In 2016 Bernie had the advantage in my state of a caucus system that gave him 73% of the vote

[pnwmom]

even though the "beauty contest" primary -- so called because it resulted in no allocation of delegates -- gave Hillary 54% of the votes.

Our caucuses tended to favor candidates with the most fervent supporters, who didn't mind arguing with their neighbors, and who also had plenty of time on their hands -- because attending even a single caucus would take hours. And delegates had to be chosen at that level to attend the next all-day statewide caucus.

Now we'll have the same primary the Republicans do, with a simple paper ballot we can fill out at our kitchen table.

In 2016 Bernie got a large share of his delegates at caucuses, so that could be a factor in his performance this year. In addition to my state of Washington, seven other former caucus states have switched to primaries this year (Maine being the most recent state to make the switch.)

So Iowa will be one of an even smaller minority of caucus states this time around.


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/12/upshot/2020-election-fewer-caucuses-bernie.html

Already, the three largest caucus states — Washington, Minnesota and Colorado — have flipped to primaries. So have Utah, Idaho and Nebraska.

Two more caucus states — Alaska and Hawaii — are using party-run, rather than government-run, primaries. This switch can increase participation and turnout to levels somewhat more like in a traditional primary, depending on how they are administered.

That leaves just six caucus states: Iowa and Nevada — the two highest-turnout caucuses, with Nevada being the only caucus the establishment favorite Hillary Clinton won in 2008 — and Kansas, North Dakota, Wyoming and Maine.

Maine is considering the switch, and North Dakota has switched to a so-called firehouse caucus, which is not obviously different from a government-run primary except that it has limited sites.

https://waldo.villagesoup.com/p/political-party-caucuses-coming-up-feb-8-march-8/1849985

It's presidential primary season, and this year Maine for the first time will join 13 other states in the fray on Super Tuesday, March 3; that's because the Legislature voted last year to change Maine to a primary state.

[Tiggeroshii]

1. On the other hand I think there are more open primaries

Which would benefit Sanders.

[pnwmom]

3. Our primary was open last time and Hillary won. Anyone could attend our caucuses, too.

In Washington people don't register to vote by party.

[Tiggeroshii]

4. Right on.

Clinton won some caucuses too, I believe, right? Iowa, Nevada... but like you mentioned, they -like open primaries, still gave him an advantage.

[pnwmom]

5. WA's open primary didn't give him an advantage. Which ones did?

So last time, he won 11/13 caucuses. But this time there will be 7 fewer caucuses -- leaving only 6.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/05/02/closed_primaries_did_not_stop_bernie_sanders_130446.html

Although he has every right to pursue that goal, he’s wasting his time, and squandering his leverage, by focusing on closed primaries. Yes, he was swept in the closed states. But he also lost the open primaries by a 2-to-1 margin.

There have been 40 state contests so far, 27 primaries and 13 caucuses. Nineteen of those primaries were accessible to independent voters. Yet Sanders only won six of them, and two were his home state of Vermont and neighboring New Hampshire.

SNIP

The reality is that, in general, primaries were unfriendly terrain for Sanders. His wheelhouse was the caucus, pocketing 11 out of 13. The low-turnout meeting-style contests are known to favor liberal candidates, having buoyed George McGovern and Barack Obama to their nominations. Sanders recently said, “We want open primaries in 50 states in this country.” If he means that literally, and would end caucuses altogether, that would certainly increase voter turnout in those states. But it also would risk ceding what’s now populist turf to establishment forces.

[Tiggeroshii]

6. MI and WI come to mind. There were not a lot of open primaries in 2016, were there?

MI he overcame a 30 point deficit to win. Many credit the open primary system. Also, he is polling far better in CA now, which may or may not have somewhat to do with the open primary system we just switched to.

[pnwmom]

7. He's not polling better in CA now. It's apples to oranges because there are so many candidates,

but he's getting about 26% in CA now compared to the 47% he won in 2016.

[Tiggeroshii]

11. He's polling way better than his closest opponent now

As opposed to the margin before. Some places he is doing worse but it is evening out in the margins in some places he did worse last time, for instance he lost South Carolina by 50 or so points, and is now looking to lose it by about 10-15 if polls are correct.

[RandySF]

10. He won his fair share of primaries

so I don't see why Bernie supporters would be wedded to caucuses.

[Tiggeroshii]

12. I certainly am not.

[RandySF]

8. That's true for the state primaries, I don't know about the presidential.

[showblue22]

2. Bernie likes Caucuses

Caucuses are the real reason the system is rigged.

[RandySF]

9. I don't know who it benefits, but I absolutely detest caucuses.

[pnwmom]

13. My husband was instantly struck by the disproportionate number of young men

attending our caucus. There was even a 14 year old boy who of course couldn't vote, but who did give a little speech for Bernie (though technically only voters were supposed to speak.)

[BlueMTexpat]

16. This.

They are much less democratic than primaries.

[James48]

14. How about we QUIT tearing down

And, instead, we work to build UP our candidates?

I’m with Bernie- because I think he will do a great job changing our country for the better.

Why are you with your candidate?

[pnwmom]

15. I have several candidates I like. And a couple I hope don't win. And if Bernie wants the support

of Hillary voters, he and his supporters could try reaching out to them. I haven't seen any overtures, have you? He's still railing against the DNC, and that doesn't help him with the more mainstream Democrats who voted for Hillary.

[BlueMTexpat]

17. You speak for me in this as well.

What he and his supporters are continuing to do is only strengthening my resolve against him.

[JGug1]

19. Strengthening Resolve against Bernie

THAT is exactly what the Repukes want. My counsel is to keep an open mind. Support the person you like best at this point and be ready to fight like hell to elect whomever we nominate.
I'm fascinated with history and am aware that this nation has been threatened from within before. Because of social media and the era of mass communication, it has never been threatened as it is today. IF we don't stop Trump and those who have chosen to be kneeling before him, we will have a feudal society by mid century.

[BlueMTexpat]

20. Bernie is the one who

strengthens my resolve against him.

I don't see that changing at all, unless or until he and his campaign undergo a sea change.

As one who has experienced a lot of life in my own 76 years, I have found that expecting a sea change to happen in anyone, especially one who is 78+ years old and stubborn to the nth degree, is pointless.

I kept more than an open mind about Bernie in 2016 until I saw how he let his supporters have carte blanche to behave like thugs in Nevada and how HE behaved when it was clear that HRC would win the nomination. His actions, and those of his Bernie-or-Busters, since have only reinforced my impressions from 2016.

[JGug1]

18. Primaries

No primary for me. I voted for the last time in Kansas a few years ago. I voted for the first time in Colorado last November.