Latino population distribution in 2000. The population has grown since then. (Wikipedia image)

The decline in Latino support for Republican candidates has some in the party worried. With demographic trends showing an increasingly diverse country, any party that fails to appeal to minorities is going to have trouble winning elections.

For the GOP, Florida is the state that most concerns party leaders. As Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart told CBS News, “We have a very, very serious problem.” According to CBS News, Florida exit polls showed McCain sinking 14 points among Florida Latinos, from President Bush’s results in 2004. Bush won Florida Latinos and the state itself; McCain lost both.

Another troubling state is New Mexico, which is almost half Latino. Obama won that state this year too, along with Colorado and Nevada. Republicans lost ground among Latinos in all three states, and the Latino population grew. Writing in the Sacramento Bee, political analyst Tony Quinn notes that Republicans lost New Mexico’s Senate and congressional races as well: “For the first time in four decades, there are no New Mexico Republicans in Congress.”

Quinn points to Latinos’ social conservativism as one way for the GOP to regain their votes. He also says that exorcizing nativism would help, and columnist Ruben Navarrette says that Latinos have “had their fill of ugliness, racism, hypocrisy and falsehoods spread by opportunistic politicians offering nothing more than simplistic solutions and overheated rhetoric.”

In The Politico, Robert E. Lang, co-director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech, says the GOP’s problem isn’t just Latino– it is a broad, sweeping trend toward more diversity and increasing urbanism, to which Republicans need to adjust, or they will perish. From Lang’s piece:

Republicans must adjust to the demographic shifts sweeping America or risk being politically marginalized. Most significantly, the party needs to recognize that there are simply not enough rural white voters to balance the growing number of minority voters and cosmopolitan whites living in big metro areas. If Republicans think 2008 went badly, try running the same kind of small-town-flavored campaign in 2020. At that point, the vastly expanded and racially diverse metro areas in Texas and Georgia could tip those once reliably red states to the Democrats.

A top target for the GOP will be Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, who was re-elected Senate majority leader earlier this week. It’s good to be the king, except for the large target on your back that comes with the territory. In 2010, expect Reid to be one of the Democrats’ most vulnerable incumbents.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid campaigns for Barack Obama in early November. Reid is banking on the voter registration edge enjoyed by Nevada Democrats to propel him to re-election in 2010. (Getty Images)

Felling opposition party leaders offers a sweeter victory than just picking up a seat in congress. In 2004, Republicans couldn’t hide their excitement over defeating Sen. Tom Daschle, who served as both majority and minority leader depending on the Democratic party’s fortunes year to year. Democrats targeted Republican minority leader Mitch McConnell this year, but were ultimately unsuccessful at poaching the Kentucky senator’s seat. Reid will be just the latest target.

Las Vegas Sun political columnist Jon Ralston anticipates Reid’s re-election campaign “will be the most expensive, most watched and most vitriolic contest in state history.” Ralston argues team Reid “plays politics like a UFC match without rules,” and notes that “Reid Fatigue” could keep the senator from landing a fifth term.

A frequent target of Republicans, Reid has never been terribly popular. Reid had his best showing in his most recent campaign, winning 61 percent of the vote against challenger Richard Ziser, a poorly-financed Evangelical Christian not in sync with the more live and let live attitude of Nevada Republicans on social issues, in 2004. But his previous campaigns were all squeakers. In his closest match-up, Reid beat John Ensign (who would win Nevada’s open Senate seat two years later) by 400 votes in 1998.

Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki has stopped just short of throwing his hat in the ring, but called Reid “too liberal and too partisan for Nevada.” (National Journal ranked Reid 9th most liberal senator based on his 2007 voting record.) But in an editorial, the Las Vegas Review-Journal points to Reid’s handling of Sen. Joe Lieberman following the Democrat-turned-independent’s backing of Sen. John McCain for president as a sign that “Give ‘Em Hell Harry” can work the middle:

With the far-left wing of the Democratic Party still demanding a pound of flesh, Sen. Reid stuck by his word… Sen. Reid’s willingness to stand up to the yowling of unreasonable followers marks an encouraging start to his second go-round as Senate leader. We hope he can rein in what promises to be cornucopia of liberal legislation and look out for the interests of Nevada and its battered economy… He’ll need to display the kind of leadership he provided Tuesday if he expects Nevada voters to return him to office in 2010.

Ensign, who is plotting the state GOP’s comeback, said Rep. Jon Porter, who lost his bid for re-election to Dina Titus on November 4, is also a viable candidate. Ensign noted that losing a race today is no barrier to victory tomorrow in Nevada. Ensign won his seat in 2000 after losing to Reid two years earlier, and Titus beat Porter after losing her bid for governor in 2006. But with a gubernatorial election also on tap for 2010, RealClearPolitics reports that “top Republican challengers may have to be talked out of running for governor.”

The freshman members of congress — especially those whose districts switched party loyalty — will also be targets come 2010.

Among the most vulnerable freshman is Betsy Markey from Colorado’s 4th district. Observers continue to question whether Markey won or incumbent Marilyn Musgrave lost. Despite a double-digit loss, Musgrave — a social conservative who views gay marriage as a top concern — has yet to concede. The 4th district had been in Republican hands since 1973, and registered Republicans outnumber Democrats 168,689 to 123,281 (unaffiliated voters account for 154,516).

A number of potential challengers have already emerged, and Markey continues to portray herself as a moderate in the still conservative-leaning district. Rep. John Salazar has invited Markey to join the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of fiscally conservative Democrats, telling the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel “she’s a very moderate to conservative Democrat… [who would] make a great Blue Dog.”

Markey, a former aide to Salazar’s brother Sen. Ken Salazar, has so far demurred, but has made it known she won’t just follow the Obama administration blindly. “I may have an issue with some of [the] policies that come from this administration,” Markey told PolitickerCO.com. “If I don’t agree then I will vote against it.”

On November 4, voters in three states — Arizona, California, and Florida — amended their constitutions to ban gay marriage. But it’s California’s Proposition 8 that is drawing the strongest response from the gay rights community.

Unlike Florida and Arizona, where existing statutes already prohibited gay marriage, same-sex marriages were legal in California from June through election day (the California Supreme Court had overturned a gay marriage ban in May). Money from across the country flooded both camps, making it the most expensive cultural ballot measure in California history and the second most expensive campaign this year, behind only the presidential race.

The passing of Prop 8 was particularly difficult for the gay rights community — and satisfying for the measure’s backers — because California is considered to be among the more socially progressive states and many believe as goes California, so goes (eventually) the nation. Indeed, when the Connecticut Supreme Court issued its ruling in early October paving the way for gay marriage in that state, it cited the California Supreme Court ruling 15 times, calling it of “the most persuasive sister state precedent.”

Protests were held across California following Prop 8’s passage and opponents are mounting a legal challenge backed by local municipalities. But this weekend, the protests go nationwide.

“To say it’s only California’s problem is to say that ’separate but equal’ in the South was only their problem,” Jill Roat, a University of Colorado student organizing a protest in Denver, told the Rocky Mountain News.

Users on social networking sites are stirring up pro-gay marriage forces and a website launched last week to push for nationwide protests this Saturday. Rallies will be held in Denver, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, and across the country.

In 2006, 55 percent of Colorado voters approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Per Nevada law, voters must approve proposed amendments in two successive elections before they become law. In 2000 and 2002, Nevadans did just that, voting in favor of amending their constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

New Mexico is one of three states to recognize gay marriages performed elsewhere — New York and Rhode Island are the other two. The state does not have a citizen initiative process. Alexis Blizman, former executive director of Equality New Mexico, told the Bay Area Reporter that the LGBT community in the state is closely watching how events unfold in California and estimated that at least 100 gay couples from New Mexico are among the thousands whose once-legal California marriages are now in jeopardy.

Republicans who believe the country is swinging left think the party needs to steer away from cultural wedge issues while at the same time reaching out to groups like Latinos who trend heavily toward the Democrats.

Sean Tonner, a political consultant who ran former Colorado Gov. Bill Owens‘ 2002 gubernatorial campaign told the Denver Post that the party needs to move away from the “God, guns and gays” litmus test on social issues.

“There is a group of people who want to have every candidate take a saliva test and be proven the purest of the pure,” said Sean Duffy, a former aide to Owens, who believes the former governor was sometimes marginalized in the party for being insufficiently conservative.

“If Republicans are going to survive we need to figure out a way to recruit and run candidates who are going to attract Democratic voters,” Nevada state Sen. Warren Hardy said in the Las Vegas Sun. “Nevada has gone in the last two to four years from center-right to center-left and it’s not going back.”

Greg Payne, a former New Mexico state representative, compared the Democrats’ win in 2008 to Republicans’ victory in 1980.

“The Democrats came back with Mondale in ’84, an ultra-liberal, and got shellacked. If the GOP makes similar moves and becomes even more far-right, we could be facing a similar fate in 2012,” Payne told the New Mexico Independent.

But others blame outside factors — an unpopular administration, the financial crisis, an insufficiently conservative candidate — for the Republican defeat. For them, Republicans don’t need a new script, just a new cast.

“This election was about Republicans running a more moderate Republican at the top of the ticket. The idea was that this would allow us to reach out to moderate Democrats and independents,” wrote New Mexico state Rep. Dan Foley in an opinion piece for the New Mexico Independent. “Now is not the time to move leftward. We did that and it didn’t work.”

“The Republican Party is a great coalition between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. If you leave either of those out of the equation, the party will not prosper and the country will not prosper,” former U.S. Sen. Bill Armstrong told the Denver Post.

“There is no excuse for a state that has been traditionally this red to end up with more independent voters than GOP voters,” Luke Shilts, president of the Colorado Young Republicans, told Fort Collins Now. Shilts attributes the state swinging blue to the Democratic Party’s strategizing and campaigning advantage this cycle, not ideology. “We’re being outspent, outmustered, outvolunteered,” he said.

No matter how the party shakes out, Republicans take some comfort in the fact that with Democrats in power, the blame for any failures now lies at their feet. And that can only be good for Republicans in 2010 and 2012. Of course, what they don’t admit so freely, is that Dems will also get credit for any successes.

Once upon a time — say, way back in 2004 — overwhelming Republican Party support in rural Nevada offset the Democratic advantage in densely-populated Clark County. Swing county Washoe, Nevada’s second most populous, often determined who won statewide campaigns. John Kerry won Clark County in 2004 by a less-than comfortable 5-point margin while George W. Bush won every other county in the state — Washoe by 4 points and rural counties by up to a 4-to-1 margin.

Fast-forward to 2008. Barack Obama lost the rural counties (but had a better showing than Kerry), improved his margins in Clark County, and flipped Washoe. Postgame analysis is far from over in the state, but one early question is emerging: Do the rurals still matter?

Obama fought hard for the rural counties, visiting Elko three times and drawing out the few liberals hiding in the shadows. John McCain, who finished third in Nevada’s Republican caucuses, wasn’t helped by lukewarm support among conservatives in the state, many of whom were more anti-Obama than pro-McCain. Most expected the rurals to play their usual role in helping determine who would win the state’s five electoral votes, but the Las Vegas Sun reports that “even if Obama had not gotten a single vote in the 14 counties outside Clark, Washoe and Carson City, and even if all of his votes had gone to McCain instead, he still would have carried the state.”

“I said in 2004, this may very well be the last statewide election where rurals can leverage the vote,” Elko Republican Party Chairman Reece Keener told the Sun. “We just don’t have the pull that we once did.”

In a close election, every state and every voter matters. Had Kerry won Nevada, he would have won the White House. Given Obama’s electoral vote drubbing of McCain, the Democrat didn’t need to win Nevada (or Colorado or New Mexico.) Similarly, his 12-point victory in Nevada meant he didn’t need the rurals any more than he needed any other specific subset of voters.

But by 2012 (or even the 2010 midterm elections, when the governorship, one Senate seat, and all the House seats are up for grabs), who’s to say Nevada Latinos will vote as overwhelmingly for Democratic candidates or at all? Maybe the slim voter registration edge enjoyed by Democrats in Washoe will reverse itself or turnout in Clark County will fall from the heights seen this year.

If the blue wave continue across Nevada, the rurals likely won’t matter in statewide campaigns as witnessed this year. But on a local level, the gun-loving ranchers and miners in rural communities will continue to dominate and could resist shifting blue themselves. It could all depend on how the new Democrats in power choose to govern.

“When we start to see some of the new programs coming out of Washington, it’s going to really galvanize things for us,” Keener said in the Sun.

Or maybe the blue waters will wash across the rural counties, too.

“When people see we are not radicals who shut down mines and take away their guns and we go out and fix the economy, things switch,” Lance Whitney, chairman of Elko’s Democratic Party told the Sun. “People’s minds switch.”

In the end, Barack Obama didn’t need the 19 electoral votes represented by Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico, three states won by George W. Bush in 2004, to make it to the White House. But he won all three, two with double-digit margins. Early analysis of the blue shift in western states credits a range of factors including high support among first time voters, the energy of volunteers as part of the Obama political machine, Latino voters, and changing priorities in the suburbs.

The blue tide that swept across the west, aided by Obama’s aggressive push in the states but perhaps equally fueled by anti-Republican sentiment nationwide, also saw Democrats pick up two Senate and four House seats. A quick look at each states results.

Sen. Barack Obama is reflected in a boy’s sunglasses as he speaks in Pueblo, Colorado on November 1 (Reuters)

Colorado

Obama became the first Democratic presidential nominee to win a majority of Colorado’s votes since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. (Bill Clinton won a plurality in 1992, carrying the state when third party candidate Ross Perot siphoned off Republican votes.) The Illinois senator won 54 percent of the vote to John McCain’s 46 percent, receiving 170,000 more votes than his rival per the count as of this writing.

Obama beat McCain with women 56 to 41 percent, a reversal of 2004 when Bush beat John Kerry 51 to 41 percent, according to state exit polls (2004, 2008.) McCain still carried the state among men (50 to 49 percent), though with a tighter margin than Bush in 2004 (53 to 45 percent.) Obama also improved among white Evangelicals, winning 23 percent of their vote compared to Kerry’s 13 percent in 2004. With Obama improving with most groups, it’s somewhat curious that the exit poll showed support among Latinos actually dipped for the Democratic nominee to 61 percent. In 2004, Kerry carried 68 percent of Latino voters in the state.

On issues, Obama did best with people most concerned about health care, winning 78 percent of their vote, whole McCain did best with people most concerned with terrorism, claiming 88 percent of their vote.  Obama won more Republicans (13 percent) than McCain did Democrats (7 percent); Independents went for Obama over McCain 54 to 44 percent.

The estimated 2.2 million ballots cast in the state is expected to break a record, though some expected the turnout percentage to be higher.

For the state’s open Senate seat, Democrat Mark Udall was able to shrug off the “Boulder liberal” label and beat Republican challenger Bob Schaffer. Udall will succeed retiring Sen. Wayne Allard, a Republican in office since 1997, taking over a seat that’s been in Republican hands since 1979. Junior Senator-elect Udall will join Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar who replaced Democrat-turned-Republican Ben Nighthorse Campbell in 2005.

The only House seat to switch hands occurred in Colorado’s 4th congressional district. Three-term Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, a far right conservative who called banning gay marriage “the most important issue that we face today” and once received an endorsement from the KKK, saw her margins of victory slip at each election and had the distinction of having the lowest winning percentage (46 percent) of any member of congress in the 2006 election. With polls in her favor leading up to the election, challenger BetseyMarkey expected to win but was surprised at her 11-point margin (56 to 44) given the district is still a conservative stronghold. Ever the gracious loser, Musgrave hadn’t called Markey to concede as of Wednesday afternoon.

Obama supporters celebrate at the Rio Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada (Getty Images)

Nevada

Obama’s 12-point victory in Nevada is really a tale of two counties: Washoe and Clark.

As expected, Obama crushed McCain in Clark County, the population center of the state which accounted for 69 percent of all registered voters in the state on election day. Obama won 58 percent of Clark County votes to McCain’s 40 percent which amounted to a 122,803 vote advantage for the Democrat, per figures available as of this writing. Statewide, Obama won by 120,521 votes, finishing with 55 percent of the vote to McCain’s 43 percent.

The margin in Clark County alone might have been enough to carry the state, but a dramatic shift in second most populous Washoe County made the Obama victory that much easier. Obama won Washoe, which claimed 1,200 more registered Democrats than Republicans, 55 to 43 percent. In 2004, when registered Republicans outnumbered Democrats by more than 17,000, Bush carried the county 51 to 47 percent with a margin of victory of 6,700 votes. In the less populous rural counties, Obama lost by as much as 4-to-1.

Exit polls show Obama won a majority of both men and women voters (51 percent and 59 percent, respectively) and all age groups except 65 and older.Obama’s support went down with age, from 70 percent among 18-24 year olds to 52 percent of voters 50-64 years old. McCain won 55 percent of voters over 65. In 2004, exit poll data showed Bush with an advantage among men (54 percent to Kerry’s 44 percent) and all age groups over 30. Kerry won more women, 52 to 47 percent.

African-Americans made up 10 percent of the 2008 vote and went for Obama 94 percent to McCain’s 5 percent. Latinos, comprising 15 percent of voters, went for Obama over McCain 76 to 22 percent. McCain won 53 percent of white voters toObama’s 45 percent. Obama improved on Kerry’s 2004 performance among all races; Kerry had 86 percent of the African-American vote, 60 percent of the Latino vote, and 43 percent of the white vote.

Similar to results in Colorado, Obama did best (74 percent) with people who viewed health care as the most important issue and McCain did best (89 percent) with people who thought terrorism was most important.

Obama managed to sway 11 percent of Republicans, while McCain got 6 percent of Democrats to cross over. Independents broke 54 to 41 for Obama.

Two of three Nevada’s House members held on to their seats — Rep. Shelley Berkley (D) and Rep. Dean Heller (R). State Sen. Dina Titus beat three-term incumbent Rep. Jon Porter in the 3rd district which the Republican congressman has represented since it was created following the 2000 census. Titus, who lost the 2006 gubernatorial race to Republican Jim Gibbons, beat Porter 47 to 42 percent, with third party candidates collecting the rest of the votes. Early on election night, Heller told the Las Vegas Review-Journal he saw himself as the underdog. “This district went from dead even in registration to 40,000 more registered Democrats voters this time,” he said. Titus credited Obama’s field operation for helping her get elected.

Sen. John McCain urges on his supporters in Albuquerque, New Mexico on election day (Getty Images)

New Mexico

Of the western swing states, New Mexico is probably the most swingy. New Mexico voters picked Reagan twice, George H.W. Bush in 1988 but Clinton in 1992 and 1996, Gore in 2000 (by a razor-thin 366 votes) but Bush in 2004 (by just shy of 6,000 votes.) This year, the state appeared tired of such close races, giving Obama a resounding 15 point, 120,000 vote win.

But perhaps most interesting about New Mexico this season is it turned — as predicted by some — true blue. The congressional seats held by Republicans — one in the Senate and two in the House — fell to the Democrats marking the “first time in 40 years in which Democrats completely controlled the state’s congressional delegation,” predicted by some — true blue. The congressional seats held by Republicans — one in the Senate and two in the House — fell to the Democrats marking the “first time in 40 years in which Democrats completely controlled the state’s congressional delegation,” wrote Steve Terrell in The New Mexican.

When Republican Sen. Pete Domenici announced his retirement, all three current House members entered the race to replace him, leaving all three seats open races. Rep. Heather Wilson lost in the Republican primary to Rep. Steve Pearce, who in turn lost to Rep. Tom Udall (cousin to Colorado’s Senator-elect Mark Udall) on Tuesday. Udall enjoyed an even wider margin of victory than the top of the ticket, beating Pearce 61 to 39 percent. Obama beat McCain 57 to 42 percent.

In the 1st and 2nd congressional districts, both currently held by Republicans, the Democratic nominees enjoyed identical 55 to 45 percent victories. The more liberal leaning 3rd district was not expected to be a close race, and the Democrat won handily 57 to 30 percent.

Obama won 54 percent of the male vote and 59 percent of the female vote; he also carried every age group, according to state exit polls. New Mexico has the highest percentage of Latinos of any state, and they comprised 41 percent of the electorate on Tuesday voting for Obama 69 percent of the time. In 2004, Kerry won 56 percent of the Latino vote.

Among white voters, the results were the same as in 2004; whites backed Bush over Kerry 56 to 43 percent and McCain over Obama 56 to 42 percent. Most voters (55 percent) said that the economy was the most important issue, and of those 60 percent voted for Obama. McCain did best with voters most concerned about terrorism, earning 84 percent of their vote, while Obama did best with people most concerned about Iraq, winning 70 percent of their vote.

More Democrats went for McCain (9 percent) than Republicans went for Obama (8 percent), and both earned 91 percent of their party’s votes; Independents backed Obama over McCain 56 to 41 percent.

For more front pages from around the globe, visit Newseum, The Interactive Museum of News

The networks and newspapers have called the election for Sen. Barack Obama, who won a historic victory with more than 300 electoral votes.

The immigrant vote might have played a role in netting him a handful of decisive states. The race was close in Virginia, and large Latino populations were leaning toward Obama in Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico. Florida’s Latinos seem to be trending blue, as News 21 reporters predicted. North Carolina is too close to call as of 11:43 Tuesday night, but Latino votes might wind up counting there too.

The Wilkes-Barre Times-Leader has called the race in Pennsylvania’s 11th District for Rep. Paul Kanjorski. His defeat of anti-illegal immigration mayor Lou Barletta owes a lot to the economic crisis, not to mention a last minute visit by Bill Clinton last night.

“You don’t need to boo. You just need to vote,” Sen. Barack Obama told his supporters who booed when he mentioned his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, this morning at a campaign rally in Henderson, Nevada.

Early voting in Nevada and Colorado — where Obama is scheduled to appear this afternoon — ended Friday, and Obama looks to be in good shape in both swing states. But he cautioned the race isn’t over and implored his supporters to get out the vote on Tuesday.

“Don’t believe for a second this election is over.” he said. “We have to work like our future depends on it in these last few days, because it does.”

More than 40 percent of registered Nevadans cast early ballots. Clark and Washoe counties, which together comprise 87 percent of all registered voters in the state, are the only counties to report on the party affiliation of registered voters. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that 52 percent of early voters were registered Democrats and 31 percent were registered Democrats in those counties. Exit polling of more than 15,000 early voters shows Obama getting 53 percent to McCain’s 44 percent, according to the Review-Journal. The polling firm’s findings suggest Obama has widened his lead among early voters in the past week, since results through last Sunday gave Obama a slimmer 50 to 48 lead.

More than half of Colorado voters will have cast ballots before Tuesday, either by mail or at early voting sites. A poll released Thursday showed Obama leads McCain among Colorado early voters 59 to 41 percent. The poll found that among likely voters who hadn’t yet cast their ballots the candidates were tied at 46 percent each.

Obama’s last stop in Nevada before the election — his 20th in the Silver State — marked the second weekend in a row the candidate hit this Western battleground. McCain hasn’t stepped foot in Nevada since early August, but will join runing mate Gov. Sarah Palin on election eve.

In the latest AP-GfK poll released Wednesday, Obama leads Sen. John McCain 50 to 41 percent in Colorado and 52 to 40 percent in Nevada. Looking at the complete data set, the Obama campaign’s push to turn out early voters appears to be working. Of those surveyed who had already voted, 57 percent picked Obama versus 34 percent for McCain in Colorado, and 56 percent of Nevada early voters chose Obama compared with 33 percent picking McCain.

Early voters in Colorado are favoring Barack Obama by nearly a 2-to-1 margin (Reuters)

Hoping to lock in these swing states turned Democratic leaners, Sen. Barack Obama is headed to Colorado and Nevada for the second weekend in a row. Some are speculating Obama’s real reason for heading back west the weekend before the election is to stump in McCain’s home state. The latest polls show McCain’s once commanding lead falling to the low single digits, in some cases evaporating into the margin of error. For comparison, Obama enjoys a 20+ point lead in his home state of Illinois.

Considering McCain won reelection to the U.S. Senate with 77 percent of the vote in 2004 and 69 percent in 1998, to be running neck and neck in a statewide election represents a huge reversal of fortune for the Arizona senator even if he manages to carry the state on November 4.

Purged Voters In Colorado Can Cast (Provisional) Ballots

The Colorado Secretary of State’s office has settled a lawsuit brought by voters’ rights groups and the SEIU over what they claimed were illegal purges from the voter roles. The agreement allows the suspect voters to cast provisional ballots and essentially jump to the front of the line when verifying provisional ballots after the election.

“Voters on the list shall be presumed to be eligible and their ballots will be counted,” the agreement says, according to the Denver Post. “Only upon a showing by clear and convincing evidence that a voter is not eligible shall a provisional ballot be rejected by the county.”

The two parties reached the out of court agreement Wednesday, but it looked like the presiding judge was leaning toward the plaintiffs.

“I think there are places where the state went out of bounds on removal of these names,” Senior U.S. District Judge John L. Kane Jr. said, according to the Post.

The New York Times first reported on the purges in Colorado and other states earlier this month, and soon after election officials began disputing the claims in the story.

Before the agreement in Colorado was announced, alt-weekly Denver Westword featured an online interview with BBC journalist Greg Palast who co-wrote a Rolling Stone article on Republican voter suppression tactics.

Palast claims former Secretary of State Donetta Davidson, a Republican, and her Democratic successor Mike Coffman purged 19.4 percent of Colorado’s registered voters since 2004.

“Are you really telling me that one in five voters are fraudulent, illegal voters who are trying to steal the election?” Palast said in Westword. “No, they’re not. Is the state really rife with fraudulent voters? No, it’s not. It’s a complete, absolute con, and they know it. Davidson and Mike Coffman have been running a purge-and-block operation.”