Florida, Michigan caucuses are needed

Email Print posted by zenie 03/07/2008 11:49:09 AM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
If you like this story, digg it!
The states control primaries. Parties control caucuses. There is less interference from the opposing party in caucuses. Caucuses can be conducted with open or secret ballots depending on the party's choice. One thing that can't be done in caucuses is crossovers, unless they are people who have declared and officially changed parties.

In Florida, at least, the early primary date was Republican mischief, with a date chosen by the Republican governor. Then important issues and questions were put on the ballot, plus there were important local elections. Thousands of Democrats voted in the local elections then undervoted [chose no one] for president because they were told it wouldn't count--except for Hillary's supporters. Michigan changed the date in spite of disapproval from the Democratic Party leaders. They were also told that delegates wouldn't be seated.

Ultimately it's the voters who are hurt by bad or deliberately devious decisions at the state level. Should the voters be punished? Maybe.

The only kind of "do-over" that can be done with limited outside interference is a caucus. Primaries are invitations for more mischief, hacking, deception. It's either two new caucuses or nothing. 

< Olbermann Had A Devastating Segment On Hillary Last Night | Best Quote about Hillary's foreign experience >
 Display:
Florida, Michigan caucuses are needed | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 hidden)
Florida (none / 0)
Who will pay for the $25 mil Florida Caucus. Crist is on record as refusing to pay. Dean is on record as refusign to pay.

by acroso on 03/07/2008 12:11:28 PM EST

Caucus is way, way cheaper by the way (none / 0)
At any rate, it looks like MI is going in that direction.

Good for Obama.

by ihavenobias on 03/07/2008 12:13:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Wait, what? (none / 0)
I thought both FL and MI were locks for Hillary?

by jarett on 03/07/2008 12:14:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Michigan (none / 0)

Michigan is pretty even in polling but probably has the Demographics to fvor Obama slightly and if it's a caucus well...then definitely Obama.

 

Rasmussen had a Florida poll out today and she was up 16%. She won the previous primary with 17%. So if they do over Florida, she's going to win big...again. 

by acroso on 03/07/2008 01:10:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Like he said (none / 0)
The caucus favors Obama. Even a caucus in FL will be much closer than a regular primary vote, even though Hillary would still likely win.

Obama has won every caucus to my knowledge.

by ihavenobias on 03/07/2008 01:22:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
12 of 14 (none / 0)
I think he's won 12 of 14. make that 13 of 15 if you count Texas...

by acroso on 03/07/2008 04:06:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Question (none / 0)
Caucuses only account for 10% of the electorate.

So how are caucuses representative of the will of the people?

look at Texas, Clinton won but.....

Caucuses in both parties are controlled by the extremes of both parties. Thus are only representative of the extremes and not the voters themselves

say the word "superdelegate" and you respond will of the people

say the word "Caucus" ( which is a smaller version of a superdelegate) and you respond Yes because it helps your candidate.

The people should elect are candidate PERIOD

by LORD FOUL on 03/07/2008 04:10:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Is a caucus really (none / 0)
a small version of a superdelate?  Were the Iowa caucuses a collection of party insiders and policy wonks?

Exactly.

by ihavenobias on 03/07/2008 04:18:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Hmmm (none / 0)
What % registered Dems voted in the caucus?

How many ended up voting twice?

Exactly

by LORD FOUL on 03/07/2008 05:45:59 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Was it a decent demographic (none / 0)
and cross section?

Exactly.

by ihavenobias on 03/07/2008 06:56:57 PM EST

[ Parent ]
both (none / 0)

I like both. I think the states should decide which they want. States like Wyoming do it partially because of Cost most likely, and some states might want a more closed system. Nothing really wrong with this.

 

by acroso on 03/07/2008 04:55:11 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Its undetermined (none / 1)
In Michigan Hillary won an uncontested primary. So its not really a lock .

by Chinese Democracy on 03/07/2008 02:42:50 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Locked up (none / 0)
No, a real primary should be ran.

by LORD FOUL on 03/07/2008 05:47:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Michigan (none / 0)

O, Michigan will probably pay for that caucus. I agree on that. Crist will not be paying for a caucus in Florida though.

 

Back to the Q...who pays? 

by acroso on 03/07/2008 01:08:11 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Calling Out Acroso (none / 0)
Dodging the questions again....

any implication that Democrats are weak and would give in to the terrorists polite? Why are they allowed to be complete and utter assholes, but we're not allowed to call them out on it? Cenk

Maybe you could enlighten us as to where you came up with this information other than regurgitating Rush Limbaugh? Prove your lies.

  • Dems think our troops are "Nazis" http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/10/25/21313 4/43/102#102
  • Dems are starting their vicious attack on American identity, national religion, taxpayers etc, http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/10/22/11525 /191/10#10
  • Voting for Democrats are at best like voting for street bums and at worst a lot like voting for terrorists.http://www.theyo ungturks.com/comments/2007/ 10/14/155517/23/33#33
  • Dems do want to take away our guns and they do want to limit our freedom of speech http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/6/20/13312/ 0705/3#3
  • La Raza is running and directing what the dems do http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/6/14/16394/ 1135/15#15
  • The dems desire to defeat the troops in Iraq and Afganistan. They want to impeach Bush because that is another way to victory in the war against the war (or another way to defeat the U.S., whichever way you look at it.) http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/4/11/112312 /588/9#9
  • Pelosi has set a date for surrender to the terrorists in Iraq, Pelosi has set a date for surrender to the terrorists in Iraq, http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/4/11/112312 /588/2#2
  • the Terrorists and the Democrats have had a lot of success in their attempts to break the will to fight of the American people. http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/4/9/131553/ 4837/1#1
  • Many Americans have lsot the will to fight the terrorists after the non-stop rhetoric coming from the left and the L&S divisions of our campuses http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/4/9/131553/ 4837/1#1
  • The Dems mato is defeat. Common sense tells us they were going to surrender to the terrorists if they took power incongress.This defeatism means implementing dates for withdrawal and defunding the our troops. http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/3/28/102731 /281/11#11
  • Nancy hangs the troops out to dry to let the Americans know who the dems really are and to lets the Islamos know that your party supports them http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/3/23/14658/ 5848/1#1
  • Go complain to Harry Reid who is heading up the defeat our troopsbillhttp://www.theyou ngturks.com/comments/2007/3 /2/941/60818/2#2
  • the Dems support the troops by supporting their defeat. The dems can't be trusted on any matters of national security.http://www.theyoun gturks.com/comments/2007/2/ 25/61739/1922/63#63
  • I posted his closing speech in the effort to stop the Dems pro-Al Qaeda resolution.http://www.theyo ungturks.com/comments/2007/ 2/25/61739/1922/54#54
  • Dems ARE unpatriotic bafoons, and the republicans aren't. http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/2/16/13593/ 4879/2#2
  • Well if there is one thing the Dems don't do is " Caring about our country." They've been working on tearing apart the ideaof what it means to be American since way before the farewell speech of Reagan where he talked about the elimination of nationalpride and collective memory.http://www.theyoungt urks.com/comments/2007/2/17 /22318/8973/22#22
  • the Dem supported the troops by supporting their defeat in the 60s. Now they "support" the troops by supporting their defeatin the war on terror. It comes to reason that the Democrats DO NOT SUPPORT THE TROOPS.http://www.theyoungt urks.com/comments/2007/2/15 /175041/565/41#41
  • How did they manage to trick the voters into this new hope ( Obama ed.) filled bipartisan agenda when the cooks are running their party?http://www.theyoungtu rks.com/comments/2007/2/6/1 1367/49130/2#2
  • Like I said, if it wasn't for the Democrats hindering the war effort, funding, and the troops we'd have won these years ago. What we need is a much larger standing army, more media control, and fewer rules. Unfortunately Al Qaeda has learned to game our media in order to dispirit the American people and the dems just act an amplifier for their message. http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/2/2/18320/2 3155/9#9
  • CNN can play the terrorists propaganda vids along side of the dem resolution supporting the terrorists.
  • Well I do know why the dems voted for General Patraeus and his plan for a surge along with giving funding to president Bush for the troops surge yet pass resolutions opposing what they just did\approved. It's all politics. Their rabid anti-American base demands that the dems politicize the war and pretend to not support the troop http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2006/5/3/12955/5 1892/8#8
  • the CNN sniper video of troops getting shot that was filmed by the terrorists in Iraq for propaganda. They want to break the American will so they give the tapes to the libs in our lib media who have like minded goals.  http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2007/1/5/19828/5 3784/2#2
  • The dems are invested in defeat, and cheer it on http://www.theyoungturks.co m/comments/2006/12/3/151518 /361/4#4

by MRFred on 03/08/2008 08:25:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
By Crist's own numbers (none / 0)
An actual primary would cost $18-$20 mil.  Caucuses are cheaper.

"If you're not pumped up, then get the hell out, 'cause you don't belong here." -- Cenk Uygur

by Spinny on 03/07/2008 01:30:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Caucuses (none / 0)

Caucuses might be cheap, but Crist refuses to pay for one. Dean also refuses to pay.

 

That means Florida and the DNC will not be paying whether it's the cheapest thing in the world. 

by acroso on 03/07/2008 02:05:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yep, you're right on that (none / 0)
I was just correcting the numbers.

"If you're not pumped up, then get the hell out, 'cause you don't belong here." -- Cenk Uygur

by Spinny on 03/07/2008 02:55:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Why Can't Obama and Hillary agree to raise $$$? (none / 0)

Hillary generally does better in primaries and Obama does better in caucuses.  So both candidates will not agree to primaries or caucuses.

I propose a Florida do over primary and a Michigan caucus, (since Fla. Dem voters got screwed by Christ).

 As far as $$$$,  why not, in a show of unity, have both candidates agree to hold a fundraiser to raise $$$ for the do-over with the Dem party chipping in as well.

I think that April 22nd, mini-super Tuesday #3 would be fine.  

by GaryG on 03/07/2008 03:33:02 PM EST

Sorry about that (none / 0)
Crist not Christ.  Really sorry.

by GaryG on 03/07/2008 03:33:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Apology NOT accepted (none / 0)
How dare you mock our lord and savior?  Shame on you. I'm alerting Dave ASAP...

by ihavenobias on 03/07/2008 03:49:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
it was (none / 0)
It was the Jeb! goverment that started the ball rolling into this craptastic fun.

Best idea I've heard, just split the delegates evenly.. half to Clinton, half to Obama.  Which would give enough delegates for someone to win.

It favors Obama, but at this point who cares. I don't want my tax money paying for a do over.

~jazzy in Florida

by jazzchic on 03/07/2008 07:28:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
what typo? (none / 0)
here's my missing 'n.'

by jazzchic on 03/07/2008 07:29:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
so (none / 0)
So in a state where Clinton is pilling +15 on Obama currently and a state that she won by +17 when they had a primary, you're going to split the delegates even. How is that different than not having a primary there are all?

by acroso on 03/07/2008 09:09:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
numbers (none / 0)
It isn't any different.
It saves money for any kind of redo, and gives the dnc enough delegates for someone to win.

by jazzchic on 03/08/2008 01:36:08 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Delegates (none / 0)
There are already enough superdelegates for someone to win.

by acroso on 03/08/2008 05:43:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Florida, Michigan caucuses are needed | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: