JUNE 2025: WHAT HAPPENED – AND HOW DO WE FIX IT?

·    Colorado was a Republican-majority State for 50 years (until 2000 - except for the Goldwater/ Johnson election.)

o  Then we became a “Swing” state (until 2008 - Bill Clinton)

o  We were pretty well “Red” – and in the top 20 U.S. “R” States - until 2004, which is when we became the 26th most R state.

o  “W” was the last “R” Presidential candidate to win in CO – but, yes, it was a close race…

o  Then, in 2016 (H. Clinton’s race), CO’s ranking dipped to 33rd.

o  DJT’s race, in 2020, made us bluer than blue, seeing us take 36th place in the country – and we watched all branches of CO State Government go “D”.

·    So…what was it that made CO become a “blue” State?

o   Was it the influx of D voters from other “blue” States – as proven by the increase in “D” registered voters?  …Probably, that was a good part of it.

·    …But…why, over the years, have so many CO voters chosen to become “Unaffiliated”, i.e. now, the largest CO voting bloc? 

o  Most people (who aren’t Party activists) would like to vote for a reasonable centrist candidate – so, they tend to vote “R” to get rid of what they consider to be a bad “leftist” agenda, and then switch to “D” to get rid of what they consider to be an ultra-conservative agenda.

o  …And, right now, they appear to not like any of the Parties. Proof?  …The growing number of Unaffiliated voters!!!

·    So…was the change in voter affiliation change based on “issues”?

o  Yes, and no.  A lot of it was/is voter disgust at the majority “D” legislators imposing higher taxes - not for obviously necessary improvements (fixing potholes!), but, often, for “Party” agenda items, “pet” projects, or to support “far-out” (anti-traditional) views.

§  Coloradans DO tend to vote “No” on tax increases.

§  CO voters are smart enough to recognize when taxes are made to “masquerade” as “fees”!

§   “D’s” have tried to find ways around tax increases that need voter approval, by “cleverly” divvying up the big-amount Bills into smaller-sized Bills, so they won’t have to go to the ballot. 

§  Note: CO voters saw through that, however, and voted to have their approval needed for fees that would raise over a certain amount of money p/year!)

o  Coloradans have proven that they DO want to keep TABOR (the Taxpayer Bill of Rights that requires the State to return revenues collected over budgeted amounts), but they are constantly frustrated, watching the D’s systematically chip away at it.

o  CO voters did (sadly) repeal the difficult-to-understand Gallagher amendment, which assessed residential property at 45% of CO’s tax base, and nonresidential (business) properties at 55% - the “good-hearted” voters having been persuaded by the “need” to address a State budget “shortfall” - which would, supposedly, have negatively affected the funding of schools.

o  …And, Coloradans do NOT like the “D” legislative restrictions on economic “sectors” like oil/gas development - under the guise of “saving the environment” – because they know (for example) that the cost of gas for their cars will go up, along with the fees added to deliveries.

o  In CO - because most of the judges are “Ds” - when the Legislature has needed a favorable/ supportive opinion, the Courts have been largely complying…and CO voters have been losing their say over controversial or revenue-increasing Bills (tho’ they may not even be aware of it.)

·    Was/is the change in voter party-affiliation due to Party infighting?

o   Maybe not as much for the D’s, since, in Colorado, the D’s Party infrastructure and politics have become loyalist-supported, smartly-organized, and well-funded.

§  Certainly, D’s don’t always vote the Party line. 

§  Certainly, many D’s have become unaffiliated.

§  …But, on most issues, D’s DO vote the Party line – because, for them, it is anti-R and anti-DJT (and many have TDS…)

o   As for the R’s, the switch to Unaffiliated may be at least partly ascribed to internal Party and COGOP politics.

§  The last State GOP “leadership” could have been listed in the dictionary under the words “divisive”, or even “cult”…

§  Party members were pitted against each other, with “purity tests” as to who was supporting the leadership “agenda” and who wasn’t.

§  Many in the Party became disillusioned when the State Party took sides in Primaries, and/or siphoned off Party funds to support questionable or self-serving causes.

o   The NEW “R” leadership literally ran against everything the past group tried to do. 

§  It has said that it wants to build Party loyalty, not factions – and to bring disaffected folks back into the “fold”, via a cohesive organization/infrastructure.

§  This new leadership is well aware that R’s and D’s each share a bit over ¼ of the electorate (D’s over R’s), and that “Unaffiliateds” now represent almost ½ of CO voters!

§  The new R leaders are also aware that many voters are turned off by both sides – and, because of that, don’t vote, at all!

o    The current numbers’ divide is either insurmountable, OR one of the Parties will read the electorate better - and come up with a winning platform, clever strategies, and electable candidates…and it appears that most Coloradans can’t wait for that change!!!!

·    Is it about which Party has the money?

o   In 2010, The Blueprint, by Adam Schrager, attempted to explain the 2008 change from R majority to D.

§   The book was/is popular among R’s because it explained how the State became transformed, politically, to “D”, almost overnight. 

§  As The Blueprint pointed out, 4 millionaires decided to take over CO politics – and did – and their money and influence are still around – as evidenced by the current governor having won with just about ¾ of the largest voting bloc in CO, i.e. the Unaffiliateds.

§   Unfortunately, the book did not provide a “blueprint” for what would be needed to adapt  R strategies, because although it described “what” happened, it only superficially dealt with the “how” or “why”…

§   Not many even understood what had motivated the 4 leaders - or that they had specific objectives, and what those were.  It did, however, explain that the D’s won, because they had single-mindedly focused their money and strategies on one thing, and only one thing: Winning – a lesson the R’s have yet to learn.

§   By the way, with the win, and seeing CO now as a deep blue State, the D’s money has grown big time – both from the millionaires within CO, and from national sources. 

o    For R’s, a lot of it was and IS about money – because, over the years, the old-time CO R largest donors have either left the State, passed on, disengaged, or just disappeared.

§  Being a bright blue State, the National R’s see CO as a no-win arena, and have pulled their money - and their attention.

·    Side note:  The 2026 election for the next CO governor, on the D side, will probably be between the CO Attorney General – who is busy building coalitions and raising funds - and a sitting U.S. Senator, who can raise all the money in the world. (There will, no doubt, be spoiler candidates, of course, but the two, listed above, are the current, and most obvious, major D players…)

·    What can R’s do about it?

o    Have more kids?  (…But who’s to say that when those kids grow up, they will vote the “right” way?)

o    Have a platform? …But does that even matter? 

§  Party “stands” on issues do one of two things: They either unite or divide.

§  R’s should have a platform that supports inclusive principles that unite CO R’s, not separatist ideologies that – even on small issues – in effect, force people to take sides. 

§  R’s should NOT focus on “issues”, at all, because, let’s face it, issues don’t matter - unless/until our candidates are elected - and besides, even though certain “issues” may gain support among those who agree, they will also turn off those who do not (or cannot).   

§  Certainly, R’s should always stand for the “basics”:  safety/security, a better cost of living, parental rights, the Constitution (freedom of speech, gun rights, etc.) and the like.

§  And…although this may be controversial, but because outreach is more important than wooing the already-committed, no personal or doctrinaire stance should ever be espoused by any R candidate - or we will not only lose voters, but turn off new ones.

§  Understandably, that may be off-putting to some candidates, or R Party die-hards who don’t or don’t want to understand that, but nor will they care…

§  Stop with the name-calling!

§  By the way, we’ve already said that most voters are middle of the road – so R’s should not be touting a “most conservative” voting record – which will attract some, but may turn off others.  Example:  While a CUT (CO Union of Taxpayers) endorsement, may be a good measure of fiscal conservative-ism, not all spending is bad, so a CUT endorsement may alienate some voters, who are just seeking “reason.”

·    Are there some things that unite Coloradans?

o    Positive ones:

§  As aforementioned, they want safety and security – in their neighborhoods, and on their streets, and around their places of worship, work, and play – and - at public events.

§  They want unbiased law enforcers, and first responders who show up as soon as they are needed – and who care about them.

§  They like lower taxes – and lower costs.

§  They like it that - when revenues exceed expenses - taxpayers get their money back (TABOR).

§  They like good schools - and to be assured that all kids are learning what we actually want them to know (and pay for!)

§  They like reasonable conservation (Sure, they like their mountains, but they do NOT like NOT having plastic grocery bags – or having to pay for the ones they need!)

§  They like no infringement on their Rights. (…And, they do like Parental Rights!)

§  They like candidates and officeholders who can “read them” - and represent them well.

o    Negative ones:

§  They dislike having their taxes OR fees raised. 

§  They dislike criminals having more rights than victims.

§  They don’t like mass transit very much, or anything that messes with their driving (like too many bike lanes; short lights; constant construction; photo-radar; unfair parking fees/restrictions; AND unfixed potholes!)

§  They do NOT like wolves!

·       How do we get new R voters and keep our old/loyal ones?

o     It is tempting to say that R’s should focus on explaining how stupid, costly, and personally-restrictive many of the D measures are – but why not?

o     We must leave in place the law that lets Unaffiliated voters get both Party primary ballots – so they can choose which one to vote – and then we must convince them to vote R!

o     We need to talk about matters that REALLY touch ALL voters: crime (especially as committed by illegal aliens), the economy/inflation, jobs, keeping sports gender-specific, maintaining our power/energy supply, road/infrastructure upkeep, parental rights, etc.

o     We must show voters how we will make the future better for them.

o     We must appear pleasant and friendly - and use humor.  

o     We must ensure that our words and thoughts include EVERYONE (not just “certain” demographics). 

o     We must address the concerns of both urbanites AND rural folk.

o     Older politicians need to understand the lingo/habits/idiosyncrasies of younger voters!

o     R’s must project optimism: We live in a beautiful State – and we need to emphasize why we are unique - and different from the rest of the US.

o     And let’s try something new – Let’s try clever and attractive campaigns… No guilt, no rants – just fun.

To the reader:

·      You, yes YOU, are needed more now than ever!

·      Please find ways to be involved in candidate and issues’ campaigns.

·      Please volunteer to be part of an “R” leadership team – Statewide and/or locally - that engages with, and responds to, our - and our potential - constituency. 

·      …And while we are at it, join CCRW - and any/every organization that supports R causes!

If it’s true that what we stand for is good, then let’s sell it. 

If only 4 D’s can do it, then we R’s can certainly gain the upper hand – and WIN!

Thanks for reading!

Your Friendly REPUBLICAN Elephant…