Iowa Caucuses....

[one_voice]

I mean offense to anyone living in Iowa.

But I don't get the whole Iowa thing. yeah I know history and all that.

For the repukes. It's their peeps.

But for the Democratic candidates (not that we don't have people there) it really doesn't represent the multi-everything our party represents. We're that giant pot of soup that has everything in it. Iowa is bread and butter.

Nothing better that good bread with butter, but it compliments the soup.

Why isn't the kick off held somewhere where the whole of our country is better represented.

Seems we should have changed that to keep up with the changing times.

Just something I thought about while I was watching telly this morning.

Now I want soup & bread.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. States can set their own voting rules -

Last edited Sun Jan 31, 2016, 03:35 PM - Edit history (1)

the federal government and/or the national parties can't do much to control when or how a state conducts its primary elections. So "we" are stuck with Iowa and New Hampshire going first because Iowa and New Hampshire wanted to be first. Other states have decided to hold their primaries/caucuses on Super Tuesday. Some go later. I don't know exactly how or why these decisions are made but they are not made on a national level. And anyhow, who would decide which state "better represents" the Democratic party?

[one_voice]

2. I don't know more diversity...

is what I was thinking. As I said meant no offense.

I'm sure the people in Iowa love all the excitement & the tradition. I don't even live there and I'm excited.

It was just something I was thinking about when I was listening to the telly this morning.

[KingCharlemagne]

5. "Iowa and Vermont"??? I take it you meant "Iowa and

New Hampshire"?? A Freudian typo, methinks

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. I fixed it. The error was not so much Freudian as

probably due to the fact that I've always gotten Vermont and New Hampshire mixed up. I can never even remember which one is which when looking at a map. I can identify Maine, though.

[reformist2]

3. I think it's best to start off in small states, because of the one-on-one interaction.

Starting off in a big state with big cities would mean candidates would have to start with a huge war chest for a very expensive first contest. Small venues like Iowa and New Hampshire allow candidates without much money or name recognition to have a shot at breaking out. Example: I don't think Jimmy Carter would have been president without the Iowa Caucus.

The down side is, as you mentioned, that the states we start off with aren't exactly diverse. On the other hand, Nevada and South Carolina are the third and fourth major contests, and their diverse voter bases balance out the non-diverse populations of Iowa and New Hampshire.

[HereSince1628]

10. IA is also relatively low cost and low risk if it is lost.

IA and NH are way off-Broadway upstate off-season theater productions, or if you like sports... a non-conference game

It's bigger than a dress rehearsal, and makes everyone play their parts, which really helps campaigns get the right people in the right places and gets the candidate delivering the right message in the right way to engage voters.

[Peacetrain]

4. Iowa gives everyone a chance..

Just ask President Obama.. The Democratic caucus is different from the Republican caucus.. we are party building and trying to get our best candidate out of here to go on... You go straight to the big states.. those with the the most strings are going to blow everyone out every time..

We also are not like a winner take all primary.. We are voting for delegates that will move on to the county caucus.. and then to the state.. and even candidates who will not win the nomination can have their voices heard in our state platforms..

You gotta be a Democrat to vote in the Democratic caucus in Iowa.. no independents or Republican can try and primary a candidate we do not want

We will be supporting who ever win the final nod.. but Iowa is a great place for everyone to start..

[one_voice]

6. How is it looking for O'Malley?

[reformist2]

11. This goes to the public funding issue - if we had public funding, O'Malley might be doing better.

Anyone disappointed that O'Malley didn't get a fair chance to get out his message, well, I would suggest you go with Bernie, since he's the one advocating public funding of elections.... Vote for Bernie, so people like Martin O'Malley might have a better shot in the future!

[Skidmore]

7. The caucus is, in fact, a party meeting

thrown open to party members and those who want to ally with the party. They are also chances to introduce resolutions for consensus by the people to added to the party platform later. Those who participate generally tend to be pretty politically active.

I love the caucus process and my only complaint with it is that I believe caucus day, and all election days should be public holidays.

And people seem to forget Iowa's progressive history. Iowa has been ahead of the rest of the nation on many civil rights issues throughout its history. I'm so very proud of this state and the many good people who live here.

http://www.councilbluffscommunityalliance.org/iowa/iowas-progressive-history/

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. We have similar caucuses in Minnesota, too.

There are complaints that they unfairly exclude people who can't make it to the caucuses because of job conflicts, child care, etc., and that's hard to argue with. On the other hand, in some respects the caucus system the closest thing you'll see to grass-roots democracy because it allows anybody who wants to, to get involved in the party. It's been said that the world is run by the people who show up.