Should we eliminate State Caucus's in the primary seasons?

[oreo]

I think State Caucus's are really the worst form of disenfranchisement of the voter that exists. If it were up to me I would have them all eliminated--and just go with a primary ballot to select the nominee of each state.

A typical caucus is held at 7 P.M. on a Tuesday night--where you can sit for hours prior to casting a vote for the candidate of your choice. Here we have parents with kids--that are home cooking dinner--taking care of kids and getting them and themselves ready for the next work and school day. IOW--they're not showing up to cast a vote. Then we have the elderly that will not go out on a cold night to cast a vote.

So a typical caucus is going to have a minut minority of the party casting a vote--that is supposed to represent the entire state. The ones that are going to show up at a caucus are going to be the extreme right or left of the Republican or Democrat party--which in no way represents the majority of the parties wishes in that state, in most cases. The other reason is that a caucus costs a lot of money for a few people to cast a vote.

All states should have a PRIMARY--with several days of voting--in order to allow everyone wanting to vote--get the opportunity to vote for their candidate of choice. In that way we get a very clear picture of the majorities choice of candidate.

Why we tolerate caucus's anymore makes no sense what-so-ever.

 

[OKTexas]

It's up to the states to decide. If you don't live in a caucus state it's none of your business, if you do and you want it changed, get involved and change it.

 

[auditor0007]

I think State Caucus's are really the worst form of disenfranchisement of the voter that exists. If it were up to me I would have them all eliminated--and just go with a primary ballot to select the nominee of each state.

A typical caucus is held at 7 P.M. on a Tuesday night--where you can sit for hours prior to casting a vote for the candidate of your choice. Here we have parents with kids--that are home cooking dinner--taking care of kids and getting them and themselves ready for the next work and school day. IOW--they're not showing up to cast a vote. Then we have the elderly that will not go out on a cold night to cast a vote.

So a typical caucus is going to have a minut minority of the party casting a vote--that is supposed to represent the entire state. The ones that are going to show up at a caucus are going to be the extreme right or left of the Republican or Democrat party--which in no way represents the majority of the parties wishes in that state, in most cases. The other reason is that a caucus costs a lot of money for a few people to cast a vote.

All states should have a PRIMARY--with several days of voting--in order to allow everyone wanting to vote--get the opportunity to vote for their candidate of choice. In that way we get a very clear picture of the majorities choice of candidate.

Why we tolerate caucus's anymore makes no sense what-so-ever.

I understand the argument and agree with it for the most part. The flip side of that though, is that with a caucus you have more informed voters deciding, or at least that can be one argument. When I lived in Colorado, I had the opportunity to take part in a caucus. There was a good mix of Romney and McCain supporters as this was in 2008.

 

[JWBooth]

Who am I, you, some guy down the street, to dictate to others how they organise themselves politically?
To suggest such a thing is a tyrrany.
Not that it matters much, outcomes are pre determined in our uniparty system.

 

[JoeB131]

I think Caucuses are only part of the problem.

The other part of the problem is that the early caucuses/primaries determine who is going to be finalists.

by the time Iowa and NH were over, it was really down to Romney, Santorum and Gingrich. (Sorry, Ron Paul was never a serious candidate).

 

[Seawytch]

It's partisan primaries that need to be gotten rid of. Look to CA and WA as the model.