Mark Udall has now moved to within 2% of Gardner

[Tender Branson]

Latest vote totals:

48.20% - 983,103 votes - Cory Gardner (REP)
46.27% - 943,585 votes - Mark Udall (DEM)

Gardner leads by 1.93% (down from about 6% on election day).

CO's turnout is now 57%.

http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CO/53335/149509/Web01/en/summary.html

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

At what rate does Colorado normal vote at in Presidentia years and what was it in 2010?

That is 20% higher then nationally. For all the talk about low turnout deciding the outcome, the hot races seem to have turned out pretty well (CO, ME etc). The places that didn't had nothing contested like IN.

I think the map in the Senate and gerrymandering in the House are somewhat responsbile for the low turnout numbers.

[IceSpear]

Good news for Bennet and Hillary.

[Tender Branson]

This is somewhat interesting, because I also checked the results page yesterday and yesterday Udall was down by 2.14% and today by 1.93%, a gain of 0.21% !

Which votes are they still counting ?

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

Which votes are they still counting ?

And how many?? Colorado is worse than California!

[Tender Branson]

At what rate does Colorado normal vote at in Presidentia years and what was it in 2010?

That is 20% higher then nationally. For all the talk about low turnout deciding the outcome, the hot races seem to have turned out pretty well (CO, ME etc). The places that didn't had nothing contested like IN.

I think the map in the Senate and gerrymandering in the House are somewhat responsbile for the low turnout numbers.

2008: 76% turnout (among active & inactive registered voters)
2010: 55% turnout
2012: 71% turnout
2014: 57% turnout (so far)

[Lief 🗽]

Come on Mark, you can do it!

I do wonder how and why they're still counting votes though. From what I understood of the Colorado law, all votes had to be received by election day at 7pm. It's not like some other mail vote states where it only has to be post-marked by election day. Why are they not done yet?

[Tender Branson]

Come on Mark, you can do it!

I do wonder how and why they're still counting votes though. From what I understood of the Colorado law, all votes had to be received by election day at 7pm. It's not like some other mail vote states where it only has to be post-marked by election day. Why are they not done yet?

Well, mail-in voting "only" accounted for 1.6 million votes.

There are also 500.000 election day voters (so far), some of them might have only registered on election day.

I think they are taking a close look at these voters to verify them, which could take some time.

[The_Doctor]

So the Colorado polling didn't underestimate Gardner.  He won by the same margin, give or take a poll. That's interesting. It also means the Republican candidate needs to lead by 3% at the end of election night.

Gardner led by 3% the morning of November 5, right?

[IceSpear]

So the Colorado polling didn't underestimate Gardner.  He won by the same margin, give or take a poll. That's interesting. It also means the Republican candidate needs to lead by 3% at the end of election night.

Gardner led by 3% the morning of November 5, right?

It did a tiny bit (0.6% if you're using RCP), but not really significant. Beauprez got Ken Buck'd though. RCP had Hick up 0.5% but he's currently leading by 3.3%.

[Vega]

Be funny if for some reason Udall could overtake Gardner's lead.

[Keystone Phil]

Wow! Maybe they'll let him take the seat!

[SWE]

Unfortunately still not enough to outnumber the misogynists

[Person Man]

The margin of this race was similar to the last one, huh?

[Holmes]

Wow! Maybe they'll let him take the seat!

We would only be so lucky, Phil.

[henster]

Bodes very well for Dems in 2016. Gardner probably ran the best campaign of any Republican this year and only by 2% against Udall's horrific campaign.

[The_Doctor]

Yeah, it'll be tough to knock off Mike Bennett. It is possible if we have a Republican carrying Colorado by 3-4% (7-8% on Election Night). But really, not likely at this point in time.

Colorado Republicans have a long way to go to regain parity. The Presidential results in Colorado should be interesting to say the least.

[Lief 🗽]

If Obama had done his executive order before the election, Udall probably would have held on. Too bad.

[sg0508]

Democrats always seem to either widen the margin (if they win) post election night or narrow their loss in CO.  Bush was up about 6.5 pts in '04 at the end of election night and won by <5 pts.  Obama broke it open both times post-election night. 

This is interesting to say the least.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This election (mainly Beauprez's defeat, but also the fact Gardner barely won despite the combination of running a perfect campaign, Udall's piss-poor campaign, a GOP tsunami, general backlash against CO Dems, and Hispanic turnout not cratered) showed a few things:

1. Ken Buck's surprise loss in 2010 was not a fluke, although the phomenon isn't as strong as in Nevada, Democrats often do beat the polling here (in addition to Hickenlooper, I believe Udall and Don Quick slightly beat the polls, and Joe Neguse only lost by 2.6% despite polls consistently showing him down by 4-7 points). 

2. At this point, Republicans basically need a perfect storm to win statewide against a strong, credible, and well-funded Democrat in Colorado (this may well change, but Cory Gardners are pretty rare and someone like Beauprez, Coffman, or Wayne Williams won't cut it anymore except in a Republican wave atm, unless the Dem blows it).

[Mr. Illini]

Wow! Maybe they'll let him take the seat!

We would only be so lucky, Phil.

[Person Man]

This election (mainly Beauprez's defeat, but also the fact Gardner barely won despite the combination of running a perfect campaign, Udall's piss-poor campaign, a GOP tsunami, general backlash against CO Dems, and Hispanic turnout not cratered) showed a few things:

1. Ken Buck's surprise loss in 2010 was not a fluke, although the phomenon isn't as strong as in Nevada, Democrats often do beat the polling here (in addition to Hickenlooper, I believe Udall and Don Quick slightly beat the polls, and Joe Neguse only lost by 2.6% despite polls consistently showing him down by 4-7 points). 

2. At this point, Republicans basically need a perfect storm to win statewide against a strong, credible, and well-funded Democrat in Colorado (this may well change, but Cory Gardners are pretty rare and someone like Beauprez, Coffman, or Wayne Williams won't cut it anymore except in a Republican wave atm, unless the Dem blows it).

This is pretty much in line with CO being D+1 with an elasticity of about 5 points either way. The D's ceiling seems to be Obama 2008 ( not quite 54-46) and the R's ceiling seems to be between Gardner 2014 (49-51) and Bush 2004 (47.5-52.5). Bennett 2010 seems to be an average campaign (a really bad R going against the most generic D possible in a R wave year).

I think its been this way since the late 80s but between 1995 and 2003 it was more R+3 because the Colorado Democrats ran semi-serious candidates (and campaigns..Nader did very well here),  had a major defection over relatively stupid sh**t and had a very competent R governor.