Beyond Red and Blue: What Colorado's Governor's Race Could Teach Us About the Power of a Vote

This November, Colorado voters may get an unusually clear opportunity to test that idea.

The race to succeed term-limited Gov. Jared Polis includes Democratic nominee Phil Weiser, Republican nominee Victor Marx and unaffiliated candidate Greg Lopez, a former Republican congressman who left the GOP and mounted an independent campaign for governor.

For voters here in Teller County, the race raises a question much bigger than any one candidate:

What does it mean to cast a vote when the ballot no longer fits neatly into red and blue?

It is a question Americans far beyond Colorado are asking.

Dissatisfaction with the two-party system has created a breeding round ground for independent and third-party candidates. Colorado provides an especially interesting test site because unaffiliated voters make up a substantial share of the state's electorate.

Lopez's place on the ballot demonstrates that dissatisfaction is more than theoretical. To qualify as an unaffiliated gubernatorial candidate, he was required to collect at least 1,000 valid signatures from registered voters in each of Colorado's eight congressional districts. State election officials ultimately verified nearly 12,000 signatures.

That gives Colorado voters another choice.

It also introduces one of the oldest debates in American politics.

The Mathematics Behind a Three-Way Contest

Most American elections, including Colorado's race for governor, award the office to the candidate receiving the most votes. A candidate does not need to receive a majority if no other candidate receives more.

That becomes especially important when more than two competitive candidates are on the ballot.

Imagine three candidates receiving 42%, 33% and 25% of the vote. The candidate with 42% wins despite 58% of voters choosing someone else.

Change the numbers slightly and the result changes with them.

That is why political scientists have long studied what is commonly called the "spoiler effect": the possibility that an additional candidate can change which candidate wins by drawing voters who otherwise might have supported one of the other candidates.

But there is an important distinction.

A vote for an independent candidate still counts exactly as a vote for that candidate. It does not mathematically become a vote for someone else.

What it can do is alter the math of a close contest.

And that distinction puts voters in an interesting position.

Should someone vote for the candidate who most closely represents his or her beliefs, regardless of that candidate's chances?

Should voters consider the likely consequences of the entire field?

Or should Americans reject that calculation altogether and vote strictly according to their preferred candidate or party?

Those are questions voters—not political parties, campaigns or columnists—ultimately must answer.

Teller County Is Part of the Equation

Here in Teller County, voting is hardly an abstract exercise.

In the 2024 general election, 16,583 ballots were cast among 22,912 registered voters in the county, according to official Colorado election results—a turnout rate of 72.38%.

Every one of those ballots became part of a much larger statewide calculation.

The same will happen again this November.

Whether a voter chooses Weiser, Marx, Lopez or another candidate appearing on the ballot, the decision becomes one number in a county total, which becomes part of a statewide total, which ultimately determines who occupies the governor's office.

That sounds obvious.

Yet it is easy to lose sight of amid national political noise.

Americans routinely hear that one vote doesn't matter. Others argue the system is broken, the major parties are blurry or participation itself somehow legitimizes a process they do not trust.

Colorado's 2026 governor's race offers a different way to look at the question.

Instead of asking whether one ballot can single-handedly determine an election—it almost certainly will not—the better question may be what happens when thousands of individuals independently decide that their ballots don't matter.

History shows that elections are ultimately nothing more than those individual decisions added together.

Where the Candidates Stand

Phil Weiser, Democrat: Weiser's platform emphasizes affordability, housing, health care, education, economic development and protection of Colorado's land, water and individual rights. His proposals include increasing attainable housing, expanding workforce programs, supporting public education and health care access, and continuing to challenge federal actions he believes violate Colorado law or residents' rights.

Victor Marx, Republican: Marx's platform centers on affordability, public safety, lower taxes, government accountability and individual freedoms. His proposals include reducing regulations and state spending, supporting law enforcement, expanding housing supply and workforce programs, requiring voter identification, increasing wildfire mitigation and strengthening forest management.

Greg Lopez, Unaffiliated: Lopez's platform emphasizes reducing the size and cost of state government while addressing housing affordability and other issues outside the traditional party structure. Among his proposals are zero-based state budgeting, creation of a Colorado government-efficiency initiative aimed at eliminating waste and unnecessary regulation, and construction of 25,000 lower-cost starter homes during his first four years.

These summaries represent only a snapshot of the candidates' broader platforms. Voters can review their full proposals and positions before casting their ballots.

Beyond Party Lines

Perhaps that is the larger lesson emerging from the mountains of Teller County this election year.

Voting does not require loyalty to a party.

Neither does voting for an independent candidate automatically make a ballot wasted.

But having more choices makes understanding the consequences of those choices more important, not less.

Voters can examine the candidates. Read their platforms. Look at their records. Question their promises. Consider the mathematics of the race. Decide which factors matter most.

Then vote accordingly.

Because the most consequential choice on Election Day may not be whether a ballot is red, blue or independent.

It may simply be whether the person holding it has thought seriously about what that vote means.