Are those IA supporters of Dems NOT making the 15% threshold obligated to vote for someone else?

[RiverStone]

There is a good chance tomorrow that at least three or four Dems will not make 15%. Then, is the proper thing for caucus attendees to do is vote for a second choice candidate in round two? And to keep voting until your choice falls above the 15% rule....

Ultimately, it seems that all who show up should at least cast a vote - even if it is a compromise second choice. In that way, the greatest representation of preferences is known.

Or, can a Democratic caucus goer simply walk way after round one and not participate further?

Thanks in advance for your wise caucus wisdom. :hi:

[Drunken Irishman]

1. I think they are obligated, though don't quote me on that.

[Pirate Smile]

3. Nope, they aren't.

[Drunken Irishman]

4. Ok, thanks. But generally, they will go to another group.

[youthere]

8. Not necessarily.

some do, some don't.

[CoffeeCat]

9. Yes....

...the overwhelming majority of those who support non-viable candidates throw their
support to other viable candidates.

These supporters with non-viable candidates are really critical. If you can get the
Dodd, Richardson and Biden people into your camp--it helps immensely.

Whoever can woo these caucus-goers will most likely take the state--because the race
is so tight.

My guess is that most of these supporters will go to Obama and Edwards.

[youthere]

6. No, we are not.

[Pirate Smile]

2. No. They can go with one of the viable groups, create a group for

uncommitted/undecided but it needs to be able to reach 15%, or they can choose to not join any of the other groups.

edit to add - Jimmy Carter actually came in second with "uncommitted" coming in first.

[aquart]

17. Is someone with a calculator appointed to do the math?

I really haven't a clue how these things work. I'm in New York. We pull a lever. We don't group. We don't care about viable. And then we go home. The whole process seems...alarmingly social. Like speed dating.

[Pirate Smile]

22. I assume the person running it has a calculator but I didn't actually see

it the last time around. I also do think they get double-checked quite carefully by the other caucus-goers. We are talking about a room full of Democrats after all.

edit to add - I don't mean double-checking because anyone is cheating, more of the double-checking because sometimes math can be hard. :)

[KingofNewOrleans]

5. They can do all sorts of stuff

They can go home. They can join a candidate that has more than 15%. They can try to join forces with another candidate below the 15% and reach 15% (ie Biden and Richardson caucus goers join together). They can try to form an uncommitted group. They can stay with their first choice and just be non-viable.


It's also my understanding that there is some neighborliness to the process too. If a candidate is only a couple of people short of viability there is a tendency within the room to get them to the threshold, regardless of people's second-choice.

[RiverStone]

10. But if your in an "uncommitted" group...

...you become a very HOT commodity!

Yet - before you leave - can I assume that you eventually decide to go with someone and VOTE?

Damn, sounds fun!!!!

[CoffeeCat]

13. That's true...

...if you're "undecided", then you have spokespeople from EVERY candidate camp
trying to lobby you into their candidate group.

Sometimes, one group is one person away from being "viable", so the discussion
and persuasion is very rousing.

[aquart]

19. Sounds like pure hell for the shy.

[Pirate Smile]

23. You don't have to say anything. Go stand or sit with your candidate's

group. You don't have to persuade anyone else. I know the Obama campaign (at least for some precincts, I don't know if they have done it for all) has the "persuaders" already picked out - the person to go try to convince other people to join their group. A person can always just leave or tell people no.

edit to add - I think it sounds more intimidating then it actually is.

[CoffeeCat]

11. This is true...

There is obviously some strategic advantage for helping other candidates to become viable.

Let's say that Obama needs 8 supporters to get 1 delegate. If Obama has 12, and Richardson
only has 7, the Obama camp may agree to send a supporter to Richardson to help him to that
15 percent threshold, so he can have at least one delegate, and be "viable."

It's too bad that Hillary ran such a dirty, closed-off campaign, because no one will be
helping her out, that is for sure.

[CoffeeCat]

7. If your candidate...

...is deemed "not viable"--because they do not get 15 percent of the total votes, then
you have choices.

You can join another group.

Or, you can decide to not join another group and stand for your candidate--but your vote
doesn't count.

This happened to me in '04. I caucused for Dean. I was so shocked when I discovered that there
were only three others caucusing for Dean. He was not viable. I elected to stand for Dean and
not count.

I sat at a table and watched the entire process.

It's pretty fun and exciting---watching people trying to persuade those who supported non-viable candidates

Also--there is usually a group of "undecideds" and all of the candidate camps really go after them--as you
can imagine. It can be quite fun.

[cyberswede]

12. "Uncommitted" can get delegates, can't they?

As far as I know, if you have enough people in the "uncommitted" group, they can have a delegate or delegates, just as other viable groups. Do I have this wrong? I'm caucus secretary, so I better find out. :)
thx - cs

[CoffeeCat]

15. Wow, I'm a precinct captain, and...

...I haven't read anything regarding that.

I have never heard of "uncommitteds" organizing and earning delegates.

It might be true that this can happen, but I haven't read anything regarding
this and I've never heard that this could happen.

[Pirate Smile]

18. As long as they reach the 15% threshold they can form a group.

[aquart]

20. Can they pick a candidate who isn't running? Or Bugs Bunny?

What are the restrictions?

[Pirate Smile]

26. You stumped me there. - OK, I checked - no, they have to be on the ballot

"Nomination Papers and Candidate Letters
10) Candidates seeking office on the federal, state, and local level are required to
obtain a certain number of signatures to have their name listed on the ballot in
Iowa. Many of these candidates will have their petitions as well as letter at the
caucuses. At this time, the chair will point the letters and petitions and encourage
attendees to read the letters and sign the petitions.
Candidate letters may be read aloud, passed around to each attendee or posted
for the attendees to read before or after the caucus."

[Pirate Smile]

16. LOL. Yes, they can.

[GreenArrow]

24. "but your vote doesn't count"

That just doesn't seem fair to me.

[Debi]

14. NO...NO. NO. NO.NOOOOOOOOO

http://www.iowafirstcaucus.org/pdfs/2008_Caucus_Guide.pdf


Realignment

20) At this time any preference group(s) that is not viable (has fewer members than
the viability threshold) must be given an opportunity to realign.

· Non-viable groups can join with other viable preference groups or with other
non-viable preference groups in order to attain viability.

· Members of non-viable groups can choose not to realign, however they will
not be awarded any delegates if they remain non-viable.

· Members of viable preference groups are also allowed to realign if they so
desire.


:banghead: Sorry, but the MSM keeps getting it wrong - All they have to do is read a little 13 page caucus guide put out by the IDP. x(

[rufus dog]

21. They have a lot of options

They could go to their second choice, or team up with others to make one candidate reach the 15% threshold. For Example, Kucinich, Dodd, and Biden supporters could go to one of the defined "top three" or they could group together and give Biden all of the votes, or they could walk. I think with this group of candidates walking away is the least likely.

[Renew Deal]

25. Here's a good post about it from earlier today.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3928203&mesg_id=3928315