Poll: 57% Of Colorado Republicans Win The Darwin Award

Darwin Award contestants throughout history.

As the Colorado Sun’s Jesse Paul reports, acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines now being administered by the thousands daily at long last in Colorado shows a stark partisan divide in a newly-completed poll–more so, to be frank, than we would have expected despite the well-earned cynical presumption many of our readers no doubt harbor:

Getting the coronavirus vaccine in Colorado may depend on a person’s political party affiliation, with a new poll showing Republican voters are far less likely to get inoculated than their Democratic and unaffiliated counterparts.

Magellan Strategies found that only 55% of registered voters in Colorado who haven’t been inoculated yet want to receive a vaccine when it becomes available to them. The share rises to 89% among Democrats and 57% among unaffiliated voters.

Only 29% of Republicans, however, said they’d get a coronavirus vaccine, according to the poll. Meanwhile, 57% said they would not get inoculated while 12% said they were undecided.

The Denver Post’s Justin Wingerter:

When asked, “How concerned are you that you or someone in your family will become infected with the coronavirus?” 32% of Republicans said they were either “very” or “somewhat” concerned, compared to 89% of Democrats. When respondents were asked whether they planned to get a COVID-19 vaccine, 29% of Republicans said yes, compared to 88% of Democrats.

Magellan Strategies CEO David Flaherty said the results show these public health matters “have become a political statement.”

Public health officials in Colorado and beyond are desperately trying to convince people that the vaccine is safe, and that broad buy-in is the only clear way out of the pandemic. Nine percent of respondents said they hadn’t yet decided whether they’re comfortable being vaccinated.

Although there’s a clear relationship between not being concerned about the pandemic to begin with and refusing the vaccine to prevent infection, it’s somewhat more difficult to understand the reluctance of Republicans to accept the COVID-19 vaccine after former President Donald Trump hyped the forthcoming vaccines relentlessly while trying to not lose the 2020 election. Is it possible that more Republicans would be lining up for their shots if Trump had kept the White House?

That’s a hell of a way to make life-and-death medical decisions, but we can’t rule it out.

Because vaccinating enough of the public to achieve herd immunity is the key to fully reopening the economy, it’s a maddening reality the same people who immeasurably worsened the pandemic over the last year by downplaying its severity and defying best practices to reduce the spread, resulting in the United States having the most infection and death from COVID-19 of any nation on Earth, are now posing the biggest obstacle to putting this pandemic in the rear-view mirror for good.

We’re going to beat COVID-19. But at every step, our nation’s response to this deadly disease has been hobbled by the politically-motivated willful ignorance of one side. The net effect of this has been, ironically, to expose that side to disproportionate risk. How many Republicans died needlessly because it became an article of faith to not take COVID-19 seriously?

This is a movement truly leading its adherents over the cliff.

0 Shares

38 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DavidThi808 says:

    When I qualified for the vaccine (I'm 65) I couldn't get an appointment anywhere in the Denver/Boulder area. So… I went toe the sign up at the Walgreens in Ft. Morgan – tons of openings.

    So yeah, people out there are not getting vaccinated.

    • kwtree says:

      I noticed that today when I was picking a Kaiser location for my 1st C19 vaccine jab. Tons of appointments in the Springs, Loveland, and Lafayette locations- not so many in Metro Denver area. 

      Takeaway: If you’re a lib wanting a C19 vaccine, go to a Trumper county.

    • MichaelBowman says:

      There are a lot of idle DPS school buses right now.  They should schedule loads of folks from Denver and take them to these places that have openings. They can drop by a local restaurant for lunch and drop a few lib dollars into their economy.  

  2. DavidThi808 says:

    From a purely political point of view, if the virus kills 3% and the above is true nationwide, then that will shift the voting numbers in each state about 2.5% Democratic.

    So from a purely political point of view, this is really bad for Republicans.

    • Meiner49er says:

      Agreed, David. This is not NEWS now, but it will be next general election cycle!

    • kwtree says:

      Trumplicans still feel entitled to infect everyone around them- at school, at work, shopping, dining, drinking- because Freedumb!

      South Dakota is still recovering from the Sturgis superspreader event- with one of the top 10 per capita case and death counts in the country.

    • JohnInDenver says:

      A problem — we don't know how many people actually HAVE gotten ill because there has been no adequate community wide testing. 

      What we do know:  Of those getting tested (and we don't know what proportion of people are untested, how many tested once, and how many tested multiple times), we know

       * positivity rates in different states are between 8/1,000 and 114/1,000. 

       * death rates in different states are between 2.7/10,000 and 20/10,000

       * there are wide variations within states based on age, ethnic/national proportions in the population, blood type distribution, and uptake of vaccination. 

      In the past year, 500,000+ deaths, most of voting age.  But the half million are among 225 million US adults.  Even if every one of those deaths was a Republican or R leaning voter, it would be 0.67% of the 74 million votes for Trump, not a 2.5% bump for Democrats.

  3. davebarnes says:

    “How concerned are you that you or someone in your family will become infected with the coronavirus?” is a terrible question.

    1. Not concerned because my family has already had Covid.
    2. Not concerned because Covid is a hoax.
    3. Not concerned because we are young and it will be like the flu.
    4. Not concerned because we are taking strong precautions.
    5. Not concerned because we have been vaccinated.

  4. Sparky says:

    Dying on a ventilator to own the libs.

  5. kwtree says:

    Registered active Rs are still less than a third of CO voters, though. January voter reg#s show Dems plus unaffiliateds = 68% of active voters. 
    Thats not counting all minor parties.
     

    So if most rational people are getting vaxxed, we may get to herd immunity by next spring anyway.No thanks to the idjuts.

    • ajb says:

      Everyone that doesn't get vaccinated just makes it that much harder to reach herd immunity, especially with the more virulent strains popping up. 

      I saw this explained by Thomas Puyo.

      If the original strain had an R0 of 2-3. (An infected person spreads it to 2 to 3 people).
      A new strain with 50% more transmissable would have an R0 of ~4.
      To stop the spread, you need to get R0 below 1. 

      For R0 = 3, that means you have to have more than 67% immunity in the community.
      For R0 = 4, it's more than 75%. 

      If only 55% of the population gets vaccinated, the only way to achieve herd immunity is through the Darwin plan of untold suffering (borne by fools) and high medical costs (borne by all). 

  6. This is a rather insensitive post and accusation, considering that my son had a vaccine injury, at around age of 4. Up to that point, he had a growing vocabulary, sentence structure and good attitude.

    After the vaccine round, about overnight, all sentence structure lost, 90% of vocab lost, and a few times per day, he would fall onto the ground and bang his head against the floor repeatedly. My wife and I stayed by him the entire time, so we could dive to the floor with him and shield his head.

    It has cost me thousands in therapy. We have also done holistic programs for detox. He is doing great today. I feel very lucky. Sentence structure returned at around age 6/7. Large vocabulary and confident speaking returned at age 7. I’m lucky – I have money – I could buy whatever therapy was needed. What happens to the people who don’t have that resource?
     

    People should have a right to do what they want with their health. I would not wish a vaccine injury on anyone. If you want to campaign us to get the vaccine, I would argue that a sensible list of scientific arguments will work better than ridicule. 
     

    Lastly – please give us the dignity of respect if we decline. It’s not a lot to ask. Thank you all.

    • notaskinnycook says:

      Your son is the exception. I’m allergic to the diphtheria vaccine and must avoid it in the future after a bad reaction. Exceptions are the reason most people should get all the vaccines they can tolerate; to protect the few who can’t.

       

      • kwtree says:

        Best explanation for mass vaccination I’ve seen, cook.

        My sister will also probably not get the C19 jabs, as anything that stimulates her immune system also stimulates her RA and Lupus to attack her own body.

        As far as I know, clinical trials didn’t include folks with autoimmune disorders.

        But she isn’t advocating against others getting the vaccine.

        To be honest, Miguel, most of your vaccine “cautious” Republican friends probably have absorbed and spread misinformation: Gates / Siros microchips, bioluminescent 5G tracking nanobots, etc.Admit it.

        • I don’t advocate against anyone getting the vaccine. It should absolutely be widely available. Those who want it, by all means, should get it. 
           

          My main argument is that – if someone doesn’t want it, then leave them be and give respect to the decision. If you must campaign for inoculation, then please stick to decent speech (as you are already doing, KW) rather than ridicule, as cpols has done with this post. 

      • Skinny – with all due respect – a large reason why vaccines cause injury is because of the basic ingredients which usually include: aluminum, mercury (or other metals), along with human tissue, or animal tissue. 
         

        It’s not a cocktail you want to put into your bloodstream. For most, yes, there won’t be a reaction. But I don’t fault anyone for turning down any injections with heavy metals or flesh byproduct.

    • Genghis says:

      Don't you have rubes to bilk with your quack nonsense? Go peddle your anti-vax bullshit somewhere else.

      • My son’s injury is anti-vax bullshit? 
         

        Why do you have to use ridicule and insult to argue your point? Why do you have to personally insult my own son? 
         

        The other two above also have disagreement – but I appreciate that they’re dignified. 

        I wish you well, Genghis. I hope you never sustain or witness the injuries I’ve seen from vaccines.

        • Genghis says:

          My son’s injury is anti-vax bullshit? 

          You're a liar, cupcake. You saying X is compelling evidence of ~X.

          Why do you have to use ridicule and insult to argue your point?

          lol

          Exactly what "point" do you think I was trying to "argue"? Is that purposeful obtuseness on your part or just garden variety stupidity?

          The other two above also have disagreement – but I appreciate that they’re dignified. 

          lol

          What makes you think I might care, even a little, about what you "appreciate"?

          I wish you well, Genghis.

          lol gtfo

          I hope you never sustain or witness the injuries I’ve seen from vaccines.

          You're a quackery peddler with no education, training, experience or knowledge in any relevant field. You wouldn't know an actual vaccine injury if it walked up to you, introduced itself, shook your hand, dropped trou, and pissed on your shoes.

    • Diogenesdemar says:

      Thank you for sharing that, MAH.  I can’t imagine how terrifying those events must have been for you and your family.  I’m glad to hear your son is doing better.

      And, I’m sorry for the rude comments you’ve received here to your story

      I do have one question:  Is the awful reaction that your son had to one previous vaccination incident the reason you and/or your wife won’t be choosing to receive this vaccine?

      • I appreciate your kind words!

        My wife has had multiple vaccine reactions – all the recent ones have inflamed her auto-immune issues (which is either Lyme or MS). In regard to my son – definitely – when you see a loved one react, it has a huge influence. I don't have the autoimmune symptoms my wife and son have – but it still causes a question? Most people who have autoimmune issues don't know it – it could be as simple as feeling tired with frequency. Ultimately, you go with your intuition (and certainly, your experiences influence that). 

    • JohnInDenver says:

      What happens to the people who don’t have that resource?
      Well, if their doctors are on the ball or there is a consultation with attorneys, they approach the groups responsible for dealing with the (relatively few) vaccine related harms.   

      I hope you got good advice.   Was there a report to https://vaers.hhs.gov/ ??

      Did you approach the group responsible for payment for injury and treatments, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program??  https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/index.html ?

      • John – I appreciate the reply. My understanding is that the Compensation Program doesn't cover the Covid19 shot, due to its emergency exemption. In regard to the other vaccines – we didn't pursue the Compensation Program route because, fortunately, we had the funds to pay for therapy and that became our 110% focus. In addition, we didn't want to take funds away from others, who really do need financial help on this matter. 

        The question becomes though – do lower income families know about this program, in the instance of an injury? Very little has been done to let people know this is a resource. 

    • Highlands Ranch says:

      Would you agree then if you make that individual choice, one should have to bear consequences if the majority desires to force distance between those who refuse to be vaccinated (e.g., not allowed in public schools, licensed daycares etc.).   And they have always known that there are potential side-effects, some quite severe, for any vaccine.  That is why the Court of Federal Claims has a "vaccine court docket" for compensation.  If one can show that it more likely than not that the side effects or issues were caused by a vaccine, than the government awards compensation for those side effects. 

      • Disagree. It's still ultimately a violation of HIPAA and restriction on personal liberty, on the basis of constitutional law. 

        The only way that argument could have standing (imo) is if the vaccine has 99% efficacy, protects against the majority of strains, and causes minimal side effects. 

        At this time – we are still debating the efficacy of the Covid vaccine – we don't know if it protects against future strains – and continual reports are coming out about side effects.

        It's fair to question if the vaccine, for many, is actually worse than catching Covid19, itself. 

        • kwtree says:

          Side effects are minimal compared to acute or long haul effects of the coronavirus. I got my first shot Saturday, and experienced mild soreness in the injection site, which s common. 

          Miguel, We are not “still debating the efficacy of the Covid vaccine”. Scientists did the science. The Pfizer version is 95% effective, the Moderna (which I got) , is 94% effective. The Johnson&Johnson /Merck version is “only”66% effective. …..more than your average flu shot. 
           

          You don’t want it given to your child- fine. You are probably going to need some special waiver to enroll your kid in public schools, as with diptheria, smallpox, polio, or any other common vaccine. He would probably also need to periodically show negative Covid tests to be around other children. All these conditions should apply to you, as well.
           

          A public-spirited man such as yourself will undoubtedly bow to the greater good and the public health interest, rather than selfishly insisting that your exceptional child should be free to endanger his playmates.

          • KW – I appreciate the kind words. I also appreciate that you can speak about this without ridicule or insult. 

            Of course – I am going to disagree – if I may politely make some points – 

            First off – the vaccine technology is incredible. It is a scientific feat that companies could pull this off in such short time. The current findings are incredible. But the shortcomings are as follows:

            95% to 99% efficacy – yes – this is true specifically for the current variants on the books, as well as for a short term period. It is not confirmed for new strains and longer periods.

            Of note – 

            1. The first shot (Pfizer, Moderna) offers short-term protection. The idea is that the second-shot (second dose) will cause the body to create longer-term antibodies. Scientists on both teams have observed that the first dose is temporary – but they don’t know how long the second dose will last or stay effective. 

            2. As documented by Fauci, preliminary research is showing that the current vaccines do not protect against some of the new variants, particularly the South African one. This is particularly concerning because, it’s a “new” virus – it’s mutations are going to continue, especially right now. This opens a large amount of new variants that we are not protected against. 

            3. The Pfizer and Moderna studies did not study “asymptomatic” infection – the idea that the virus is actually being spread, and the vaccine is simply serving to reduce symptoms. The AstraZeneca study confirmed that the vaccine does not stop the viral spread (something Fauci has mentioned as well). So in reality – you’re getting a vaccine to stop symptoms, not viral load (which is actually a good thing – because I think herd immunity is a good thing). Where the concern comes is the new mutations. If the vaccine isn’t stopping the spread of the virus itself, then it further lends credence that it may be useless to new mutations – this is why Fauci has said the lockdowns have to continue, even after vaccination. 

            Which gets to this point:

            What do we have to lose? Just take it! It’s like a multi-vitamin! It’s good for you! 

            To that I would say – The AstraZeneca vaccine has chimpanzee tissue/dna in it – I’m hypercritical of injecting such a substance into my body. I believe all other vaccines use aborted human fetal tissue. I’m not a religious zealot – but I always pause at any suggestion of outside dna being injected into me. Such ingredients are not immune-strengthening. They are foreign bodies, meaning that your immune system will be taxed in absorbing them. The mRNA technology has also not been adopted at a wide-scale – yes, with cancer patients, who literally have nothing to lose – but adopted against a virus with a 99.99% survival rate?

            Ultimately – I agree with Merck – who abandoned their vaccine study and endorsed that we pursue the safest path to herd immunity possible. I’m a huge fan of this because acquisition of any Covid19 variant should offer ongoing protection against future mutations as well (not bullet-proof protection, but one that is likely stronger than what the vaccine can offer). 

            In regard to restricting my movement because I don’t get the vaccine – to that I say – such a protocol is virtue-signaling humiliation, and not public health benefit.

            Covid19 has been around since at least October 2020. When the outbreak happened in December of 2020, in Wuhan (which is a region with a population size comparable to California) we continued daily flights from there to the USA for weeks. Ultimately – the mass-majority, if not all Americans, have already interacted with Covid19. To suggest that people who don’t get the vaccine be shunned – that would be humiliating people for not following public order, rather than protecting others. Your counter may be that it would be necessary, since the vaccines don’t last long, have a temporary effect, and will probably mean continual vaccination on a frequent basis, if we are truly committed to vaccines as our savior in this case. 

            And to that, I say, the continual injection of the substances above – which don’t even prevent the virus from spreading, and don’t even stop the new mutations from infecting subjects – at some point, are going to bear a cost that we have not calculated, primarily because the ingredients alone are going to tax our immune system, not to mention the long term side effects from mRNA use. Why pursue this when herd-immunity can be pursued, as Merck argued. 

            Ultimately, the ones pushing us all to vaccinate, without understanding that it doesn’t stop viral migration, and doesn’t stop new variants, to me, are commanded more by impulse, than depth and thought. 

            Lastly – I’m not advocating that people don’t get the vaccine. For those who want it, definitely get it. I’ve helped my own motivated friends, family and coworkers with suggestions on where to go, how to qualify, etc. Jared Polis is also doing the right thing by making it widely available and accessible – he has done a fantastic job on that. I’m simply saying – for those who don’t want to get it – please respect their decision. In terms of your protection, be happy you got the vaccine and don’t worry about whether I get it… you’ll be protected….

            ….it’s 99% effective, after all!

            • kwtree says:

              Muhammad,

              At least two of your assertions about the MRNA vaccines are untrue.

              They don’t contain chimpanzee DNA. ( The Johnson & Johnson and Astra Zeneca vaccines used it in development, but the Pfizer and Moderna didn’t). 

              They don’t contain aborted fetal tissue. Old fetal tissue from a 1973 abortion was used in development of cell lines in the final confirmation phase only. 

              The “natural” ( no vaccine)  herd immunity argument is inherently racist, and spread by incompetent racists such as Trump’s Scott Atlas.

              We’ve already seen and felt the results of your “simplest path to herd immunity”. 500,000 dead, 2,000 every day. It was referred to by racists as “culling the herd,” with the idea that more vulnerable seniors, black and brown folks would be “culled”, leaving a stronger, whiter master race to run the world. 
               

              Schools are absolutely in their rights to deny unvaccinated students admission, or to require regular negative tests. The needs of the many outweigh the rights of the individual.

              That’s all I have time forthis morning- got to go be a grandma. I want those little ones to grow up in a world where science and good public policy are used to create the healthiest and freest and most egalitarian world possible. And I want to be around to see them grow up, for as long as possible. Your misinformation and “culling the herd” policies would makethat unlikely.

              • A few points – 

                Johnson and Johnson and Astra are likely going to include animal tissue. 

                Fetal tissue – ultimately, yes, it is cloned, but the parts still mimic the tissue itself. Again – this is a foreign body substance that is not meant for human consumption. Absorption is going to tax the immune system – a lot for some. 

                Herd immunity is racist? Goodness, lol. 

                500K deaths. Of note – the total death toll in America for 2020, compared to 2019, was an extra 300K (in a country of around 330 million people). When you subtract the number of increased deaths from drug overdose and suicide (whose rises were likely due to lockdowns) the total increase in deaths is hardly higher. On the whole, it shows that the majority of Covid deaths are actually deaths related to the flu or medical complications that can often arise with elder patients. 

                Disagree on the needs of the community. Not when the death rate is 99.99%. 

                I appreciate your candor and patience in debate. Hope you and your family are well!

                 

                • kwtree says:

                  Such a polite and smooth propagandist you are, Muhammad Ali.

                  You went from “ Be compassionate to me because my son had a vaccine injury” to “Vaccines are immoral and contain aborted fetus and chimp tissue” to “Nothing racist about letting the vaccine “cull the herd””, to “Those 500,000 deaddidn’t die of covid”. 
                   

                  You lie in service of those who by malevolent ignorance, gave our country the worst death toll from COVID in the world. You lie for Trump. Maybe you lie to yourself. I”m working today, no time to post refuting research. 
                   

                  But I invite you to do so. Send out your sources from Alex Jones and Breitbart, from the Q pages, so we can see where you get your information.
                   

                   

                  • Genghis says:

                    It's likely that dudebro gets his anti-vax talking points from far more successful hucksters, vermin like Mike Adams (made a fortune selling Y2K scams in the late 1990s, has since parlayed that into a alt-med scams megafortune), Joe Mercola (super-rich alt-med quack, slapped down by the FTC for, inter alia, selling tanning beds he claimed prevented cancer), Andy Wakefield (lost his license to practice medicine in England for fraud-laden, ethics-impaired research claiming a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, currently living in the U.S. and making more $ as an anti-vax celebrity than he ever dreamed of making as a physician), Del Bigtree (former teevee producer now making serious bank as an anti-vax celebrity), etc. Small-fry like dudebro have nothing original to say on these issues; they just parrot the big-time grifters.

      • Genghis says:

        Would you agree then if you make that individual choice, one should have to bear consequences if the majority desires to force distance between those who refuse to be vaccinated (e.g., not allowed in public schools, licensed daycares etc.). 

        No anti-vaxxer would ever agree to anything like that. Their mantra is, "Gimme free stuff and give it to me on my terms." The entitlement mentality is palpable.

        And in the unlikely event anyone's wondering, Danny Dipshit's claims upthread about HIPAA and the constitution are utterly bereft of truth. You'll find that anti-vaxxers — Dunning Kruger University grads, one and all — consider themselves experts on every subject.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.