Unaffiliated voters pass GOP
By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published July 8, 2008 at 7:35 p.m.
Colorado's unaffiliated voters - those who don't belong to any political party - are now the largest voting bloc in the state.
It marks the first time in almost two decades that unaffiliated voters led Republicans and Democrats in voter registration.
"Independent-minded voters have been moving up everywhere in the West, but Colorado clearly is the cutting edge," said Denver pollster Floyd Ciruli. "We have a long history of registering independents."
Unaffiliated voters lead Republicans by 1,546 voters, while Democrats remain the third-largest voting bloc, according to the latest registration figures from the secretary of state.
Put another way, of the state's 2.8 million voters, 34.19 percent are unaffiliated, 34.14 percent are Republicans and 31.2 percent are Democrats. The remaining voters are members of other parties.
Unaffiliated voters participate in general elections in November but cannot vote in primary elections in August without declaring to be a Republican or a Democrat. Some unaffiliated voters interested in a particular race often claim membership in one party, vote in that primary then switch their registration back to unaffiliated.
Since the 2006 election, Republicans have lost about 42,000 voters, and Democrats have picked up about 32,000, registration records show.
Pat Waak, chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party, said the latest figures don't surprise her. "Part of this is the independence of the Western voter, but we started to see a real shift last summer," she said. "What it shows is that Coloradans are moving away from the Republican Party. I think it's great news."
But Dick Wadhams, chairman of the Colorado Republican Party, warned Democrats about being too cocky, which he said his own party has been guilty of. He noted Republicans dominated the 2002 election but only two years later suffered humiliating losses.
"This underscores what I have said about Colorado being a competitive state," he said. "Some years it's good for Democrats, and other years it's good for Republicans."
Wadhams pointed out that Republicans did not lose a statewide election from 1962 to 1970. "Just about the time the Republican Party looked invincible, along came Watergate," he said. "Democrats creamed the Republicans in 1974."
Ciruli said unaffiliated voters were the largest voting group three times between 1968 and 1976, and then every election from 1978 to 1990.
A year and a half ago, Ciruli predicted the voter trend that has emerged."The main message for me is these new unaffiliated voters by and large, while they are very interested in this election, are not tied to any party loyalty," he said.
bartels@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5327
Shifting allegiances
Voting figures during presidential election years, with leading group in bold:
2008 Unaffiliated 1,021,979 34.19%
Republican 1,020,433 34.14%
Democrat 932,603 31.2%*
2004 Republican 1,085,921 36%
Unaffiliated 986,668 33%
Democrat 913,024 30%
2000 Republican 1,014,960 36%
Unaffiliated 980,502 34%
Democrat 762,994 30%
1996 Republican 824,222 36%
Unaffiliated 738,982 32%
Democrats 719,230 31%
1992 Democrat 682,412 34%
Republican 670,282 33%
Unaffiliated 648,058 32%
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Holiday Lights
Is your house the jolliest on the block? Submit your holiday lights display.
-
Holiday Gift Guide
Looking to get a jump-start on the holiday shopping season?
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's midweek rant on the Chiefs.
-
Broncos Video
Get the latest from Dove Valley as the Broncos prepare for Sunday's matchup.
-
Calendar wallpaper
Download this month's desktop wallpaper calendar
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Stirrin' the Soup with Matt Iseman
-
The Rocky @ 150 Years
Read the Rocky's coverage of Colorado's cannibal, Alfred Packer, in 1886.
July 8, 2008
8:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
windskull writes:
Curious indeed considering it has been a long standing practice in such trendy and affluent counties as Arapahoe, Douglas & Jefferson and certainly others as well that you must declare party affiliation when registering as either Democrat or Republican or county clerk(s)turned people away!
July 8, 2008
8:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
HopiMedicineMan writes:
This configuration, in individual state house and senate districts, has spelled losses for the GOP, every time. Bush is the best thing that ever happened to the Democratic Party. Don't impeach him, Democrats, give him the Order of Lenin.
July 8, 2008
8:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Oroboros writes:
Funny timing on this. I just updated my voter registration today, and was advised that I wouldn't be able to vote in the primaries by declaring myself unaffiliated.
Some day this country should really look into getting an opposition party. It would do us wonders!
July 8, 2008
9:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
hikingartist writes:
I hope both liberal and conservatives are seeing how they are being manipulated by the 2 major parties. A better democracy would include Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and perhaps even "None of the above: they are all bums" as Presidential choices on the November ballot.
July 8, 2008
9:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
jhous1490 writes:
www.thirtythousand.org can tell you what we have been deprived of for over 100 years...the REPRESENTATION given to us by Thomas Jefferson ...we don't need more politicians, but we do deserve the representation Congress has illegally denied us.
but I've been an unaffiliated voter for over 15 years..and I do believe a third, fourth , fifth and multiple parties would decrease the stranglehold the two party system has on our politics. There are many more than two sides to an issue these days, and we need to reflect the many positions and possibilities life entails.
July 8, 2008
9:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
HopiMedicineMan writes:
"Don't impeach (Bush), Democrats, give him the Order of Lenin."
Well HMM, unless you're an avowed communist, I see some real irony in your comment!
July 8, 2008
11:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mtnmike293 writes:
WWW.thirtythousand.org just goes to show you another creative way to make money off of the gullible. 6,300 more congressmen at an additional cost to the taxpayers of 2 billion dollars. Give me a break. Anyone buying into that as making government more efficient or representative has been smoking way too much weed. The fact of the matter is that website is set up to sell T-shirts and make money. Clever, as I am certain their are enough wackos that visit and buy.
July 9, 2008
2:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
KING writes:
Wow,
I’ve been saying it for years on these blogs and yet some of you offer shallow opinions as if you don’t read one another's postings. But nonetheless, I am happy to see even you bloggers wake up and smell the coffee. The two major parties have killed American politics. You want an opposition party; you have it in the Libertarians, not the Greens and not the Reform party who both made the fatal mistake of centering around a cult of personality in Nadar and Perot, respectively. You want change; you have to vote for it.
Now a word or two about the “independent” registered voters of this state: As politics is what I do for a living, let me share this. It’s a sad story that while now Colorado may have more “independents” than any thing else is meaningless if you still vote for the same two parties. Registration as an “independent” sounds real cool to people and makes others think that your are “independent’ minded, real chic and all, but if you simply vote for one or the other, you might as well drop the “independent” façade and align yourself with one of the big parties to begin with.
Independent voting is only made so if you actually vote for other than the two parties. Now for some of you, you do in fact vote for Greens, Libertarians, Reforms, Constitutionals and the like, but the VAST majority of you “independent” registered voters are fooling no one. Don’t live in shame simply because both the Dems and Reps have ruined this country; go align yourself with you party and quit lying to yourselves that you are really independent.
July 9, 2008
3:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
LOUIE writes:
I've always voted for who I thought was best capable to lead. Sometimes neither party, such as this presidential election, put up a truly great canidate. I wish we had more choices as these two partys are so firmly entrenched, in thier respective party's doctorines and platforms, that they lose sight of what truly is best for this nation as a whole. Bipartisan efforts are extremely rare; seems when one party puts up a good bill, the other party loads it up with thier agenda and pet desires, and it is not really a good bill when taken as a whole. You end up with one thing the nation really needs on the initial proposed bill, and by the time it passes, it's been loaded up with the other party's pork barrel projects in order to get it to pass. Sad, but each bill should stand on it own without additional pork added, or we give the president line item veto powers. Either way, the two party system has become archaic, and needs fresh ideas to compete with both that more represent the needs of our nation as a whole, and not just the selfish needs of these two opposing partys. More choice is more in the better intrest of our people as a whole.
July 9, 2008
6:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
VVVV writes:
I vote for the president to be a different party than the congressional majority. That way there is either compromise or stagnation. Both are preferable to me than the nut job radical ideas that either party panders to. Just because I don't waste a vote on some fool like Nader does not make me any less independent from a political party.
That, and I would declare myself communist if it would stop the robo-calls that incessantly fill my voice mail. Primaries? Meh. It's a given that any politician that makes it anywhere is going to be a worthless tool that spoon feeds the public what it wants to hear about the front page headline for the day, ignoring the long term issues that are going to destroy this country in a whimper of apathy.
I think the "none of the above" idea would be excellent if it didn't guarantee that nobody would ever get elected.
July 9, 2008
6:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike846 writes:
So now we know who's responsible for idiots like Ken Salazar and his brother being voted in. The Independents! What a cute way for both parties to say (again) "See. Its not OUR voters who are responsible!" If you really ARE independent, vote OUT of office anyone who supports illegal immigration, more taxes, more government interference in our lives. Oh. Wait. With only a two party system, you may not have that choice!! What was I thinking? Mike
July 9, 2008
7:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
The Two Parties are the Inevitable Result of Our Election Process
We get one vote (either or) to vote for one. This form of democracy is only superior to getting one vote (yes no) to vote for the only one.
In our non-democratic system, if you have two similar but popular parties versus one unpopular party then the unpopular party wins. This happens because the similar parties tend to split their voting block forming two minority blocks instead of one combined majority.
This leads to the formation of two parties each composed of similar but disparate interests. The two party system is easy to corrupt. Imagine that you are a wealthy boss. Which is easier to bribe? Two viable candidates or ten viable candidates? So, the math also says that our political system tends to be both non-democratic and corrupt. It lends itself to bribery and tyranny.
A Ranked or Runoff Election Process Solves the Two Party Dilemma
In a ranked voting system, we do not vote for one candidate; we rank the candidates from 1 to however many there are on the ballot with 1 being the highest rank. In the first tally, the lowest ranking candidates are eliminated. In subsequent tallies, we continue to eliminate the lowest ranking candidates until one candidate is elected on a clear majority as the highest ranking candidate. If a voter returns a ballot with unranked candidates then they are all assigned the lowest rank on that ballot.
Runoff voting is similar. If the first round of voting fails to produce a clear majority for one candidate then the lowest ranking candidates are eliminated from the race and another round of voting is held. This continues until one candidate has a clear majority. They do this in almost all other democratic republics such as those in Europe.
Ranking and runoff elections allow the formation of political parties that offer similar solutions to compete and thrive in the marketplace of ideas. The two parties will never allow this on their own volition. People need to flood the caucus process, overthrow the old candidates, and replace them with regular folks who understand this fatal defect in our electoral process and will insist on its improvement.
July 9, 2008
8:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
All Coloradans can agree on equal workplace rights.
YES on Amendment 47 for sustainable & responsible reform.
Don't let Politicians - Union Bosses - CEOs force their decisions on you! Join state workers in their Right to Work.
July 9, 2008
8:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
CaptainObvious writes:
This isn't the least bit surprising to me given the way both parties have behaved in the last decade. Each party is too busy hating and blaming the other that any actual progress is now revelation.
July 9, 2008
9:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Forced Unionization - Corruption - Harassment - Politics - Forced Dues - Sole Source Deals - Loss of the Secret Ballot
YES on Amendment 47, says no to forced union dues and forced union membership.
YES on Initiative 53, protects your paycheck.
YES on Initiative 59 , stops government sole-source deals tied to campaign contributions.
July 9, 2008
9:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
YIOTA
It must be the mexicans and the blacks, that what it is. There are people like you still out there. That s@cks!
July 9, 2008
9:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
mark79trans writes:
If we could break up the two parties, we could actually see what we are getting. A religion(s), business, green, labor, socialist, litigation, and liberty party, etc. etc. The two parties are coalitions of special interests. For all those that complain, everytime you want something from the government, you are part of the special interests and the problem. It matters very little if you like an individual, you are voting for a coalition of special interests, an agenda, period! "Independent" is an illusion; the agendas remain the same. I want one thing and one thing only, my freedoms protected as written in the social contract...the constitution. I want the rest of the garbage the federal government spends Trillions of dollars on to go away.
July 9, 2008
9:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnHKennedy writes:
UDALL has been claiming the lead over Shaffer in the Senate race.
Given the number of Unaffiliated Voters....
We
who Campaign Against Udall
for His twin Failures to
a. Protect Our Constitution by calling for Impeachment Hearings
and
b. His Vote on the FISA spying bill
Have A VERY GOOD CHANCE
To AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF THE
Senate Race.
Join Us
John H Kennedy, 43 yr Democratic voter, Obama delegate, organizer of
Impeach Colorado Coalition http://ImpeachCO.com
..
Google "impeach colorado"
..
July 9, 2008
10:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Well hey JohnH, Mr. Udall is starting to sound pretty good to this southern Coloradan; plus I read he just stood up to Colorado Springs in their attempt to push through their plan to send much more wastewater down Fountain Creek, causing more erosion and the threat of flooding. Sounds like a conscientious Democrat that just may get this conservative's vote.
And by the way, didn't your man Obama vote 'yes' for the same FISA bill? Ever consider the possibility that, when our representatives are faced with the kind of intelligence data that the Executive branch has to deal with, they get a little sense of perspective about the kind of threats there are out there?
July 9, 2008
10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
mark79trans writes:
Here is something for the independent to think about.
The last time people were upset about the war was Vietnam. Richard Nixon, or "TrickyDick" won the election largely based on the nation's need for a change. It didn't work out so well last time. People may want to think about that before voting for Obama...look at what is underneath the skin. Don't get caught up in all the hoopla, or the weariness for our involvement in Iraq. This guy will say anything, but he will be the Illinois Senator and the Chicago Democrat after he is elected. If elected, maybe he can re-grease the Daley machine and place it in DC.
July 9, 2008
10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
whitecat writes:
They can add lots more to the unaffiliated column if Obama actually gets the Dem nomination. There are a lot of soon-to-be-former Democrats who won't vote for that FISA-enabling Republican in Dem clothing, and I'm one of them.
July 9, 2008
11:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
You Demmies are cracking me up with your wailing about the FISA bill. Just can't stand the idea that maybe the intelligence concerns are sufficient to merit the monitoring? What are you worried about? The Feds don't give a crap about your weekly marijuana purchase.
Looks like Obama had to step away from his 'Peace/Love/Change' hugfest for a moment, and face the facts. That's what presidents have to do sometimes.
July 9, 2008
11:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
BlueCarp writes:
Bob Barr is polling at 6% nationally already. http://campaign.blog.bobbarr2008.com/...
Reject the two party system. Vote for Barr.
July 9, 2008
11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
"I believe in God but I’m not a big believer in his fan clubs." - That was a good one Big_D.
I'm generally conservative, but don't feel like a very good fit with the Republicans because I'm pro-choice. Also I support decriminalization or outright legalization of marijuana use in the home.
But I am a Christian and do go to church on Sunday fairly regularly. Many churches have an official position on certain issues that many of their attendees don't necessarily agree with. I find lots of nice people are mixed in with some of the self-righteous, holier-than-thou types that make most of the noise.
July 9, 2008
12:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
no suprise that unaffiliated voters are now surpassing the gop's numbers in colorado.
we've started to see folks trying to distance themselves from the republican track record for months now...and it will only continue to get worse.
the big push now is to imply that somehow "conservatives" are disgusted at the actions of "republicans"...and yet when you corner these folks on the track record of "conservative" voters over the last say...40 years...you find that they can't run fast enough to get away from The Track Record.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
July 9, 2008
3:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
jm42 writes:
I WAS and INDEPENDENT BUT, since I live in a county that is heavily Republican and Independents can't vote in primaries I have re-registered as a Republican. All the important local elections get decided in the Republican primary and I wanted to have my vote actually mean something.
Crazy but true. I would guess Im not the only one forced to do this and register for a party that has an extremely strong presence in a county in order to exercise my right.
July 9, 2008
7:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
DEMOCRAT COLLAPSE!
In 1992, Democrats were the largest group at 34%, and now are DEAD LAST with a collapse to barely 30%.
Republican % has grown from 1992 to 2008, while Democraps have crashed and burned into last place.
All the Democrat corruption, lies, support for terrorism, increasing taxes, and failing to live up to their fraudulent promises has cost them!
No wonder the Democrat controlled Congress has the LOWEST APPROVAL RATINGS IN AMERICAN HISTORY AT 9%!!!!! SINGLE DIGITS! BUSH IS 3 TIMES MORE POPULAR THAN DEMOCRAPS!