How would you fix the Iowa Caucus?

[brooklynite]

Last edited Fri Feb 14, 2020, 05:00 PM - Edit history (1)

1) Don't say "switch to a Primary", because the IDP can't. A Primary is administered by the State, and the Republican Governor has been clear that they won't conduct one.

2) Because of 1) any costs will be incurred by the Party. So a proposal to add early voting or longer Caucus hours would mean additional expense to IDP.

So, how would you fix things?

[BlueJac]

1. Nothing change leadership first

[Jose Garcia]

12. Your wish has been granted:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1136126

[redqueen]

2. Use secret ballots and a formal procedure communicated to voters

at least 90 days prior to the caucus.

Keep the precinct captain speeches or whatever but no more counting heads or haphazard organization of the separate rounds.

[bluewater]

3. I would do this...

Stop the caucus after the first round.

Tally those votes from written voter preference cards that must be collected and stored securely.

Then apportion delegates proportionally based on those results.

Essentially , backdoor to as much of a Primary-like process that the current law permits.



Caucus goers would need to get themselves into viable groups before the first round is closed.

[frazzled]

6. Then it's not a caucus

It's just a meeting posing as a primary. The state needs to move to a primary system. Caucuses are neither practicable nor representative in this day and age. Having people "vote" at a prescribed time and place still cuts out a lot of people.

PS: If you don't like the realignments, you won't like "ranked voting," a proposal that has a fair amount of support around here. It's exactly like caucus realignment, in which supporters of candidates who don't initially receive enough support get their second choice counted in a second tally.

[bluewater]

8. Sure it's a caucus. ;)

The OP said we can't just say change to a real primary.

That's how I would change the caucus. It's certainly not a primary with a secret ballot, so of course it's a legal caucus.

[frazzled]

15. Not like any of the caucuses I've participated in

(Minnestoa, presidential; Massachusetts, gubernatorial). To merely have some speeches and then a first preference elides the purpose of meeting in person, to discuss and persuade, and try to come up with something like a consensus.

You said yourself it was like a primary by another name.
I can't believe the state can't, in theory, change to another system if so desired.

[bluewater]

18. True, its different.

But the OP makes it clear that Republican Governor has the final say and has stated he would block any move to try to change to a primary. He restated that down thread too.

That being the case, the OP is asking a fun hypothetical question, don't take it too seriously.

So, playing the game as requested, I chose to keep the general trapping of a caucus's first round, but try to backdoor my way into as primary-like process as possible.


Thanks for the discussion.

[randr]

4. Ignore it

Hold primaries in states that hold the majority of Dem voters.

[brush]

10. Ding, ding, ding.

[33taw]

5. Accept a single ballot from each participant throughout the day. Count them an report them

after the polls close. That is basically what they do in a primary, but with early voting. Split the delegates based on their county or district allotment.

[patricia92243]

9. I think your suggestion is best.

[squirecam]

31. This i like

No gaming the system. It’s all done by the cards already.

[Midnightwalk]

11. A couple questions

Did you mean “don’t say switch to a primary”. I assume so because I can’t parse it the way you wrote it.

Can a governor really refuse to hold a primary? What prevents an Republican governor in another state from saying “sorry dems you’re going to have to do caucuses from now on”?

[brooklynite]

14. Answer: yes they can refuse...

How a Party selects it’s nominee is not automatically alegal matter for State Govt.

[judeling]

13. Hold it on Saturday first

Extend to sign in time an start at least noon.

Allow a RCV ballot choice as an option to the main caucus. 2nd and below used for the reallocation.

Pair it with the Nevada Caucus. Hold both on the same day to raise Nevada's importance and diminish Iowa's.

With the RCV option that allows basically a firehouse primary.

[BlueIdaho]

16. Hold it on Super Tuesday...

The Caucus is a cash cow for Iowa. Let’s pick a state more representative of the voting public and run that state first.

[33taw]

19. I agree. Nothing against Iowa, but they basically represents a very small portion of the US.

I would rather see four states from each part of the country with diverse populations go first. Even if you selected Michigan or Wisconsin to replace the Midwest, you would have a more diverse population with Milwaukee and Detroit. They also represent manufacturing, natural rescources and agriculture. State laws may prohibit this, but we need to make some changes.

[BlueIdaho]

20. THAT is a great idea!

Do you mind if I steal it?

[33taw]

21. No, feel free to use it.

[BlueIdaho]

22. 👍🏻

[33taw]

35. They could also look at state like Virginia, Arizona, and Georgia.

This would offer more diversity and put money in states that we could make further gains in.

[BlueIdaho]

41. Good Picks!

I hope we can do something like this in the future.

[mcar]

17. Move it to a later date so it doesn't matter

Because it really doesn't matter except for the calendar. We need more representative states to have their caucuses/primaries earlier.

[denem]

23. Replace New Hampshire with Connecticut.

Make Iowa a primary.

CT


NH

[Demsrule86]

25. Connecticut has less than 1% difference in AA vote....why that state?

[denem]

29. ?

10.5% AA.

Close to representative of US demographics.

?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium

[Blue_true]

39. Blacks make up around 12% of the nation's population.

Hispanics make up about 18-20%. Instead of Conneticutt, I would chose Virginia or New Jersey to replace New Hampshire, and Ohio to replace Iowa.

[Demsrule86]

42. I don't think Connecticut would be a good state personally...I used to live there.

You might as well keep Iowa and New Hampshire if you are going to pick a state like Connecticut...if you want to balance Iowa you want a state with a sizeable AA population.

[Blue_true]

45. A lot of people from the outside don't understand how White Conneticutt is.

And it is pretty segregated, though the segregation is driven more by financial status than by racial animus.

[Demsrule86]

24. Early voting... for anyone who wants to do so...and the party could run a primary within a

caucus by merely counting the votes...no more viability and all the other silliness...but if we can't have a primary there than, Iowa can't go first anymore.

[dsc]

26. Switch to where they have instant run off voting with 15% as the cut off

conduct the vote by mail, with people mailing in a request for a ballot with a self addressed and stamped envelope if they can afford to, mail the ballots out and people either mail the ballots back or return them to specifically designed boxes in specific places. Count the ballots as they come in, do the IRV totals over the course of the night and into the next day as needed.

[question everything]

27. First, you do mean swithc to primary, right?

Second, there are several states: North Dakota, Alaska, Hawaii and Kansas that have "party run primary." Not sure how it works but perhaps worth looking into it.

[Jose Garcia]

28. Vote by mail

[democratisphere]

30. DNC needs to mandate voting primaries and outlaw rigged caucuses.

Vote the Iowa republican govenor out so primaries can be changed to straight forward voting.

[doc03]

32. Move it to a swing state such as Ohio, Florida,

Michigan, PA.

[Midwestern Democrat]

33. As far as #1 goes, Iowa could simply do what other states have done for years and have the

presidential primary on the same day as their regular down ballot primary - in Iowa's case, that would be June 2. It would cost them nothing to put the presidential candidates names on the June primary ballot. Obviously, that's very late in the presidential primary season, but there have been states that have been having their presidential primary in May and June for years - Indiana, Nebraska, West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Dakota, and until very recently - California. That's what I'd tell the IA Governor - if you don't want to pony up the money for a separate earlier presidential primary, then simply join the ranks of states with May/June primaries.

[Smackdown2019]

34. Simple

They are register a month advance and they are assigned a number. That number ensures that they dont vote twice in any election during the caucus date. The election shall be opened from 3 am to 9 pm fielded by the local caucus sites. The caucus computers only have their parties website. One vote! Ideal of it, that number that is assigned must include their state identification number to prevent false voting and to keep Republicans from voting in our elections. Since they to have a caucus, they will be using their identities on their caucus.

[MoonlitKnight]

36. Make them last

Or don’t seat their delegates.

[Blue_true]

40. I would totally ignore the fact that a caucus happened.

It would be meaningless for campaigns to go there and spend money.

[Codeine]

37. Just fucking ignore it.

I don’t give two shits what a handful of Iowa farmers care about anything, and neither should anyone else who isn’t an actual Iowa farmer. It is a state utterly lacking in any significance beyond that which their silly little caucus has granted them.

[33taw]

43. I agree. But the candidates spend months courting them, while ignoring other states.

It is a waste of valuable time.

[Blue_true]

38. Ignore the fact that they had a caucus that we don't want.

Candidates would have no reason to go there because they would get absolutely nothing but meaningless bragging rights from it. Hold the first primary the Saturday after the meaningless Iowa Caucus vote.

[dsc]

44. make the math simpler in explanation than it apparently was

Looking at the NYT article about the math mistakes some of the most problematic was easily avoidable by explaining the apportionment system more reasonably. They use the Hamilton method of apportionment. That method says find the number of delegates each candidate is entitled to by multiplying the share of the vote by the total delegates. Round down to the nearest whole number (2.3 becomes 2 so does 2.9). Assign delegates based on that number, there will be extra delegates, give those to the highest decimal 2.9 gets extra before 2.3. They turn this into round standardly, then give extra seats to the decimal closes to .5 but under, and take extra seats from those over .5 but closest to.

Put a math expert on email call for the precincts to check sheets before they are finalized. Keep better track of voter cards than they apparently did.

[CalFione]

46. First off, move it to later in the process. They don't deserve to go first.

Secondly... make it work like the early-voting in the Nevada caucus. Let people fill out a sheet with multiple choices and then LEAVE.


Forcing people to sit around for 3 hours is ridiculous. Fill out a ranked-choice ballot, and GO HOME.

[struggle4progress]

47. Keep Republicans from jamming the phone lines?