Spurred By The Capitol Riot, Thousands Of Republicans Drop Out Of GOP
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Lyle Darrah was on a conference call at work in rural Weld County, north of Denver, when the riot at the U.S. Capitol started on Jan. 6. When his boss mentioned what was happening, he turned on news coverage — and immediately felt his last allegiance to the Republican Party slipping away.
"I was completely shocked and ashamed. That's not how I think of the Republicans — who we were, and who we are," he said. "It's something I felt I could no longer be in support of."
That night, he talked with his wife over dinner at their home. Darrah had been a lifelong Republican, while his spouse and children are Democrats — the kind of family that joked about canceling out each other's votes.
Later, Darrah, age 49, sat in his living room and pulled up the state's voter registration website . And then, like thousands of other Coloradans in the wake of the insurrection, he left the Republican Party.
"I think it should be a signal," said Darrah, a software company director who voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020.
His strongest political priorities are fiscal restraint and national defense, he said.
"I don't know if there's anything to be said about being party loyal your entire life, if your party doesn't go in the direction you want it to," Darrah added.
But in this moment of upheaval, his story is just one of many reasons that voters have abandoned the GOP in Colorado, a once-competitive state that swung strongly left in the Trump era.
4,600 fewer Republicans after the riot
In the week from Jan. 6 through Jan. 12, about 4,600 Republicans changed their party status in Colorado, according to a CPR News analysis. There was no comparable effect with any other party. CPR News was able to contact dozens of them by tracking changes in the state's voter file.
The number of people changing parties spiked immediately after the Capitol breach. The same phenomenon is playing out nationwide. News outlets documented about 6,000 defections from the party in North Carolina , 10,000 in Pennsylvania and 5,000 in Arizona .
In Colorado, only a small fraction of the defectors made the same dramatic leap as Darrah did in choosing to join the Democratic Party. Some went to conservative third parties. But the vast majority — about 4,200 people — switched from Republican to unaffiliated status, accelerating a trend that has affected both parties in Colorado in recent years.
Tags
Who is online
93 visitors
Other newly former Republicans had the opposite reaction: They cut ties with the party because they felt its leaders had abandoned Trump by blaming him for the riot and refusing to overturn the election.
"I quickly realized that I would probably never vote for another Republican again. They have let America down," said Cara Samantha Toney, a 45-year-old mother of three who switched from Republican to Libertarian and lives in Jefferson County, a suburb of Denver.
Phil Trubia, a 52-year-old Mesa County voter, made a similar move to the American Constitution Party. He sees himself continuing to vote for Trump loyalists like Rep. Lauren Boebert, but not for mainstream Republicans.
"I do feel there is a split," Trubia said. "I'm not necessarily doing it to hurt the Republican Party, but the way they turned their backs completely on Trump, that kind of got me really upset."
Gads Larry - for heaven's sake - you know better than to state totally opposite of what the drivers on the main board are pushing.
BTW - welcome back - you have been missed.
Hi Warrior, good to see you as well.
Being a life long Republican, I as well changed allegiances, though before Trump was elected. Trump was not the main reason I switched Parties; but, his nomination and rise were emblematic, of all the reasons I started becoming disillusioned by the Republican Party.
I completely understand after Trump’s coup attempt, why folks feel the need to get out from under the oppression that has become the Republican Party.
Good evening 1st. Hope you are having a good evening. IMHO, contrary to popular belief, the majority of said Republicans allegedly dropping out of the GOP are nowhere near flocking to the Democrat side. Most are switching to become Independents or just non aligned and see the Democratic Party as not much better than the Republican Party.
Ed,
I don't think it was implied that ex Republicans were becoming Dems. I think the assumption is that they are becoming indies.
I don't think it was implied that ex Republicans were becoming Dems. I think the assumption is that they are becoming indies.
I am one of them. Will never vote for a Dem.
bfd. it won't matter where you live.
Then you are not a true indie. A true indie votes for the most qualified person, and not based on party. I have voted for both parties. I look at their qualifications and how they stand on the issues.
Only way to go.
It sure is. Been an Independent since I registered to vote for the very first time. Even at 18 I knew I didn’t want to be associated with either party. Bunch of idiots, the whole lot of them!
Who are these mysterious (and un-named) "drivers of the main board?
(Those who names shall not be mentioned???)
As a registered Independent, I make every effort to vote for the person and not the party. I have in fact voted Democrat in the past.
I have read many of your comments over the last couple years. You have not sounded like someone who sometimes votes for Democrats.
I am a right leaning conservative. That is no secret but just because you have not seen me vote for a Democrat does not mean I have not. The last Democrat I voted for in a national election was Rep Ron Barber of Arizona who was defeated by Martha McSally. I have voted Democrat in my local and county elections on a number of occasions. I just do not care for the current crop of hard core leftist liberal Democrats in DC. That being said, a lot of the Republicans are no peaches either so I choose carefully to suit me, not you or others.
Unfortunately. in this day and age independents aren't nearly as independent
Good for you. That’s how it should be. Way to many people are so entrenched in one party or another that they don’t care about qualifications, reputation, or outcome.
Hold on. If this Trubia person will continue to vote for a loyalist like Boebert, then why leave the republican party? His logic doesn't work for me
weld county is a brain-dead teabag shit hole.
Where is it in Colorado?
east of ft collins. secessionist teabag central in colorado.
You guys gonna try to get your own state like some "person" from Cali???
Why would dev do that?
T'was a joke - against his use of the phrase "secessionist teabag central". Reminded me of someone who is constantly talking 'bout how great the "New" state of Californication is gonna break off some day.
Just a joke.
I'd explain, but it wouldn't be worth any of my time.
You guys gonna try to get your own state like some "person" from Cali???
Most Republican politicians already have their own state.
(It's called "A State of Confusion"!!!)
You're referring to some "person" (or persons) from Cali who promotes the fictional state of "Jefferson" where all the Trumpists can hide out in their caves until their dream of a "rapture" destroys humanity?
the redding turd polisher ...
Majorie Greene seems to be the new face of the Republican party. That says it all.
Yup ,,,
,,,she’s loony.
Yes she is, but so is "The Squad".
Which one of them has called for assassination, or claims that Jewish space lasers started the California wildfires?
Not even in the same league, Ed.
I did not mean to imply that they were in the same league. However, two out of the four Squad members are blatant bigots that are tacitly condoned by the other two who make outrageous comments of their own.
This is very true. So the only difference is crazy bigotry vs noncrazy bigotry.
Who? What evidence?
Well, that's one way to look at it.
Another way is to note that they are 2 out of 535 members of Congress.
Now even if you believe those two have considerable influence other the other 533 members of Congress (thereby representing a significant danger to democracy)-- how does that compare to the number of members of Congress whostill refuse to accept the legitimate votes of The Electoral College?
Get your quotes straight Bob. That was me, not Perrie. As far as evidence that should be a no brainer. There is a fair amount of anti-Semitic/anti-Israel comments made by Omar and Tlaib on record and well documented.
I was addressing Perrie. She cited you, and doubled down. I thought I might get a straightforward answer... from her. I didn't ever imagine that you would have anything concrete... and indeed you do not.
A quick Google search shows that both women have often been accused of anti-Semitism... but does not show any evidence of their actually being anti-Semitic.
That's how the right rolls nowadays: a Big Lie... and just keep repeating.
MTG is pretty blatantly anti-Semitic, herself. And looky here:
How fast can she run... backwards?
I don't think she has to backpedal all that hard. Her colleagues seem perfectly willing to forgive her, regardless of what she says or doesn't say. They even seem to have bought into the whole "I don't know what the Jewish space lasers were, even though I'm the one who fabricated the story on social media" shuffle.
Lies are truth.
Their own words.
Sandy,
That is a given, too.
I did a quick Google search but found nothing. Lots of accusations,but no evidence. It looks like a swiftboat.
There are some anti-Israel quotes. I hope we agree that anti-Israel and anti-Semitism are not synonyms.
Bob... are you claiming I spread lies? I think you better think again.
These links concern remarks critical of Israel. Personally, I do not consider criticism of Israel to necessarily be anti-Semitic.
The ''Benjamins'' remark was callous. That was the worst in your three links.
So I'm thinking that there's more anti-Muslim happening here than anti-Semitism. It's a classic trick: accuse someone of doing to others what you intend to so to them.
Are you interpreting my words to say something I never said?
I insist that reformulations should be CoC violations.
Oh please, Bob. Did you even watch the video? And I am sorry if you don't know when someone is making a smear about Jews but that Benjamin comment was beyond callous, but then questioning who Jews are loyal to, the US or Israel is beyond the pale. It is one of the oldest antisemitic tropes that there is. Then you top it off with it being anti-Muslim? I think this discussion is over.
Are these your words:
Well, I repeated the "big lie", right?
But it was not a lie, since I produced the information you asked for. You just decided to dismiss it.
I hate stupid word games and I am not going to play them now.
Of course. It's just frustrating when, in the face of insanity such as MTG's, some deflect to "the squad" as if they were in any way equivalent. They're not. It's also frustrating that, in the course of that deflection, they call out "the squad's" bigotry, while ignoring the anti-Semitism displayed by Green, which got a standing ovation from some of her party.
On that I agree with you 100%. The woman is a raving lunatic who should never have been elected.
That's an insult. You're awfully free with them, sometimes. Here, I'm saying you were mistaken, two years ago, and that you simply haven't re-evaluated since.
I'm politely explaining how and why I think you were mistaken. Your reaction is to insult me and then declare the discussion closed. Wow...
I have not accused you of spreading lies. You made that up. It's another insult. "Lie" implies intent, which I do not for a second imagine. Only the Pope never makes a mistake, and that's only ex cathedra...
Questioning the loyalty of people who have divided loyalties is NOT anti-Semitism. The same happens to Muslims, for pity's sake. The same happens to anyone with an accent.
"Why don't you go back to where you came from?"
If Omar's tweet had said "It's all about the Big Bucks, baby"... you'd probably agree with it. The tweet said "Benjamins" so it's stupid and callous. It's "offhand anti-Semitism"... which I agree is reprehensible. Should we lynch her?
It was two years ago.........
The discussion is not closed until we agree that it's closed.
I totally agree with you. This woman has no business in office. Her party should kick her out. This is an all-time low having a lunatic being a member of congress.
Since when is asking a question an insult?
We did this one already. I'm not playing. I don't insult people. It's low and petty.
Are you kidding? You do realize that is why Jews have been thrown out of countries for centuries? And while we are talking about it, you do know that there are almost zero Jews in all of the Arab nations, right? That they were all kicked out. And I am well aware of what's going on with Muslims, so Omar should know better, right?
No, I would not. It would still be insulting. But making it about Bennys, was over the top. Btw.. she did have to apologize, or have you forgotten that?
See, this is why I hate discussing things with you. You take it to the ridiculous. I don't have hate in my heart. It seems like she does. That is what I am trying to say.
So what? It doesn't count? All it shows is that she is smarter than Greene, who keeps blabbing away.
And btw... I don't have to respond if I don't want to. I would have "impasse", but I had made a comment.
... is a question. I would have been surprised that you'd imagine me asking for evidence and then not looking at it, but hey!
...is an insult. The formulation assumes the negative.
You handle the English language well enough to know the difference.
---
Is that also a ''question''? It sounds kinda like a threat, based on a false presumption. In other words... ''where did this 'spreading lies' shit come from?''
I said (that I thought) you were mistaken. It didn't occur to me that saying you were mistaken would send you ballistic.
---
Yes. You and I are among the several members who know ME history fairly well. I'm surprised you needed to ask.
Think that through, a few times. Must every Hindu know everything about everything between New Delhi and Bangalore? Every Catholic must everything about... the whole world?
By what right does anyone presume to know what someone else knows or should know?
My guess is that Omar knows the ME well. With a different POV.
---
Ummm... Before reaching this point, you've insulted me a couple times, and belittled my knowledge of the ME. Are you really surprised that I get upset?
---
What is prescription? Ten years? Never?
Nothing I said was an insult. That is your perception. For instance:
That is not an insult, since you seemed to miss the most insulting part of the video. Omar asking who Jews are loyal to. So my assumption was that you didn't watch the video, or you chose to ignore one of the biggest Jewish tropes out there, along with using the blood of Christian children. But we have Greene for that one.
My guess is the same, but you tried to make this about Muslim bigotry, and it isn't. It's about Omar's bigotry. And no, she is not criticizing Isreal here. She is asking American Jews who they are loyal to, and that is disgusting and exactly what happened in her home country.
And I'm sorry, people rarely change in 2 years. Are you going to cut Greene the same slack? I'm not.
Please STOP telling me what I'm doing. You're almost always wrong. And it's painful to see the execrable opinion you have of me.
Likewise!
Oh and to this:
Please put some context into that. I said:
Yet here are your very own words, in their entirety:
So there we have it.
The same happens to anyone with an accent.
Well, there's this...
Of all the myths about Jews, perhaps the most persistent involves money. It’s a prejudice that remains almost mainstream. In February, Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar tweeted that U.S. support for Israel was “all about the Benjamins” (a reference to the $100 bill, adorned by Benjamin Franklin’s face).
Bob,
That is an afterthought, since that came after the Muslim comment. And funny but my mum and my future son in law have accents and don't have discrimination against them.
On the other hand, maybe you would like to read this article by Rahm Emanuel, on why Omar's comments were so ugly:
No. It is the end point of a progression. You said Jews' loyalty is questioned. I added Muslims as a balance... and then I added ''anyone with an accent'', to insist that questioning loyalty is widespread.
I don't know what I did, that you perceive me as evil, underhanded, and dishonest. I'm really not.
??
Bob, I never said, or implied that nor do I think that. I think we should call it a day.
More than that, I think.
There you are absolutely wrong. Part of my heritage is Mexican/American. I have family on both sides of the border and have somewhat of a accent and have never in my adult life had it happen to me. So give generalizations like that a rest.
Nice deflection there. I never said it was. Who was the one that said "THE SAME HAPPENS TO ANYONE WITH AN ACCENT."?
Perrie, I think he was more implying me rather than you, as I am a known "rightie".
personally i think she is crazier than a shithouse rat that lives in the basement of the shithouse....
It doesn't matter if they quit the Republican Party, or why they quit. What matters is if they will vote Democratic, Republican , or "other" in the next elections.
Exactly so.
Makes me wonder how many votes the violent Capitol secessionists won for Harris 2024?
IF any .
usually what happens when folks leave the GOP or any party for that matter for whatever reason , they tend to look for a similar or like minded party , and as most know out here in the intermountain west , there are a plethora of parties be it constitutionalist , liberterian ,hard , or lite , seems they have parties pop up overnight in the wind .
lets not forget someone can keep their core political beliefs and simply register to be independent and pick and choose as they go, usually they already have an idea what they WONT support and vote for .
usually what registering as an indie does is just means one can not vote in the party primaries or caucuses and are limited to voting in the general only.
I havent been a republican or registered as such since Bush the elder was president. and i dont see that changing anytime soon.
Some do, some don't.
Republicans I know who have left the Republican party (of trump) are not looking for a similar party! They are trying to avoid the scourge of Trumpism!
Since the gop has let the Proud Boys and Qanon into their inner circles they should not be surprised that decent people want to disassociate from their party!
Should also remember weld county colorado is considering to have it put on the county ballot whether or not the county should secede from colorado and become part of wyoming . reasons i read was the disconnect from the powers in denver and taxes and how they are used.
of course its just asking a question at this point for county residents , but may have some long range repercussions down the road .
from what i understand if it happens , ( meaning both states legislatures and the us congress agree) , it would almost double the residency of wyoming and make weld county the most populus county in wyoming.
gonna be interesting to watch.
That is interesting.
The real question is, would the new Wyoming residents have to become Cowboy fans?
lol i think that will be left up to them if it comes to the battle of the bronze boot.
remember Wyo doesnt have any professional sports teams so its left to the individual who they root for .
hell even i dont root for the uw cowboys except in the boot game , i usually root for the AFA
Happens every time the Whitehouse changes hands. Remember when Chuck Norris was pushing the secession of Texas?
That's what they claim. Truth is that Weld is a red county in a blue state, so of course they disagree with what Colorado is doing with taxes. Weld county also fought the mask mandate and other COVID restrictions Colorado put into effect, then got upset when they weren\t given all the COVID money they wanted.
It won't. Guaranteed.
Nope. Going to be a bunch of whining until the idea fades away.
The GOP is losing their big donner companies left and right for that stunt at the capitol.
and democratic ran states are losing their corperate tax base as well as voters fed up with high taxes and restrictive government , no guarantee all those moving will stay under a democratic tent either once they move .
But some will.
Many from the North-East are moving to Florida-- many from California are moving to Texas.
And if the numbers are large enough for those states to lose one member of Congress or not (along with possible losses in The Electoral College)-- there's another side to that story.
And that is the strong possibility that both Florida and Texas may be become less solidly Republican.
It doesn't matter if the voters who abandon the Republican Party don't vote for Democrat candidates, because it's likely that the Democrat vote will stay relatively stable while the Repulican candidates will lose to candidates in independant parties that have no real chance of overtaking the Democrat candidates, and the Republican chances are then bound to wane considerably as well due to vote loss. I bet the Democrats are going to solidify their hold on both the House and the Senate in 2022. That is why I have this concept. Don't go ahead with the trial now, do it after the 2022 midterms. If it is not unconsitutional for the Senate to convict Trump now, it will not be unconstitutional for the Senate to convict him in a later trial and then allowing the further simple majority vote to prevent him from ever taking office again, which will not happen if the Democrats push for the trial to be held now. Double Jeopardy would prevent a later 'bound to be successful' trial if the Democrats then have 67 sure votes to convict. In my opinion, Trump not being convicted now, even if he is censured, will cause the worst of all alternatives to happen - Trump will run again in 2024 (and for sure he is aiming for that) and God help the USA if he should win.
History is against you Buzz. americans seem to like a divided congress, and i can not think of a time when the party that held the WH , and had control of both houses of congress at the start of an administration , held on to both houses of congress , one is usually lost in the first mid terms sometimes both , and as close as both houses are , coupled with the fact the entire house comes up for re election every 2 years and only 1/3rd of the senate , i would say both parties have a race already on their hands.
The question then arises which house? if its the senate , they control whom is seated on the judiciary and approve treaties , if it is the house , they control the purse strings of government finance which affects everything.
It seems to me that the american people some time in the 80s discovered that if they had a crappy president , or simply one they disagreed with, they could effect the administration and policy by handing control of a branch of the legislative to the opposing party as a check to the administrations power, and it has been that way ever since , gone are the days that any party stays in power of a single house of congress for 40 years , and i would say 10 years is a stretch now days.
I agree, Mark, that history has indicated what you stated, but I don't recall a party that has upheld (pandered to?) such a controversial situation previously. I think that history has not seen a situation like this within my memory, but then I've never paid so much attention to American politics previous to my joining NV and reading members' opinions. It will be interesting to see what happens in 2022.
remember i dont belong to either party at this time and havent for about 30 years, but there is 2 things i am sure of .
1. is the ineptitude of the republican party when they think they have power or have a majority.
and
2. the inevitable over reach of democrats when they think they have power or have a majority which usually causes them to lose the majority.
not in the US that i can think of except for the civil war and one group wanted to keep slavery even if it was on the way out the historical door because of the times industrial revolution , but in world history? i think the chamberlin /hitler fiasco of the 30s comes close. and we both know what happened because of that.
what happens in 2022, will depend in large part on biden and the dems in congress and what happens between now and then , right now if anything goes wrong since the dems control both houses and the WH , they will catch the blame come mid terms the dems are saying they can do it without the gop or any bipartisanship.. another thing to keep in mind , a lot of promises were made during the campaign , lets see how the voters feel after some are whittled down , or not kept.
here is another little historical thought as well.
in my lifetime , the republican party has only ever once ran a candidate that has lost a run for president, and that was nixon , he lost against kennedy , stayed low through johnson , then ran and won twice and then watergate .
No candidate since then that has run for the presidency and lost has been run again in the republican party, mc Cain lost and wouldnt run again for the office , romney ran and lost and since then has made plenty of enemies in the party that he would lose , trump? i didnt vote for him either time so its highly unlikely i would if he decided to run again.
see if history stays on the same path.
Well, remember what Yogi Berra said: "When you come to a fork in the road, take it."
I don't see it. The biggest thing the Dems have done for two decades is the ACA, which is totally wimpy compared to what other developed countries have had for seventy-five years.
What I see is a policy frame-of-reference that is skewed so far right that moderates like AOC (measured on an international scale) are described as ''far left''.
The lowest imaginable bar for ''far left'' should be ''actively working for the nationalization of all essential economic activity, from finance to farming to industry''. There is no one on the American political stage who meets this criterion.
My favorite example is Obama. He insisted so firmly and for so long, on bipartisanship, that the Republicans needed only to do nothing, for his program to stall out. (Pelosi made ACA happen, not Obama.) And yet... conservatives firmly insist that he was a flaming leftist.
Frank Luntz explained why it is more important to occupy the battlefield than to win the battle. The Republicans listened; the Democrats did not.
Democrats talk about policy. No one cares.
Republicans talk about space lasers directed by Jews to start forest fires. People listen!
I dont expect anyone else to see it Bob , it is merely an opinion based on my observations and listening to people, as well as watching what results.
for me to define over reach , I would actually have to ask the person what THEY think is over reach as it pertains to them , and even then it is totally issue dependent . even if i cannot see it myself.
The political pendulum can only swing so far in either direction before reversing itself to swing the other way.
good point , thats why i have posited in the past that politics in general is not a flat line thing but more based on a clock face. based on a circle .
with it being a flat line you have far left , far right , put the unacceptable on either end , with the circle ( clock face ) 12 is the extreme either side can go in the direction of dictatorship and 6 being actual and absolute middle ground of compromise between extremes.
i think the majority want it to stay as close to 6 as can be achieved without there being a perceived in reality its leaning either way. and once it passes 3 or 9, 9 or 3 people will think its leaning to dangerously close to becoming a one party rule and dictatorship, what could be considered acceptable to some is 4 and 8 on that clock face , and that is where the pendulum swings from my view. it goes past that and everyone is in deep shit .
but im just a numb nuts in the wilderness , what do i know?
hell i took the fork, knife and spoon . 3 more and i will have a complete setting.....
2. the inevitable over reach of democrats when they think they have power or have a majority which usually causes them to lose the majority.
They appear to be well on the way if they continue to pursue this impeachment nonsense or imply that most Republicans are white supremacist racists.
Do you need some help in being able to correctly separate quotes from others and your own comments?
In my lifetime, and I'm not exactly a teenager, I have never seen an administration move so quickly and do so much in the first couple of weeks following inauguration. And that was with the LEAST transitional assisstance ever from an outgoing administration.
All we've seen so far is a bunch of EO's
Until I see Bobart, Green, Hawley, Cruz or some of the other shithouse rats get primaried I'll remain skeptical on any change in the Party. Trump took the Republican Senate's balls with him when he left.
unless you live in the respective states they represent , all you can do is attempt to influence the voters of that state with your opinion, and usually , the voters there dont give a rip what an out of stater thinks.
And also proves that congressional term limits isn't really a valid issue.
wyoming voters passed a term limit resolution that ended up getting denied by its state supreme court as unconstitutional by the state constitution. the chief justice of the court at the time made a statement that I think kept the matter from advancing to the USSC. and pretty much settled the matter without any more cost or conflict.
What he said was even though term limits were not codified by law , the voters themselves have the choice at the polls , both in the primaries and during the general election to limit any candidates terms to be served simply with their own vote, with no need for a law or resolution.
basically what he said was if a voter thought any candidate had spent enough time in congress , they were under no obligation to vote to send them back for additional terms and could vote them out both in the primaries and the general .
Since that statement only one individual considered running for more terms than what was in the origional resolution , but found out that the voter were already talking about denying him another term at the polls , so rather than run and lose , the individual stepped down and opened an oppertunity for another candidate to possibly win the seat.
a possible win vs a definite loss is actually a no brainer situation in politics.
The court decision ignores reality. An incumbent has a big edge, that grows bigger at each election. An incumbent, after a number of terms, almost never loses.
Yes, I agree with the court. The voters have power if they so choose to wield it.
Because they get more votes than the other guy. Both the modern populist wings have shown if you motivate voters you can win despite money and incumbency.
Note that the lowest incumbent win rate is eighty-five percent
So? You and I don't have to like it, we can only help to organize others to run and vote for better candidates. Were term limits a thing we would have less Bidens and more Greens.
Term limits are a good solution.
Well Bob i think in 22 here in Wyoming that theory just might be put to the test .
Cheney is only in her second term in the HoR, the usual stay there is 3-4 terms before someone else runs, 22 will make it her 3rd run.
At present 10 of the 23 state county GOP boards have voted to censure her, which doesnt bode well for a 22 run in the primaries.
I have stated it before that if she had been a senator , she would have had time to actually do something for the voters that would somehow appease them and sway them to her side again , but being the sole HOR congressperson and just barely over a year and a half left in her term before the primary system kicks in again , magnified by the fact she is now also in the minority party, she is not afforded the time , so she is facing issues within the state debating her abilities and stances as well as facing the same on the federal level within the party in DC.
It'll be interesting.
If the GOP thows Cheney under the bus, a lot of the party's traditional donors will probably close their checkbooks. Will the crazies be able to make up the difference?
It appears she has survived the DC onslaught and kept her commitee seats, which MIGHT possibly help her in getting things done in the eyes of Wyo voters .
That just leaves the real test and the voters back in Wyoming , and on that front I am starting to see on local social media and discussion boards push back from those that support her.
Apparently the (secret) vote on whether to keep Cheney was massively in her favor.
The cowardice is stunning.