Running Primaries Thread

Caucuses are simply idiotic, and they would be still if it were Biden and Dodd fighting over the nomination.

 

There are problems with caucuses. But all caucuses are not created equal, and some have more problems than others. And they aren't any more inherently undemocratic than primaries, and arguing so really does make it seem like you swallowed the Wolf Man's Kool Aid wholesale.

Iowa's caucuses need tweaking.

Texas' need to be completely scrapped. That was a gigantic clusterfuck -- of that there is no doubt.

Maine and Washington, on the other hand, hold caucuses with options for absentee voting. To my mind, there's nothing on earth wrong with that.

And, I'm curious how you feel about early voting? There's another system that is popular for the exact same reason that caucuses are -- it's cheaper and spreads out the strain on a voting system. Plus, campaigns love it. But with a 15 percent requirement for delegate allocation and the speed at which candidates can drop out during primary season, isn't it as big a problem as caucuses are? Because Edwards had more than 100K early votes in California that went for naught.

The irony, of course, comes from the Clinton camp claiming that the caucuses are undemocratic during an election in which Obama owes his success at the caucuses to making them more democratic. The Clintons never complained about how undemocratic caucuses were when they, you know, ran the party and could have changed things, nor when they were convinced that tapping old friends and party bosses around the country to run their caucus efforts would be enough to win them.

When folks started showing up, that's when the Clintons noticed that folks didn't show up at caucuses.

 

Voting is voting, early or not.
Caucuses are not voting.
Any more than state legislatures electing the senators used to be.

 

Voting is not voting in Democratic primaries, either.

You don't have to be let off work to do it, and if your guy doesn't get 15 percent, your vote doesn't count.

In fact, when it comes to the viability threshold -- which all the primaries have, by the way -- the caucuses are better than primaries. Allows people to back their second choice.

 

Ha. They moved the big day up to early February to facilitate the process/grease the skids for an obvious frontrunner (and virtually all the smug party pros had the same name in mind, when they did it).

Alas, HRC turned out to be presumptious, rather than presumptive.

She flat-out blew this, because she cut corners/didn't cover all the bases.

Her problem, now.

 

How about this novel idea? Every state could vote on the same damned day. Perhaps in April? That might hurt an upstart candidate, but the campaign coverage and the polls should give some voters an idea whether that candidate has a shot in hell.

 

Sorry Stallion:

Uncle Media needs the ad money, yo...

 

Boy, would that be hell on whoever wasn't the front-runner to begin with.

How are you going to keep raising money that long without showing a win?

The system is flawed. I think the solution is some kind of rotating regional windows spaced out a little more evenly than things are now. Allow different regions and states to go first. Give each region say a two-week window -- giving them two Tuesdays and two Saturdays to spread out among the states in the region. Keep it regional to allow the candidates some semblance of a rational campaign travel schedule.

A national primary would makes things worse, I fear.

 

Not to slightly threadjack but ...

I was watching a documentary on History Channel today about the Kennedys, and it showed Bobby Kennedy declaring his intentions to run for the presidency on March 16, 1968. I'm a young sparky here - just 30 - but did they hold a lot of the primaries later then, or did he just jump into the race later.

And if he did jump in later, could that happen now and that individual even get a whiff of the nomination?

 

Both. The calendar was set up for later, and Kennedy jumped in late.

It would be next to impossible for something like that to happen today. But not impossible, given the right candidate and the right circumstances.

But the playing field is pretty rigged against it. Iowa was on Jan. 3rd, and Edwards, Clinton and Obama all had staffers there for at least a year leading up to it.

 

Thanks for the input. Now back to your regularly-scheduled primary discussion.

 

Jump right on in, Chester.

We would use some new blood, anyway.