Who is Caucusing tonight?

[Patty]

Only for national elections, Ron. More specifically, only the presidential elections. (I think)

I'm wondering, do you have to be pre-registered as a democrat or a republican to attend a given caucus? Or could, theoretically and as an example, republicans show up at a democratic caucus or vice-versa, and caucus for the opponent they felt was least electable?

Jeff, you can show up at either caucus in your district (republican or democrat), but you must register at the door. In otherwords if you were a registered independent, but you wanted to participate, you would pick the side you want, and register at the door for that specific party.

Some one asked about Mitt Romney. He was not a consideration for me. No offense meant to anyone here, ok? In MY opinion, a candidate can waffle on many issues, but abortion is not one of them. Romney couldn't seem to decide if thought women should be able to kill their babies or not. Enough said for me.

Ron Paul was extremely appealing to me. I heard him speak on several occasions and agreed that he is an eloquent and thoughtful candidate. Then I heard a guy ask him this: "If North Korea loaded up a ship with nuclear warheads to sell to the Mullahs in Iran, would you stop the shipment?"  Ron Paul's skirted all around the question. His answer was, " North Korea can't even feed their people, much less purchase nuclear warheads to sell to Iran. If we were at war, I might pay attention to the ship. It is statistically impossible for that to happen, so my answer is no, I would not stop the ship."   Right there I realized that Ron Paul did not understand that we are involved in a war, whether he believes it or not. In MY opinion his answer should have been, "Yes I would not only stop the shipment, but there would be a huge gaping hole in the ocean floor where that ship had been."

Now these are just my thoughts, not meant to cause harm or hurt feelings.

[Jeff]

Patty and bmill, thanks a ton for your thoughtful looks into your Caucuses. Very insightful and for me at least, educational.  Exactly the type of posts I like to see and love to read. 

[OneWithWood]

Let me echo Jeff's response and thank Patty and bmill for their thoughtful and insightful replies.  Thank-you.

From what I could gather form the news reports and the replies here, the democrat caucuses seem to be a more complex affair.  It is unfortunate that of the 240,000 dems that turned out to caucus none seem to frequent this forum.  It would be most interesting to hear a first hand account of the discussions that occurred in what were much closer contests. 

To me the Iowa caucuses are a much more participative and vibrant form of voting than the dry and dull affairs in the other 49 states.

[Tom]

I agree OOW.

The caucus, while maybe cumbersome, retains the independence of years past, when citizens took individual pride in being involved in the selection of Government.  Today's population appears to be complacent enough to allow somebody else to make their decisions for them.

[Jeff]

I think I disagree with the motion that the primaries are all held at the same time. The people in Iowa do the rest of us a great service by starting this process. They are in my mind, the ones that spark the process. From that spark, we begin to form our own ideas and conclusions from what they offer us, in turn, the next primary voters benefit from what they have learned and this string continues. Actually, its not a string, its a circle. The folks in Iowa are able to now look on, as what they started proceeds, and perhaps adjust what they think from watching.  Everyone shares in the information process in this manner.

If all the primaries were held as the same time, none of us could learn from each other. I think our Forefathers were very intuitive to create such a system.

[Gary_C]

Yes, I add my thanks for those reports. I know my son and DIL were going to the democrats caucus last night as they were impressed with Richardson and I will ask them tonight and see what their reaction was.

Last I heard, the candidates spent over $65 million in Iowa alone.  That alone is reason enough for every state to want to be first. If you want to see the money trail, check out this site:  http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp

You can even get names of donors and salaries of employees if you have time to look thru all that information. 

[Norm]

It's been kind of fun well except for the billion ads we were inundated with. This has been the first time in many years that I was undecided on who to vote for. To be honest I may yet change my mind before next November but can tell you that we did get a unique chance to really get to know the candidates.

[pigman]

Thanks for the reports. It shows that a discussion of the political process can be civil and informative. 8)

[DanG]

I gotta respectfully disagree with your disagreement of the motion, Jeff.  Now as long as we are doing it this way, Iowa is a great place to start.  They got a good cross-section of people, and they take it seriously.  However, they have already eliminated a few candidates before the rest of us had a chance to weigh in on them.  Next come's New Hampshire, and they are going to eliminate some more of them.  The rest of us are going to be stuck voting for people we don't like.  In all of my voting life, I've never had any say in who the candidates will be, because our State was assigned  ??? a late slot.  The candidates that will be in the final election are already chosen before they even get to us EVERY STINKIN' ELECTION!  If we just gotta cling to an antiquated, obsolete system, can't we at least rotate it around so that some of us will finally get a chance to exercise our Constitutional rights?  New Hampshire passed a State law that they have to be the first State with a primary, and the whole Country has to abide by it.  Yet, this year Florida decided to move up our Primary date, and we are told by the Democrat Party that our delegates won't be allowed to vote at the convention.  What kind of "democracy" is that?

The current system was just the ticket, back when candidates had to make their speeches from the back of a railroad car, but in this age of instant global communication, it is a real dinosaur.

[Furby]

Yeah, I'm disagreeing with you as well Jeff, I think it should all be done at once all across the country and everything tallied at once.
As you described makes no sense as we can learn from each other at any time before a vote.
Instead, we choose to learn from the media's reports on the aftermath of each state.

[Jeff]

They dont eliminate anyone.  They drop out of their own free will.

Furby you have a sentence in there that is crossing the boundaries I set. Telling me or anyone else that they make no sense is not within the boundaries of this conversation.

[Furby]

Ok, "As you described don't work for me" OR "today's system doesn't make any sense" take your pick.

They drop out because a portion of the country doesn't support them.
Just because a portion don't support them, don't mean they'll lose.
Because of the way things are done, and as you said they drop out, it's $ that decide who makes it to the end.
If you get early support, more $ will be "found" to support you.
If everything is done at once, the field may not be level, but all parties are in the game and we all have a say in things.
Lots of folks won't vote as they don't like any of the options that make it to the end in today's system.

[J_T]

Thanks Patty and everyone for the report. I must admit till reading this I was dummer than a box of rocks  : Been trying to get a grasp of what these caucas was all about and how they worked ??? Now I think i'm getting it . Those news folks don't tell it where I can get it  :D

[Handy Andy]

  Hooray Patty, I like Ron Paul and would vote for him in a second if we weren't at war.  Think the libertarians are the right way for America if they would just defend the country.  Jim

[Norm]

I certainly understand that other states would like a chance to see all the candidates before they are winnowed out. On the other hand let me tell you that some of the lesser candidates are doing nothing but wasting our time, on each side of the aisle.

Here's something I'd like to see. Make the candidates write down their campaign pledges and if they get elected have some kind of punishment each time they break one....I think starting with toes and working your way up.  ;D

[Mooseherder]

Here's something I'd like to see. Make the candidates write down their campaign pledges and if they get elected have some kind of punishment each time they break one....I think starting with toes and working your way up.  ;D

:D :D :D

[isawlogs]

 
Would anybody care to give me some explanation as to how this all works. I think I have an idea of it , but not sure cause the way I see it it sure aint a democratic way, but I could be wrong . So before I set my mind to something I am not competely at ease with , can ya enlighten me some .

  Thanks
Marcel da foreigner 

[beenthere]

Isawlogs
Looking back at Patty's explanation, (I thought it was pretty clear  : ), the caucus picks delegates to carry the consensus of the group on to the next level (county) and then on to the next (state). It is a grass-roots selection of who the small group favors to run, as well as moving a platform (be it taxes, illegals, health insurance, etc.) on through the higher levels of meetings, eventually to the National conventions.
Does that help?  (or am I confused too?) ;D

[Furby]

Norm, I simply feel I have a right to decide for myself if a lesser candidate is indeed wasting my time.
That right under the current method, is taken away from me.

I do like the punishment idea though.

[Tom]

You've pretty much got it, isawlogs.  It would work without question if the candidates came from the same area as the caucus.  The rub comes when the candidate comes from another part the nation, one that may not have any resemblence to the area where the causcus is held.  Then that small caucus is making a decision that could keep that candidate away from his "own" people.   With only two parties, some paring must be done some way.  Even in a popular vote where everyone was voted for in the same election, unfairness could happen when the most populsated  areas elect all of the candidates.

The tricky part of a caucus is that it is the "Delegates" that are chosen and passed up the ladder, not really the candidate.  Who's to say what may be in a delegate's mind when he/she reaches the National convention.

[asy]

Well, I think this is FASCINATING.

This is running into my list of favourite threads ever! I love this stuff. GREAT information, thanks everyone!

Patty, thanks for your great summary. I've read the one over atWikipedia: CAUCUS EXPLANATION but yours is just as good an explanation

I'm fascinated by American Politics, it's hillarious (sorry). Now, I know it's a race to run the free world (or so they'd have us think), but, I find it amazing that they take a whole year (or more) of touring around the country shaking hands and kissing babies.

I must admit, I'm a great fan of the West Wing TV show, and series 6 is where they start the race for the next pres after Bartlet, and (yeah, I know it's a TV show, but it's "technically" pretty good according to reports, and I'm not getting into the politics of the show) there's a whole section on the Iowa Caucuses, followed by the New Hampshire primaries, etc. The particular show is called "King Corn.

The thing I find most interesting is the fund raising. I had a great time reading that site Gary listed. I can't believe the money going into the "race" at such an early stage, especially. Here in Aus, the Political Campaigns are funded by the country. They each get the same amount of money and go forth and "press flesh". There are things they have to pay for themselvs, and they fund any overrun, but there's not fundraising like you guys seem to have to endure!

Anyway, I'm finding this thread magnificent, and I'd like to really thank everyone participating in the thread for keeping it non-political from Rep v/s Dem point of view. I'd hate that to come into the discussion.

I'm interested in both sides of view. I'd be pretty sure whether or not I'd be R or D, if I lived in the US, but, even so, I'm still interested in hearing how both do things.

Thanks again, guys. Gear up for some "silly questions from the Aussie".

asy :D

OK: Silly Q #1: Can someone NOT from (for example) Iowa vote in the Iowa Caucus'? So, could Furby (for example) go to Iowa and vote in a caucus there? Can you only vote once in a Caucus? or could you travel around to the different ones and vote over and over. Is there a "roll call" or such? I know (I think it was) Patty said you had to register, but is it noted that you were there and voted, and if so, is this checked against others to see that the same busload of people isn't 'loading the votes' at caucus after caucus?

[Jeff]

Asy, I believe you have to be a registered voter, participating in the township or parish, (or however the local regional divisions are described) in which you are registered. For example, I am registered in Hayes Township, Clare County. I can not go anywhere else and vote but there.

[isawlogs]

  What I did not compreend understand , maybe its me and my reading capability , but are all candidates from Iowa for the Iowa caucus and so on for every state .... or is it that an outsider can be voted in or out .

 Beenthere , I read and re-read Patty's post , had it been clear as you say I would not have asked for further explanations on the hows of the elections . It was clear on what the caucus did and how they did it , but did not explain the election process in itself , that could of been my fault on maybe the way my question was drawn up or writen, I have yet to master my writings , I am though , working on it .

  So if I understand it : I guy from ....Florida can be thrown out of the withdraw from the race at the first caucus held in .. well this year Iowa , and never be able to see what his local partisan (people) would think of him as a candidate .
 That don't seem right to me ... but I can be wrong on this ... so if I am please feel free to steer me in the right direction .  :P

   I am trying hard here to understand the process of how you elect your President , in no way do I want to judge how it is done , only want to understand , that could take a spell  ;D So be gentle with me .  ;D

 

 

[J_T]

Isawlogs I've always lived here and am just now getting some of it  :(I think you got it pretty good  ??? Keep asking I'm listing too 8)

[Norm]

Marcel they are from all over the country and are trying to get enough voters in each state to pick them to run for President representing their party. In the USA we have mostly a two party system, Democrats and Republicans. After each state votes they tally up how many each of them won in each state at their National Convention. The winners are the ones that run for President (one from each party but an independent can run also making it a three way race)and then we vote for one or the other to be President this November. That's kind of the simple version but hopefully you get the idea. If not please ask more questions.