Input | Output |
---|---|
Link | Youtube |
Published | 2024/03/19 |
Theme | |
Status | article incomplete |
Beau says:
In Colorado's election scenario, voters face a unique challenge of splitting votes between the special and primary elections, creating strategic dilemmas for candidates and constituents alike.
Colorado Voters
Insights on the potential impact of this dual voting process on the election outcomes and political landscape in Colorado.
#Colorado #Election #Voting #Candidates #Primary #SpecialElection
Well, howdy there, internet people, it's Beau again.
So today we are going to talk about Colorado
and the special election and the Republican primary
and how something keeps getting said in the media
and what it means because we had a few questions about it.
Just as a quick recap, if you don't know what's going on,
in Colorado, one of the representatives, Ken Buck,
he's like, I'm leaving, I'm done.
I just cannot handle the way things are working up here in DC, the Republican Party's in disarray.
I am done.
I'm not finishing my term.
This caused a special election to fill his seat for the rest of this term.
That election will occur at the same time as people are voting in the Republican primary
for next term.
The media has repeatedly said that this would be confusing to Colorado voters.
And here's one of the questions about this.
I'm from Colorado and I'm not even in Bucks district, but I'm a little offended by the
constant claim that voting in the special election and voting in the primary election
at the same time will confuse Colorado voters.
Does the nation think we're dumb?
was this confusing? One vote for the rest of the session, one vote for the
primary?" Yeah that's exactly what it means, as far as one vote for the rest of
the session, one vote for the primary, I don't think that when they say
confusing I don't think they really mean confusing. I think they mean unusual
and it puts voters in a unique position, it puts voters in a place where they
They normally aren't, which is they're being asked to vote for two different candidates
if the candidate that they would have voted for in the primary is not running in the special
election.
Hypothetically speaking, let's say that a representative, a current representative in
another district, was moving to Ken Buck's district, yeah I'm talking about
Lauren Boebert, she can't run in the special election because she's already in
Congress. So she won't be part of that, but she is running in that primary. When
a voter gets the ballot, they're going to see the special election and they're
going to choose somebody. She has the very difficult task of asking them to
vote for somebody to take care of that seat for a few months and then vote for
her instead in the primary to keep that seat later. Those people who are not
running in the special election, who are running in the primary, they are
realistically at a little bit of a disadvantage because those who are
running in both, they're gonna say vote for me in the special election and give
me a full term, give me the time to accomplish what I'm setting out to do, and so on and
so forth.
You can see how that might be an easy sell.
That's what they're talking about.
It's putting those voters in a position of asking them to basically split their vote.
And generally speaking, voters don't like to do that.
That's why you have so many party line ballots.
I think confusing is probably the wrong term for it, but at the same time, it is unusual.
It's not difficult to understand.
One of the votes is just going to take care of it for a little bit.
The other is for the primary to then run in the general to try to keep that seat through
next term. The thing is, it's a pretty red district. So that's what it's about. I don't
think that there is a national stereotype that says people in Colorado aren't that smart.
So anyway, it's just a thought, y'all have a good day.
{{Shirt}}
{{EasterEgg}}