~ Where the Sun Will Never Set on Our liberty ~
Colorado will not vote for a Republican candidate for president at its 2016 caucus after party leaders approved a little-noticed shift that may diminish the state's clout in the most open nomination contest in the modern era.
The GOP executive committee has voted to cancel the traditional presidential preference poll after the national party changed its rules to require a state's delegates to support the candidate that wins the caucus vote.
The move makes Colorado the only state so far to forfeit a role in the early nomination process, according to political experts, but other caucus states are still considering how to adapt to the new rule.
"It takes Colorado completely off the map" in the primary season, said Ryan Call, a former state GOP chairman.
Republicans still will hold precinct caucus meetings in early 2016 to begin the process of selecting delegates for the national convention — but the 37 delegates are not pledged to any specific candidate.
The Democratic Party still will hold a presidential straw poll March 1 — a Super Tuesday vote in a key swing state that is attracting attention from top-tier candidates.
For Republicans, no declared winner means the caucus will lack much of its hype. The presidential campaigns still may try to win delegate slots for their supporters, but experts say the move makes it less likely that candidates will visit Colorado to court voters.
The Colorado system often favors anti-establishment candidates who draw a dedicated following among activists — as evidenced by Rick Santorum's victory in 2012 caucus. So the party's move may hurt GOP contenders such as Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Rand Paul, who would have received a boost if they won the state.
So because Colorado hasn't be voting the GOP RINO, Like Mitt Romney last time, it means we don't get to vote this time. Because we'll pick and loser and not the RINO Jeb Bush...WTH... Am I getting this right?
...but the 37 delegates are not pledged to any specific candidate.
That is far better IMO than pledging all delegates to one candidate. Delegates ARE supposed to represent the party voters -- are they not? Are party voters homogeneous in their preferences?
That's what I've been trying to figure out. If this is good, or if this is bad.
I think it is a good thing.
Gris, is this possibly a first step in the establishment getting to a brokered convention?