seems to be running a good field operation.  I see his people at everything.

    I thought you were a little unfair to Linkhart.  Sure he’s a little kooky sometimes, but he has a good base of liberals (a lot of folks I know are with him).  I would put him at the same level as Hancock and Boigon personally.  Do you think the legalization crowd and other liberals won’t be enough?  This is Denver after all 😉

    For the record, I’m not sure where I’m going quite yet — I hope once the ballot is set (with far less than 18 candidates!) we can get into some nitty-gritty issues during these debate/forum things.  Right now they seem like a waste.

  4. But there’s a long, long list of Mayors who’ve been elected without going on TV. Webb won (the first time, way back when) without much money, without much elitist support and certainly without television. If I’m Spahn, or anyone else, I look to that model. . .  

    1. Romer will probably spam all media available, but I would imagine much of the campaign for the other candidates will come down to phones, doors, and people’s networks of support.  Remember when Webb walked every street in Denver?  I still remember that — clearly it left an impression.

  6. When is the last time Denver Pols was right about one of their predictions? It is unfortunate that this blog has been taken over by nothing more than high priced political consultants. In the past, this site was about open discourse regarding important political issues. It is clear the intent of this blog has been lost. Hope you will get back to where you came from…. soon.  

  7. Two internal polls from separate campaigns are showing as of now –

    Over 40% are still undecided

    If election were held today:

    Romer

    Mejia

    Linkhart

    Boigon and Hancock are not gaining any traction.  Theresa Spahn and others don’t even show up.

    Linkhart may seem surprising to some, and he is still trailing Mejia and Romer pretty significantly, but he is a constant throughout Denver and has really taken his role as CC At-Large seriously throughout his term.

    Remember, in the past the ones with the most money in the past mayoral races prior to the runoff were not the ones that ended up winning the race.  Money is important, but not the decider in the mayor’s race the way it is during a state-wide race.

    On top of that, Denver’s only daily newspaper has not begun to explore and expose Romer’s background.  (His role in the DPS finance fiasco as well as his role in the pay-to-play bond scandal in New Mexico which ultimately cost him his job at JP Morgan.  Romer’s actions, which went before a Grand Jury in New Mexico, also tanked New Mexico Gov. Richardson an opportunity for a high profile/power appointment in the Obama Administration.) When this exposes happens, the TV news will follow and he’ll need a lot of money to defend or at least to attack his main opponents to muddy the water.

    Romer has consistently dodged community forums in the Hispanic and African American communities and created a great deal of hostility as a result and recent reports from the daily newspaper about the abrupt resignation of his top staffer, Cher Roybal Haavind, is revealing turmoil in his campaign.  

    Romer’s daughter is his campaign manager and is simply not qualified to run the campaign, and his new deputy campaign manager, Zach Knaus, has a prickly personality and brings with him a lot of burned bridges with the media and other Dems from his state house days and other jobs.  

    1. I will offer this simple correction: his daughter is not the campaign manager, Adam Dunstone is. My understanding is his daughter is working on finance.

    2. I highly doubt Denver’s major newspaper is holding back some scathing Romer DPS story – if there was one they would have run it by now.

      We’ve been through this before: The Romanoff camp ran an entire negative ad-blitz against Bennet based on these same allegations. All of Denver’s major media outlets have reported that, while complicated, this deal was good for Denver’s kids. That’s why Romanoff’s strategy failed and Bennet won (you can find these stories on the “Mayoral Candidate Forum” thread and decide for yourself who you agree with).

      In addition to that, Romer played no role in this deal. Sorry, but this doesn’t exactly scream worthy story: ‘Candidate At One Time Worked For Firm That Put Together Deal We’ve Already Reported On.’ Maybe it’s Cherry Creek News worthy, maybe.

      Your other allegations lack similar credibility. If I’m wrong please site some sources that back-up your claims.

      Also, for an “insider” you seem to lack some pretty basic knowledge, like major candidates’ campaign leadership. It makes me question the other “insider” information in your posts.

      (P.S. This was posted during my lunch break. Teachers do still have lunch breaks, for now at least)  

      1. We’re not going to argue the validity of the allegation — the point here is that they are just too complex for an average voter to use them to make a decision on a candidate. When you start talking about dividends and interest rates and bond restructuring, people’s eyes glaze over. It’s virtually impossible to explain this in 15-30 seconds, which makes it unworkable for paid ads.

        Again, we don’t know what is or isn’t true about the DPS allegations. We’re just talking strictly about their effectiveness as a campaign tool.  

        1. in detail. Pretty easy to explain in big, broad (ominous) strokes.

          I also want to stress that I am not arguing the validity of the allegation. I am simply contesting the notion that it can’t be used though, there are countless examples of complex issues being boiled down to simple rhetoric for political gain.

    3. You really should check your facts before posting. It is generally accepted that Romer was not involved with any wrongdoing in the pay-to-play scandal, and he quit his JP Morgan job.

      1. Denverco, this issue is really simple to tell.  

        Romer was in charge of the JP Morgan office in Denver and Public Finance in the Western United States.  

        Romer was implicated and then turned “cooperative witness” in the pay for play scandal that tore down Bill Richardson.

        Before that, Romer sold lots of interest rate swaps to New Mexico and all over the country.  

        Members of the finance team for the 2008 DPS transaction have told people that Romer was all over the deal despite the fact that he left JP Morgan before the deal was actually closed.

        Romer threatened the Colorado PERA board that, if PERA insisted on a 5-year true up of the DPS and PERA schools division pension systems, he would make sure PERA never had support on the hill again. (Remember, the 2008 DPS transaction was all about the DPS/PERA merger and DPS’ ability to not pay employer contributions to its retirement system.)

        Now, Romer runs from room to room denying he had anything to do with the 2008 DPS transaction. People who have known Romer for a long time smile and say, Sure you didn’t, Chris…

        The only thing working in Romer’s favor is the fact that there are not many smart reporters in Denver. We do have Eli Stokols and Heather Draper, however.  

        Romer should start praying….

  8. could shift quite a bit.  There are four candidates in District 11 including Steve Lawrence who has been around for a while.  In District 5 there are eight candidates with the Line only listing three – anything can happen with that kind of vote splitting.  Susman may be the perceived frontrunner in that race but almost any of the other candidates has better energy and stage presence.  It’ll be interesting to see who gets endorsements and how each candidate evolves.

  9. and in an open non-partisan first round, they are an important voting block.  I’ve seen Republicans in Denver waivering between Romer and Hancock, with the trend being pro-Romer.

    This is a difficult block of supporters to marshal.  On one hand, you want all the votes that you can get.  On the other, you don’t want to have endorsements that send a message that alienates other parts of your coalition.

    Also, FWIW, Mitch Morrisey, Denver’s DA, is not IMHO, particularly popular.  Dems tolerate him because he is the incumbent of their party but Dem insiders aren’t particularly happy with his job performance.  The GOP doesn’t love him because, well, he’s a Dem.  Mostly, he has managed to stay relatively low profile and off the radar screen.  His lack of grassroots popularity is one reason, I suspect, that he didn’t choose to run.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

86 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!