I keep changing my mind about caucuses...

[zanne]

On one hand, I think it's good that people have to publicly reveal who they're supporting. On the other hand, I think privacy is important and I worry about how much peer pressure is involved in making the decision. Thoughts?

[Evergreen Emerald]

1. In Iowa when there were stories about Obama shipping people in

from other states and that there was no proof of citizenship or residence status to participate, I became leary of them. And now, in this Nevada caucus with information that the workers are being bullied into siding with Obama, who fear loosing their jobs, I think the choices should be private.

[zanne]

2. Wow.

I wasn't asking for opinions about Obama, but I suppose if I substituted "blank" for Obama I could see your point. I just don't want to make this about any particular candidate. I'm seriously curious about the caucus process.

[Sal Minella]

17. Scary scary fiction you've got built there, but in Iowa you have to be a registered Democrat

to participate, and your residence has to be in the precinct you are caucusing in. But if you truly want to believe that busloads of undocumented illegals shipped in from out of state gave Obama his lead, you go right ahead. I won't bother to tell you that my very wealthy Republican neighbors changed their registration to Democrat so they could caucus for Obama.

[pinto]

3. I've never lived in a caucus state so have no personal comparison, yet prefer a ballot,

and a private vote.

[patrice]

4. Never underestimate the power of the pressure to conform . . .

The pressure to "be one of us" is especially strong amongst the un-informed.

[Glorfindel]

5. I wish we had them in Mississippi

Here, you don't have to register by party, so the Repukes, naturally, vote in droves in the Democratic primaries in order to nominate the weakest possible candidate. Typically, 65% to 70% of primary voters will vote in the Democratic primary, and then the Repukes will win by about the same margin in the general election. The same thing happens in Georgia, where I used to live.

[zanne]

9. Oh no.

Another thing to worry about!

[Toots]

13. Who do you think they will vote in droves for?

:shrug: I think it will be Obama. I think they believe all of America is as bigoted as they are and there for if the Democrats nominate a black man America will turn out in droves to defeat him. I think they are just plain despicable people..

[Glorfindel]

20. Mississippi isn't important enough to matter in a presidential primary

It's a given that the Repukes will carry the state anyway, so why even bother with the Democratic primary? Having said that, I think the 'Pukes will vote in droves for Huckabee, the Baptist preacher, to keep Romney, the Mormon incarnation of Satan, from carrying Mississippi. It's state and local politics that matter here. Last fall, the Repukes nominated the worst possible Democratic candidate for governor. He campaigned while waving a Bible, on a platform of restoring prayer to public schools. Needless to say, wily ol' Haley Barbour won re-election in a landslide. (P.S.: the public schools here are FULL of public, Protestant, Christian prayer, but naturally no one dares to object.)

[Emit]

6. I posted about this last night. As a caucus goer and volunteer here in NV

I have talked to so many people who are dissatisfied that we are doing a caucus instead of a primary election. Some folks here are so uncomfortable with the process. I'm actually hoping a lot of the younger voters will pull this off, because so many of the older voters I've talked to aren't ready for this change -- the complaints I've gotten include not wanting to select a candidate in public with neighbors, not comfortable discussing politics with strangers, not having the time to spend two hours (more or less) for the process, etc. One woman I spoke with was very angry and said she felt disenfranchised by the process and not the least bit empowered -- she said they took her opportunity to vote in the primary away. I tried to reason with her about the advantages --having more candidates to choose from, eing able to hear from candidates first hand and early in the race, etc -- nothing I said could change her mind. She will not go.

[zanne]

11. I phonebanked for a candidate for ten months...

We have primaries here, of course. Alot of people I called were very upset at being asked the question "Have you decided who you'll be supporting in the Primary"? Especially among people 40 and up, the answer was often "That's private".

[zanne]

14. Is there a fee for caucus goers? nt

[Emit]

16. No, but the chair is supposed to send an envelope around for donations and there is a fee

for the County Convention to cover attendance and lunch.

[zanne]

18. Well, that's OK. nt

[cboy4]

7. You have to wonder how many people choose to

NOT get involved because of what you're describing.

Then again, I'm curious how many people truly know what the caucus is all about.

What I know is I like the way things are in my state.

[iamjoy]

8. The Problem With A Caucus

is not only the fact that the vote is not private, but the number of people who are automatically excluded. What if some one is in the military and on deployment or just another voter who has to be out of town for one reason or another? What about the voters who are nurses, firefighters, or in another profession where they can't get the time off to caucus?

Most (if not all) states have some kind of absentee ballot provision for elections, but if I understand correctly, that's not an option in a caucus.

What's cool about a caucus though is the chance to support a second choice. I think it would be good if this could somehow be worked into all elections.

[zanne]

10. I hadn't considered the second choice aspect of it.

Something to think about.

[annabanana]

12. OTOH.. If you have a really persuasive supporter for a

candidate that hasn't gotten enough press for their positions on the issues... it is a great venue for bringing people around...

[durrrty libby]

15. "it's good that people have to publicly reveal who they're supporting"

No it's not. It's like asking people how much money they make

They don't dig it and I have never heard anyone say that it is good to have people reveal

publicly who they support.That goes against the grain.

[zanne]

19. I rethought that position...

See post #11.