Romer Going Negative

Chris Romer made clear at the first post-general election debate he intended to make the election about Michael Hancock’s alleged lack of fortitude to say no to city employees’ pay demands; his responsibility for the deficit; and most importantly, Hancock’s voting a future pay raise for the next group of city council members.

This is hardly a new issue. Carol Boigon, who now endorses Hancock, used it in an advertisement earlier during the general election.

If Hancock becomes the candidate of government, he can expect to lose the election. He might do somewhat better than Don Mares did in 2003 when John Hickenlooper crushed him 65 percent to 35 percent, but Hancock will not win.

Hancock wanted to run a positive campaign; that is, no negative advertising. But, it would be unprecedented in a close race when an opponent goes on the attack using a well-known public incident (and vulnerability for Hancock) to not use advertising to both defend, but go on the counterattack.

And, time is short. Mail-back voting will begin in a week, about May 23.

See news articles:
9News – Denver mayoral campaign advertising goes negative
Denver Post – Romer, Hancock turn test at Denver mayoral debate
Denver Post – Denver mayoral candidates face off at pair of forums