You want to know what's FUCKED UP? 37k people went to the Kansas caucus,1.2 million voted in Mass

[Herman Munster]

Obama got a 14 delegate advantage from Kansas.

Hillary got a 17 delegate advantage from Massachusetts.

The base of the party is not getting the candidate it wants and there is going to be hell to pay, either at the convention or in November when McCain wins.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

[Dogmudgeon]

1. The whole system needs a redesign

We'll see how it goes at the convention. I trust Dean to make things go right.

--p!

[Political Heretic]

2. You don't know anything about a statistically reliable sample, do you?

The idea that because "only" 37,000 people choose to go out for the caucus means that it is somehow an invalid representation of Kansas compared to the 1.3 million people who voted in Mass. is just incorrect.

It bugs me that if Clinton had won Kansas and other caucuses you wouldn't have posted anything. Sour grapes sucks.

But for what its worth, if I ran the party, all states would be primaries.

[LeftCoast]

3. You believe a self-selected group of caucus-goers will be representative?

Besides, when did voting become a matter of statistics? I though it was all about one-person, one-vote.

[Political Heretic]

7. Explain self-selected in case I don't understand something.

Idaho's caucus was public, so maybe I'm missing something.

[LeftCoast]

42. My argument is this

Caucuses can only be attended by people who have the time. Some people have to work. Others may have to watch their kids. They also take a lot more energy. It's one thing to go spend 15 mins to cast your vote in a typical primary, but with caucuses you have to spend at least an hour or two. The people that turn out for caucuses are therefore probably not a representative sampling of those who would be voting in a primary election.

[LittleBlue]

48. Flawed argument. During Kerry-Bush, the lines grew to hour long waits.

The first South African election had wait times of 4 hours or more. You can't compare 45 extra minutes to cast a ballot to an undemocratic process.

[Skidmore]

13. Then people who vote in primaries are not a self-selecting group?

They choose to go to the polls. Your logic escapes me.

[hlthe2b]

29. No, anyone can vote in a primary within the requirements...

NOT so in caucuses, where large biases exist due to the physical attendence requirements that preclude many entire groups of workers, the handicapped severely disabled, homebound, etc.

The issue isn't whether participants self-select; It is that caucuses are inherently biased in terms of who CAN participate and therefore non-representative of the potential voting public.

[Orsino]

25. Could be as representative as the self-selected voters we'll see on Election Day. n/t

[Herman Munster]

4. caucuses are undemocratic

People have second jobs, family responsibilities, maybe they are elderly and can't get around easily and need to vote absentee.

It's NOT A REPRESENTATIVE sample. Not everyone can devote 3 hours at a certain day at a certain time to attend one of these things.

[Political Heretic]

8. That doesn't make it not a representative sample of population.

The question of whether or not it is demographically representational is something that neither you or I can say unless we had demographic information on caucus participants and could compare it to the general state demographics.

So you might have a point, you might not.

Like I said, if I had my way, they would all be primaries. But I don't think the OP's point is the strongest reason why.

[The Ghost]

34. UNLESS

Hillary won.

WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

You know, there was a way for Hillary to WIN those caucuses dont you? They both knew the rules and they both started on the same playing field.

[gaiilonfong]

5. Tsk, Tsk, Tsk

Awww poor Hillary, nothing is EVER fair for the ClintonS...who have become multi-millionaires, by pardoning CRIMINALS like Marc Rich and touring the world with Iran Contral CRIMINAL Poppy Bush.....Awwww Poor Hillary

NO MORE CLINTONS

[faithfulcitizen]

33. You know what really (messed) up? Mass is going blue no matter what.

Obama's strength lies in his ability to draw in indies.

[MadBadger]

6. Please tell me that if Obama wins the nomination, you wont be voting for him.

[Herman Munster]

9. I live in Florida

If he wins the nomination, there won't be a point to vote. McCain will win this state running away. Close to 30% of our voters are over 65. They sure as hell won't vote for Obama.

[MadBadger]

10. You know, I remember when Obama lost in Nevada, I admitted defeat and that was it for me

Your response tonight has been to just post random BS after BS.

[Herman Munster]

11. oh so you weren't one of the hundreds here

claiming Clinton manipulated the caucuses and then claimed victory by winning 1 more delegate in Nevada.

Good to know.

And I won't even get into New Hampshire and all the inane conspiracy theories that Hillary had Diebold fix the vote.

[chascarrillo]

28. So you're saying you won't vote for the Democratic nominee

Interesting.

[goldcanyonaz]

45. McCain will win Florida, no doubt about that.

[Perry Logan]

12. I'm moving to Kansas immediately, so as to vastly multiply the power of my vote.

[bread_and_roses]

14. The delegate count being nearly 50-50 makes your case rather feeble, don't you think?

None of the States have been winner takes all and the delegates have been roughly split - so which base are you talking about?

Personally, I think Primaries are more democratic too, but even in the Primaries, given proportional representation, they are not exactly "one person, one vote" either, are they?

And in previous elections, the "base" in most States never had a chance at all to make any impact on the nomination, so one can surmise that a good few never had a meaningful vote for the candidate they wanted - I know that I didn't, here in NY. Which was among the reasons that I, someone who's never pulled a R lever in her life, had no qualms about switching to a Third Party here in NY.

edit for spelling

[cali]

15. call the fucking waaaambulance for wittle Hermie.

Obama has won at least as many votes nationwide as Hill.

[shadowknows69]

16. The time to rage about our election system

might be significantly before the thing is actually taking place. I agree it sucks but it's the way the game is played right now.

[CanonRay]

17. I would submit that the 37K who caucused in Kansas

ARE the base of the party. It's easy to vote, a lot harder to caucus.

[bowens43]

18. Sour grapes......

get used to the taste.

[Debi]

19. Was it really 37,000 who caucused or 37,000 county convention delegates selected?

I don't know the answer, but just for comparison only 13,800 county convention delegates were awarded byt over over 230,000 participated. Maybe that count is for delegates and not actual voters?

[returnable]

20. What's FUCKED UP is your preferred candidate just had her ass handed to her in 3 states...

...and you can't accept defeat. Nice.

"The base of the party" in 3 states (and the Virgin Islands) made its preference known yesterday.

Try building your candidate up instead of tearing down the victories of another. OK?

[Zensea]

21. what about playing the hand you are dealt?

Even if one grants your point, it looks to me that Obama is taking advantage of a system that was set up before he started running for president.

Deal with it.

[cgrindley]

22. and California and Delaware both get 2 senators

there's a reason for this. Perhaps you need to retake a civics class because it's clear that you really don't understand the system. Your anger is sort of funny.

[lastliberalintexas]

53. I understand the basis for the system

but I can still say it stinks to high heaven. The fact that some people's vote counts more than others should be disturbing to all, not just supporters of rival candidates. A few years ago I saw an article comparing the relative weight of people's votes in national elections, and it turns out that Wyoming voters have the most influence, something like 3 or 4X that of Californians, Texans and New Yorkians. Yes sir indeed, those Wyoming republicans are the people I want choosing our president.

And I like neither Obama nor Clinton, so I doubt that candidate preference has colored by view. I have never actually cast a vote for president which was counted, and that is what bothers me.

[ProSense]

23. 10,128 participated in the Nevada caucus, 1.96 million voted in Illinois

That's how it is.

[HeraldSquare212]

60. Again, isn't that the local delegates? I don't know that we ever learned the number of actual voters

but I thought it was at least 100 - 120K.

[stevenleser]

24. As a former Edwards supporter and now Obama supporter, I have to ask...

would you be complaining about such things if you won and were ahead?

No?

Didnt think so.

[Telly Savalas]

26. So you're going to protest by voting for Nader?

And are you going to address the point raised in post #23? It's FUCKED UP, as you say, but it cuts both ways.

[Guava Jelly]

27. Aww... I'm sorry that democracy is so inconvenient for you

Maybe we should just do away with Elections And Just have the Supreme court appoint her.
Worked great the last time they crowned one..:sarcasm:

[MadHound]

30. I love the smell of Hillaryites blowing a gasket early in the morning

First of all, if Hillary had won Kansas, you wouldn't be whining and complaining. Second of all, deal with reality. Third of all, since you don't live in Kansas, you don't get to make their rules, deal with it. Fourth of all, are you really planning on not voting for Obama if he gets the nomination? Fifth of all WAAAAAAAAAAAAH! Geez, what a sore loser you and a lot of people in the Hillary camp are turning out to be. Much like your idol, you folks thought primary season would be a walk, that a Hillary win was inevitable. You bullied and swaggered your way around this place, but now that you're getting your ass handed to you, all you can do is whine and moan, trying excuse after excuse as to why Hillary is losing, ranging from the hysterical to down right tin foilish. And now I'm seeing one Hillary supporters after another vowing not to vote for Obama, that they're going to stay home and pout(despite the fact that they've been the largest purveyors of the loyalty oath post around here for months). Get a fucking grip people, grow the fuck up, and have some sort of modicum of self respect, even in defeat. You're sounding more and more like whiny little children.

[Hepburn]

31. Boooooooo-fucking-hooooooo

Would you like some cheese to go with your whine?

:eyes:

[DS1]

49. It's a valid point, regardless of which side it benefits

[Hepburn]

50. Soooooo....

...why not bring it up as a VALID point instead of a whine?

[DS1]

52. I didn't bring it up

[Hepburn]

59. I did not say you did...

...but the OP sure as hell does IMO.

[Thrill]

32. Well if their stupid enough to vote for McCain

You get what you ask for

[flyarm]

35. why all of a sudden are all these states using the caucus system..it disenfranchises so many dems!!

it is a disgusting system..and it is meant to disenfranchise voters.

how many military get to caucus that are in Iraq or Afganistan..oh yeah..none. so their voice does not get heard.


How many Old and or ill get to vote about their health care? ..oh yeah..none

How many moms with sick kids get to vote in a caucus..maybe a few..but most prob ..not many

How many homeless unless Obama people picked you up on a street corner..got to caucus about the fate of their lives..prob very limited.

how many people who had to work got to caucus?..well if you were working ..you lost your voice in democracy.


this system is meant to disenfranchise..it is not democratic and it is reprehensible to use this system in this day and age.

fly

[chascarrillo]

40. In WA, if you are in the military, you can file for an exemption to vote absentee in the caucus.

If you are unable to go to the caucus for medical reasons, you can file for an exemption to vote absentee in the WA state caucus.

If you are unable to go to the caucus for religious reasons, you can file for an exemption to vote absentee in the WA state caucus.

It's reprehensible for Democrats to gather together and decide who their nominee should be? WTF???

[Warren Stupidity]

41. It isn't all of a sudden.

What is all of a sudden is your paying attention to how we choose our candidates. If anything is 'all of a sudden' here regarding the selection process, it is actually the proliferation of primaries, which proliferation started around 1972. Historically speaking that is about as sudden as things get.

[Thrill]

36. New Newsweek Poll. 84% of Democrats are happy with Barack or Hillary

[Turn CO Blue]

37. Well, actually, NO. The 37K are "delegate equivalents"

Each caucus, made up of several precincts is assigned a delegate equivalent.

On edit: I was trying to show the Colorado numbers on CNN, where they only showed that 10K people had caucused for both parties when over 200,000 people did, but they've already replaced those numbers.

[Levgreee]

38. There is the same phenomenon in the GE... we are not a true democracy, we are a

federal constitutional republic. Balance is made between states, because otherwise, if we went just on population, states such as California would have a gigantic influence over many other states.

You may argue that it should be a true Democratic vote, all votes equally significant, but that is just not the case, EXCEPT, in interpreting the popular vote which has influence, in elections, but overall, electoral votes are what matter.

[lastliberalintexas]

54. Except that the way it is now, states like

Wyoming, Idaho and Alaska have a disproportionate influence on elections. Personally I'd much rather shift the power to Illinois, California and New York, but that's just me.


And apologies to DUers from those states. I know what it feels like to live in a right wing hellhole, and my comment was certainly not directed at any of you!

[Renew Deal]

39. The base of the party in Kansas elected a Democratc governor who happens to be a woman.

Tell Hillary she needs to compete everywhere.

[Straight Shooter]

57. Yes. Kathleen Sebelius is a Democrat, a DLC Democrat.

She endorsed Obama.

Just pointing out that the DLC is apparently not the horrid machine that many Obama supporters make it out to be. It will be interesting to see how the DLC benefits Barack if he's the nominee.

[ctaylors6]

43. In future primaries, no caucuses! The more people who vote, the better result for EVERYONE

Texas has early voting Feb 19 through Feb 29, plus early voting by mail for several categories of people.

[cloudythescribbler]

44. This complaint is part of the pattern -- you have AGREED UPON ground rules, however imperfect, & ...

If they turn out not to be beneficial (eg MI and FL), work-site caucuses in NV, Obama outperforming HRC MASSIVELY in caucuses (while it appears that in terms of raw overall vote total, he has ALREADY surpassed HRC), then there is endless whining.

Now on the issue of superdelegates, we have a problem which at least in theory the superdelegates themselves can fix, by uniting behind whoever CLEARLY outperforms their opponent in the primary election season.

If the results are murky, that would be a separate issue. It appears that Obama will be the clear front runner at least until Feb 18, and that even after that, the outcome would be murky ONLY if somehow HRC has a major comeback and starts OUTPERFORMING Obama consistently in the remaining places, and by more than a narrow margin.

[HeraldSquare212]

46. If only more people would move west....

[ElsewheresDaughter]

47. Mc Cain will NOT win...even repukes will NOT vote for him..makes this a moot issue

[thesubstanceofdreams]

51. Obama is leading the popular vote

Get over it. Obama is leading in both the popular vote and pledged delegates. If something is fucked up is that despite those facts Hillary can win the nomination thanks to super delegates.

[VolcanoJen]

55. That's IT! Let's rewrite the whole damned thing!

I propose we take one US Senator each from Idaho, Utah, Kansas, Nebraska, and split them up between California and Massachusetts.

:eyes:

[JackORoses]

56. everybody is getting the candidate they want except the Hillarites

[lastliberalintexas]

58. Um, no

The leftists among us aren't getting diddly this year, so don't think it's only the Clinton supporters who are unhappy.


And please people, can both sides give up the silly nickname insults?