U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
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) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 17, 2013 12:03 PM UTC
13 Comments
No Szabo?
Szabo? For what?
that would be a good yard sign or bumper sticker
Cynthia Coffman isn't still thinking about an AG run?
I wouldn't give the edge to Romanoff. First, Coffman's a multiterm incumbent, including one win after CD-6 was made more competitive. And while there's a kind of "first term" quality because of that, I think he still has a greater incumbent's advantage than the usual first-termer would. Second, Romanoff's refusal of PAC money is simply going to hurt him more than it helps. The battle over money in politics was lost.
For those reasons, I would swap Romanoff's and Coffman's places. Coffman may spit out a few more gaffes, but it takes money to take advantage of that.
First, Coffman, swimming in funding, took 49% against an empty shirt that had no money. There is no incumbant edge because of that.
Second, Romanoff's refusal of PAC money is better politically then taking it this go 'round. Nothing would hurt Romanoff more than a Coffman campaign ad to the tune of "When he was running for the Democratic nomination, he refused to take PAC money to cut off the influence of Special Interests. NOW he's taking it just so he can get elected…" He also seems to be doing just swimmingly now funding-wise even with the pledge.
Third, he will have the full force of the DCCC behind him in a district that now swings his way, which will probably force the RNCC to back off eventually (especially if other, more important districts need the help more).
I think the Pols assestment is pretty accurate for the time being.
Coffman wasn't swimming in the kind of money he'll be swimming in this time because his team didn't take Miklosi seriously until very late in the game. They didn't fight tooth and nail because they didn't think they needed to and they were proved right. Miklosi got way too close for comfort, though, and Romanoff is a much stronger candidate. To think that a Miklosi getting close in that election under those circumstances means a good candidate can win with a few more bucks in a very different 2014 election would be a big mistake.
I don't believe it's not winnable for Romanoff but I agree with Ari; edge to incumbent Coffman, already re-elected once in the new CD6 and who's seat will be defended by the state and national GOP to the death.
It'll be interesting to see how much differently Coffman runs his campaign in 2014. His "New! Improved!" voting (or maybe just PR) record will be used as a defense against the 2012 Coffman who was the invisible man after his many gaffes and public embarrassments over his old Tea Party/Birther persona.
But he'll definitely have to make public appearances this time around, and even a bunch of debates with Andrew.
Andrew can run on his record in the Colo House. Coffman will have to run away from his in the US House.
And Andrew's record in the Colo. House is quite the deal making, across the aisle moderate one, despite the attempt to turn him into Super Progressive Man against Bennet.
Exactly what CD6 (and the US House) needs.
No argument there.
Agree with most of this – I don't think Romanoff could flip on the PAC moeny (again). I think he'll do fine with money – lots of national help.
Do think Coffman still has a slight advantage though – being an incumbent is a powerful thing for resources in a Congressional race. It's why they don't lose much. And which Coffman is vulnerable in the seat, I'm not sure he's weak. It'll also be a midterm election, which is going to help Coffman. Romanoff would probably have been in better shape running in 2012.
I seriously would like to see Ralphie as the Dem candidate for SOS. He'd do a damn good job running it and he would fight like hell to win. Plus it would give the western slope a state-wide officeholder.