If your argument is that Giffords only represents a small part of the district and that would make her a poor candidate, it is still more of the district than either Latas or Schacter currently represents.

Not that that matters, really. What actually matters if you are looking at "electabliliy," at least initially, is how well known you are. For example, Linda Arzoumanian was elected by the etirety of Pima County, but few people could name her. Whereas someone like, say, Ray Carroll, only represents a piece of the county but is on television constantly. It's not like people don't know him because they live outside of his district.

As for your comments about the liberalism of the district: yes, its true. But one also has to remember that the district includes a sizeable chunk of eastside precincts that voted for Mayor Walkup, and Senator Giffords has worked hard to paint herself as a centrist over the last few years.
 

Your point about name recognition is well-taken, but I don't think that should be the only (or even a) factor in deciding who gets the nomination.

True that Senator Giffords is a tested and known quantity. I've said a few times in other posts that I respect her and appreciate the work she does in representing me. I don't believe - and I think even she agrees - that that means someone who hasn't held public office before shouldn't be given a chance to run and have their views evaluated by the electorate.

The House of Representatives is, after all, the people's house. True that the founders only defined "people" as property-owning white men; perhaps even more reason to elect a woman. Still, one of the beauties of the House is that, as times have changed, many everyday ordinary citizens have been elected to its chamber.

If anything, I'd want a Congresswoman Giffords who let her true liberal colors shine through. That may not be possible in any district in Arizona (except of course for CD7!), but that's where my tastes lie.