Early Tuesday morning, the Colorado Republican Party announced on social media that its leadership had brokered a deal with the Libertarian Party of Colorado where Libertarians would field fewer challengers if Republicans, in turn, ran more “pro-liberty nominees.”
We negotiated an unprecedented deal with [Libertarian Party of Colorado] that if we run more limited-government & pro-liberty nominees they won’t run spoiler candidates,” the Colorado Republican Party stated on Twitter, “Together we can break the stranglehold of Democrats’ one-party rule over Colorado.”
The Libertarian Party of Colorado additionally praised the agreement. “We look forward to seeing some great candidates!” it stated in response to the initial announcement. It later added in its own thread that the “advancement of liberty is our number one priority.”
https://twitter.com/LPCO/status/1668636274331373568
Included in the announcement was a signed letter by the LPCO Chair and Vice Chair sent to Colorado Republican Party Chair Dave Williams outlining the agreement in greater detail. The Republicans additionally tagged the accounts of the Libertarian National Committee and Dave Smith.
The letter, which lacks a discernable date, criticizes the current state of Colorado politics and how the statewide Republicans and Democrats frequently join together in opposition to topics important to the Libertarian Party of Colorado. In particular, the letter specifies the response to COVID and the “destruction” of the First and Second Amendments. It then proposes a prospective deal between the two political parties where Libertarians would avoid fielding candidates in districts and races where Republicans put forward “Liberty minded, anti-establishment candidates.”
The Libertarian Party of Colorado states that it will retain the right to field candidates if Republicans choose not to put forward such candidates, however.
Readers can view a transcription of the letter below:
“Since 2008, our state has been under uniparty rule. Each election cycle since then has moved further and further away from a democracy, putting an absolute lack of checks and balances upon our government. A government unchecked by its citizens destroys human liberty, without exception, throughout history.”
The majority of voters would agree that the alliance between corporate interests and the state benefits no one but those in power. However, most voters are simply resigned to this reality and believe it cannot be stopped.
The illusion of choice between the democratic and republican parties has been whittled away over the years as the GOP continues to support policies and practices they never would have stood for years ago. We watched democrats and republicans stand together over COVID lockdowns, vaccine mandates, destruction of both the first and second amendments, and may more tyrannical moves throughout the recent years.
We say no more.
The Libertarian Party of Colorado is a third party. But we are the third biggest political party in the country. And while our candidates do not win the majority of elections in which we participate, our candidates have an impact on the outcomes of those elections.
We are calling upon the Republican Party, above all else, to support the things republican voters believe your party stands for. Life, liberty, and property.
The Libertarian Party of Colorado’s primary end goal is to see liberty flourish, regardless of where and how. We want individual liberties protected as was intended in the founding and design of this constitutional republic.
We are calling upon the Republican Party to take our goals and objectives into serious consideration and run anti-establishment candidates going forward. If the Republican party runs candidates who support individual liberties, we will not run competing candidates in those races. Furthermore, we reserve the right to run our candidates if you choose not to put forth strong Liberty candidates.
We would prefer to work with you, and not against you, to support the Colorado that your voters believe they are supporting. We are committed to working with you to end their one party rule here in Colorado.”
Colorado Newsline has an article on this issue. It quotes a tweet in response to this by
Democrat Governor Jared Polis
:“And if you run more pro-liberty candidates who support a woman’s right to choose, the freedom to marry who you love, reducing the income tax, private property rights to build housing on your own land, and legal Cannabis and Psilocybin small businesses then… maybe you can start calling your nominees Democrats,” he wrote.
The mention of reducing the income tax, private property rights, and legal Psylocybin indicate that Jared Polis is a different kind of Democrat. He served in Congress and was the only Democrat member of the Liberty Caucus organized by Justin Amash, and he has continued to praise former Congressman Amash, including a couple months ago on Real Time with Bill Maher.
Full article @ https://coloradonewsline.com/2023/06/13/libertarians-republican-colorado-ballot/
If I am reading Colorado’s filing rules correctly it appears that both major and minor parties have the same deadline to hold nominating assemblies to choose candidates. If this agreement between the Colorado GOP and LPCO is to have any teeth then the Republicans would have to nominate their candidates prior to when the LPCO nominates, otherwise the LPCO has no opportunity to react if the GOP nominees are not deemed to be sufficiently pro-liberty. I have no expectation that coordination of nominating assembly schedules will take place.
Without a specific set of agreed upon policies that define a ‘liberty candidate’, this is meaningless and will fall apart after a single election cycle.
Also, “anti-establishment candidates”? That’s such a stupid thing for a libertarian to say.
Of some possible note…there is now at least one prominent Colorado LP person, part of the current governing caucus in Colorado, who is questioning the validity of the deal.
Is the Colorado LP infested with Mises?
Root’s: I agree that the party should be able to have standards on who it runs. In that respect, I agree that it is a “private“ organization.
But once it gains status as a party capable of running candidates, if an otherwise perfectly qualified candidate by their standards wished to run, they are violating his or her right to free speech by coluding with the GOP in advance to not run anyone.
I am not sure I would have said it violates RICO, but that is not a statute I feel qualified to debate.
ABTAFT: yes, I agree that Nolan was rational. And I am sure there are those in any given political party that believe it best serves their mission by forcing the major parties to change and conform to their positions.
The problem with this is that Republicans lie. Democrats lie. Nowadays, libertarians lie. Hell… everybody lies at sometime or another! Republicans these days are literally chosen for their ability to walk, talk, chew gum and lie as leaders.
They may appear to agree and cooperate, but all they are going to do is turn their back on anything they say to the libertarian party, and just do whatever the bleep they want once they are in office. Excuses are already written, and I guarantee you that they are laughing at the fools they just made an agreement with. They have an undeniable track record of this for decades in every single state, and at every single level of elected office within their party.
In the smoke filled back room of politics, they just blew smoke in your faces, then spit out their gum into your eyes. They have a lot more gum in the pack.
The Libertarian Party of Worcester County (Massachusetts), which is affiliated with the Massachusetts Libertarian group recognized by the LNC, has condemned this action by the Libertarian Party of Colorado.
I think this just reinforces the view that Libertarians are just the minor league affiliate of the Republicans. I personally think that is a shame.
Charles Hall: Wow what the way to repress free speech! All this is a violation of the 1st Amendment. … If a qualified candidate applies to be on the ballot as a Libertarian the Colorado party owes that candidates a vote. If they do not vote then it is repression of free association and free speech.
Is it?
Throughout the 1990s and 2000s (when I was active in the California LP), I often heard the more radical party members emphasize that the LP is a private organization and thus can establish its own rules without government interference.
How does it violate “free association” if the Colorado LP chooses not to associate with a prospective candidate?
This is a good move. Democrats have ruined Colorado.
Nolan was more pragmatic than you may think. In early 80s he thought it was pretty cool when a Penn LP candidate approached the GOP candidate suggesting the GOP candidate refuse to debate the Democrat unless the Libertarian was included. Quid pro quo was that LP candidate would concentrate on issues to peel voters from the Dem. GOP guy didn’t go for the deal and lost an extremely close statewide election.
Yep. The LP (at least in Colorado) is now a puppet party for the GOP, just like the Conservative Party is in New York. Another nail in the coffin for the LP nationally.
Wow what the way to repress free speech! All this is a violation of the 1st Amendment. This is also collusion to repress candidates. In other states county chairs have been charged with interfering with the election because they have refused to allow candidates on the ballot.
If a qualified candidate applies to be on the ballot as a Libertarian the Colorado party owes that candidates a vote. If they do not vote then it is repression of free association and free speech. Plus by colluding with the CO GOP to keep candidate off the ballot the CO LP and GOP can be and should be charged under the RICO act.
This is disgusting. I remember receiving very strong words from the national party a decade ago when our ability to run fusion candidates in South Carolina was discussed. We were told that we would be violating the national bylaws if we nominated a member of the republican or democratic party to also run on our ticket. One even threatened us with disaffiliation, although that threat was never carried through.
How is this disgusting agreement not a clear violation of the national bylaws?
I am so glad that I have left that failed party. How can they even call themselves a party in Colorado anymore? They sound like lapdogs for the Republicans at this point in time.
David Nolan is rolling over in his grave.