Caucuses are undemocratic, and here's why

[sniffa]

Hillary didn't win. :nuke:

[polichick]

1. LOL

I guessed it right!

[George_Bonanza]

2. Either that or she has the most immobile constituent in political history

[sniffa]

18. And she polls in the high 90s among the agoraphobic and claustrophobic

This is bullshit!!

[GalleryGod]

22. Bad boy!

"Step back,Hillster,we'll retire your debt for you."

[pdxmom]

3. Has there been an uproar about how undemocratic caucuses were

in past years? I don't seem to remember hearing about it. I'm getting older, though, so I don't remember so well.

[Hill_YesWeWill]

4. Well I think they are the most democratic honestly,

because they count the actual bodies, there are no questionable voting machines involved.

[covadcalifornia]

5. classic!

you hit it on the head - someone does not win and then all of a sudden it IS the process..... well until next time if they win then it MUST be ok now.

good call

[VolcanoJen]

6. ROFL

Yes, and he's now won as many primaries as Senator Clinton, too. Primaries are SO undemocratic!!! :-)

[TexasObserver]

7. Why are caucuses so mean to Hillary?

Hillary can win primaries, but only if voters can literally "mail it in," because without those old, long since filed absentee ballots she garnered before the race heated up, she'd already be out of it.

She doesn't motivate people, no matter what a few hundred posters here say.

[NashVegas]

8. Thanks For Doing Your Part

To raise the discourse.

[karynnj]

9. Yep - and like her surrogate the Governor of Maryland said this morning

The reason for the superdelegates are to assure that we get a candidate who can run well going forward. I guess he means you wouldn't want peons deciding.

[GalleryGod]

21. Good old Marty O'malley. Long time since he cme to Goucher College and spoke on "grassroots"

democracy:rofl: :popcorn: :rofl:

For HER !!!!!!!!!

[HeraldSquare212]

10. They're considered a party-building exercise, to prepare for the general election

and help the party within the state. I recall one poster here from the Iowa or NV caucus mentioning that she met some people at her caucus site and they exchanged phone numbers so they could get together and work on the general election. That would never occur in a primary state.

[JVS]

11. Waaaaaahhhhhhhhh!

[Whisp]

12. gawd you are evil.

and funny as hell.

:rofl:

[LittleBlue]

13. LMAO

:spank:

[SaveOurDemocracy]

14. Nice ... so much for staying out of the fray.

[Crooked Moon]

15. personal opinion only...

but i believe people are freer to vote their conscience in a private, secret ballot. caucuses are more susceptible to browbeating and groupthink.

[Barack_America]

16. I've never caucused before, but I personally think it would be FUN!

Nobody's going to intimidate me into changing my mind and I like the idea of making a party out of my vote.

I imagine going to caucus, meeting up with fellow supporters and then going to a bar to watch the results and talk politics.

How amazing would that be?

It's so anti-climatic to push a button and then go to work. I'm too fired up after I vote!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

17. the caucuses are sexist

thats the big problem.

And probably the caucuses favor African Americans, or

they favor people who like to watch MSNBC too much,

or something.

Please do keep us up to date with the latest.

[WillyT]

26. LOL !!!

:rofl::evilgrin::rofl:

[flyarm]

19. caucus's are not democratic ..they disenfranchise too many voters!

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2008/02/obama-won-caucu.html

snip:

The Votemaster notes:

Obama did extremely well in caucus states and Clinton did very badly in them. How come? Turnout in caucus states is always low, usually about 10-20% of the electorate. Only highly motivated people bother to show up, especially the Democratic caucuses, which go on for hours and people have to publicly defend their choice. Obama has a smaller, but extremely active and loyal following, especially among younger voters. These are precisely the people who can swing a caucus state by showing up in droves and working hard to convince the other voters that Obama would make a great President. In primary states, the media, especially TV ads have a much bigger influence. Now it becomes clear why Obama won North Dakota but Clinton won Oklahoma, a demographically similar state in the same part of the country: North Dakota had a caucus and Oklahoma had a primary.
This explanation may be too simple, and I would be surprised if the other analyses I've seen (invoking everything from Hispanics to the Kennedys) have no merit. However, the Votemaster's simple hypothesis has remarkable explanatory power: Every one of Obama's top five wins were in caucus states; and of the seven Super Tuesday caucuses, he won them all.


*oh and a caucus i saw in Iowa..and was co-captain in for Edwards..i saw lots of cheating..lots!!
so much so..it made me sick!
and when many of us who worked the caucus got together and shared notes..it was disgusting the cheating that went on.

and a caucus does not reflect who will come out and vote for our candidates...especially when they are open caucus's..to independents, and or republicans.

fly

[IDemo]

23. Turnout in caucus states is always low?

We had over 4 times as many show up at our local caucus as the entire state had in primary voters four years ago.

http://www.2news.tv/news/local/15308836.html

[eridani]

31. It's just TERRIBLE to have highly motivated people have a larger say

Let's just give the election to the candidates who can afford to pay the media to repeat their names often enough to catch the attention of all those other people who'd rather not pay attention. Or we could just cancel the actual vote and award delegates according to FEC filings.

[GalleryGod]

20. Go, Sniffa! And BiBaby,Too !

Da-MAS-Cus!



OOops! I meant DEN-ver !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bluestateguy]

24. Caucuses separate the half-ass supporters from the true believers

They are a fine way to separate the committed believers from fickle voters. Caucus participants are among the most well-informed and serious people about politics.

[no name no slogan]

25. And MSNBC must be shut down! Here's why:

Shuster makes a dumbass comment about Chelsea. But it's still okay that they disinvited Kucinich from the debate.

[Bitwit1234]

27. There is no checks and balances....you can't prove who won.

And since every time the big other candidate loses a state he says it was crooked....what a whiner...pouty boy in action. I suppose he would like a law where every body has to bow down to him.

[no name no slogan]

28. Just have two or more people count heads

You get more than one person to count the member of each caucus, just like you have more than one person count each ballot. There's your checks and balances right there.

[sniffa]

29. Your post needs its own thread

:thumbsup:

[newmajority]

30. Have you ever been to a caucus?

Here's what happenned at mine yesterday. You sign in immediately.... or as soon as you get through the long line. You fill out a form that has your name, address, phone number, and e-mail on it, so you can be verified if necessary. The last thing you write on the form is the name of your candidate. THAT is your ballot.

The PCO appoints someone to count the ballots, and that count is verified by a representative of each candidate. In this case, one from the Obama camp, one from the Hillary camp.

Now unless your Obama rep is really a closet Hillbot and all three of them falsify the ballots, I don't see how you could get the count wrong. And even then, anybody who thought the results were improbable (i.e. a Hillary victory in a room full of Obama stickers) it would take a whole 10 minutes to get a recount.

It's an idiot-proof process, and basically a theft-proof process. I'll take it over DIEBOLD anytime.