Susan Estrich is a stupidhead! Iowa Caucuses

[Debi]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20071123/cm_uc_crsesx/op_394470

So Much for the Student Vote

<snip>

The problem is the calendar. The Iowa caucuses used to be in late January, which meant students who attend college in Iowa could caucus in the cities and towns where they go to school. Since you have to register at least 11 days in advance, that left time to do everything after Christmas — or to register before break and vote when you got back. When this campaign began, all of the candidates had college coordinators and were making appearances on campuses in the hopes that it would encourage students to register to vote and get involved.

Now, it's hardly worth the effort. The caucuses have been moved to January 3, so Iowa can stay ahead of New Hampshire, which wants to stay ahead of South Carolina, not to mention Michigan. The problem is that students who go to college in Iowa aren't back by January 3 and, in most cases, couldn't be if they wanted to because the dorms aren't even open yet.

You can't caucus by absentee ballot. It just doesn't work that way in a process that requires people to go to different corners of the room depending on which candidate they support, and then regroup if their chosen candidate doesn't have enough people to meet the threshold for a delegate in his or her corner, and so on until the final division. Even in this virtual world, it's hard to figure how you could do that without being there. And it wouldn't be Iowa.

<snip>

Of course, students who live in Iowa and go to school out-of-state, or in another part of the state, can caucus with their parents on January 3. But that assumes they knew enough to register to vote at their parents' addresses at least 11 days earlier — that is, the minute they got off the train or plane or out of the car. It assumes they didn't register in the place where they go to school and, considering themselves adults, now may think they "live." It assumes more than most of us who spend our time trying to convince young people — the demographic with the lowest turnout rates going in — to vote would ever choose to assume, at least voluntarily.

<snip>

++++++++

1) you don't have to register 11 days in advance - Iowa has same day registration - you can register at the caucuses on the night of the caucuses.

2)many of the universities are opening up the dorms or at least sleeping space for students so they can come back and caucus - also several campaigns are looking for help to house students who want to come back early to caucus.

3) There is only one realignment in the caucuses - you don't get to have a first choice and then a second choice and then a third choice then a fourth choice.


x(

[Connie_Corleone]

1. Sounds more like a misinformation campaign to me.

[Debi]

5. Who would it benefit?

Just Iowa Caucus haters :eyes:

[gateley]

2. Brilliant. In understand your frustration. nt

[Debi]

6. This just arrived in my local paper..but has been out all over the country

for a week. I hope someone other than just a poster on DU took her to task for her inaccuracies.

[bbinacan]

3. stupidhead?

I last heard that from my 7 year old nephew. What grade are you in sport?:evilgrin:

[Debi]

4. I'm out of swear words for her inanity

:P

[bbinacan]

28. Fair enough.

:toast:

[Lucinda]

57. I've been a fan of asshat lately. But stupidhead works for me too. :)

[Debi]

76. Thank you asshat has a nice ring to it.

much less juvenile :P

Of course there is the ever popular assclown as well...

[Lucinda]

90. Assclown doesn't work for me.

I'm a recovering "skeered of clowns" girly. I saw a demented Bozo as a child and am still getting over it. :)

[madrchsod]

7. are you talking about her?--->

)

[1corona4u]

8. Holy crap, LOL....

[Debi]

9. OMG..

:rofl:

[hisownpetard]

10. OMG, I'm having a nightmare and I'm not even asleep yet...!

[MADem]

11. These caucuses are a quaint custom, but they are by nature in this century DISENFRANCHISING.

God forbid you go on holiday in winter...or visit Grandma in Michigan...or have to go "out of TOWN" on business...

If you aren't there, you don't count. And weak-minded or timid people can be BULLIED at those things.

That just sucks. At least in primary states, you can get an absentee ballot and not have to go to a designated location and stand around, waiting to be counted, in some archaic ritual to make known your choice.

I know some people find it charming; I think it's poorly suited to this century.

[Debi]

12. Please give me one example of bullying that occurred at a caucus

I'm tired of hearing about it without any proof that it actually happened. Unless you have anecdotal evidence I'll believe that you are just spreading untruths and rumors.

The presidential preference portion of the caucuses is a very small part. The party building and organizing is the important part. People select members to the central committee, they select the county convention delegates, the platform committee is voted on as well as the organizational committee for the county convention. These people keep the party alive, without them there would be no Democratic Party. Also, nomination papers are signed for candidates at as high of a level of U.S. Congress down to County Board of Supervisor (less work for the individual campaigns in getting signatures). Surveys are filled out in the hopes of having people desire to run for office - again rather than having to 'ask around' to recruit candidates they people who want to be candidates can tell the party themselves. All of this is a big part of democracy. a caucus is not just 'voting'

Of course it's easier to request an absentee ballot, fill it out and mail it in. You don't have to see or speak to another person. You don't have to be asked to volunteer or contribute to your party. You don't have to be involved. You can participate in the democratic process at the smallest level. No sweat off your back. Let the others do the work. THAT is a rather antiquated idea. THAT attitude will be the demise of the Democratic Party.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Debi]

37. Which Deaniacs?

Since I was a Dean precinct captain and was well acquainted with the Governor and his campaign here I'd like to know which people you spoke with that said they were bullied? Until you can get off your 'some people' crap, I really can't believe what you say other than to assume you have some misdirected hatred of early states going early.

It might help you to review the staff of many of the presidential campaigns. You will note that many of these people received their initial political training in Iowa and New Hampshire. You can spew all the hatred you want about the two states, but they provide an incredible experience and have been used as stepping stones many political operatives. I wonder how you feel about the Nevada Caucuses. Are you happy that Nevada has joined in the mix of the early states.


This line of your post is very telling, I guess we now know what you think campaigns and elections are all about:

Go check the coffers of the candidates--Iowa and NH aren't leading the pack in donations, there.

[MADem]

44. I have NO IDEA why you whined and hit alert--I did not insult you in any way, there.

But that works when you cannot argue from facts.

I provided cites, and now they're gone.

[Debi]

50. Your rudeness and personal attacks are incredible

You have no desire to engage in civil discourse, you only want to shove YOUR opinion down other's throats (and if somebody disagrees you call them names tell them to 'fuck off' and smear the state they live in, the political process of the state they live in AND ALL the citizens of the state they live in.

HOW can anyone have a conversation with you?

From this post forward you have been placed on my ignore list, an amazing feat since in four years I have never placed someone on ignore. But you are so rude and full of venom that I have no desire to read another word you choose to write on this board again.

Congratulations.

[MADem]

62. Nonsense. But congratulations to you, for whining.

You can't debate, and you know it. I don't prevent anyone from presenting their opinion. EVER. I just don't put up with "Because I said so" bullshit, and weakass arguments.

I said nothing offensive, because that's not what I do. I argue on the merits, but you conned a mod. Heckuva job, there.

Thank you for putting me on ignore. Life is too short to deal with hypersensitive whingers, and do remember, that if you SAY you put someone on IGNORE, you actually HAVE to do it. That's those DU rules.

Debi, I look forward to never, ever hearing from you, ever again. And you won't see this, IF you've done what you said you would do, hit that ignore button, and that's just dandy with me, too.

[karynnj]

46. I've been jealous of you Iowans since I watched the caucuses

covered in 2004. I had thought them interesting before - but I never thought I would watch the entire CSPAN coverage. They were impressive. They certainly looked very good for party building. I would imaging that if you really thought your candidate was good, a persuasive argument or the ability to conclusively debunk any fears or negatives would go a lot further than bullying.

[Adelante]

85. The greatest political show on earth

I love the Iowa caucus and am completely jealous.

[CornField]

13. LOL

Sorry... but :rofl:

The idea of any of the caucus-goers I know being bullied is just a hysterical image.

[Debi]

14. Maybe it was the snacks....

they were a passive-aggressive form of bullying :shrug:

[gkhouston]

17. LOL, "vote for my candidate or you're getting nothing but the

jello cubes with lima beans in 'em". ;-)

[Debi]

18. Or 'Want a cookie? Only if you support Hillary Clinton!"

I mean, what if caucus-goers didn't have supper before the big event? :shrug:

[youthere]

23. I could be bought with rueben dip.

[Debi]

26. I'll call the Kerry campaign for the recipie...

x( and all I had was cookies and hot drinks (non-alcoholic of course)

[youthere]

29. wouldn't do any good...

I've given up meat since the last caucus!

[Debi]

30. Well, then what the hell was your last post about?

You Iowans are just evil! x(

[IA_Seth]

20. Oh geez, here we go...

Have you ever attended a caucus, MADem? If so, please share your horrible experience of being bullied here with the Iowans, because none of us have ever witnessed anything of the sort.

And the "go on holiday" argument? So asking Iowans who want to choose Iowa's nominee to be engaged in the process and participate in a party-building event is "disenfranchising"? It's one night a year, if the people can't attend that is very unfortunate, but the caucus is not only a nominating convention, but a party building event.

In primary states retail politics become "quaint", with getting voters engaged put on the back burner and replace with just getting votes. No party building, just showing up or mailing a ballot.

I do, in fact, find it charming. As well as useful, educational, and neighborly.

[Debi]

22. You left out the free food, Seth

Oh wait :blush:

It's your turn to bring the food this year isn't it? Guess we know who will win your caucus. :rofl:

[MADem]

31. No but I come from New England, land of "Town Meeting"

And I have seen what goes on at those.

I suppose everyone who has told me that "Force of Personality" plays a role at these events, well, they're all just liars, eh?

OK, fine. I bow to your superior knowledge of what occurs at every single caucus throughout the state.

If you want to go away for two weeks at Christmas and the New Year, you ARE disenfranchised. Unless you want to watch the fireworks in London or France, or whereever you happen to be vacationing, get up on New Year's Day, and haul ass to get home in time. At vastly inflated prices for your airline ticket, travelling on those popular travel days.

You are NOT required to agree with me, you know. But your arguments (that I'm wrong about what others have told me, that even though people on holiday during a popular vacation period are disenfranchised, you claim otherwise--as if they must SACRIFICE to exercise their vote--when primary states don't have that issue) don't meet my standards of acceptable--I just don't buy them.

And if you think NH isn't charming, you might want to think again. The house parties, the meet and greets, the little Q and A's at the town halls, they're very grassroots-ish. Pumpkins and old guys with pipes who say "Ey-ah." ADORABLE!

But not all NH-ites are like that. Many are busy families with two working parents, or single parents, who rarely get a break and look forward to the winter break for the schoolkids--in NH, those people CAN fill out a damned absentee ballot and go to Bermuda with their kids during the school break, instead of sitting around, waiting for a single day, and farting around in a cold public building for a couple of hours, like people are forced to do in Iowa.

Sorry, I still think that the system is idiotic, and puts too much weight on two (I include NH) tiny states full of white folk who don't represent the bulk of America demographically. This guy did a good job of spelling out my views, actually:
http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/how_iowa_and_new_hampshire_hijack_american_democracy/C37/L37/

But increasingly, the voters in those two states make lousy gatekeepers. They’re the last people in the world who should be making the first cut of presidential candidates. The simple truth is the hamlets and pocket-sized cities of Iowa and New Hampshire no longer resemble mainstream America.

Consider first that their citizens are more than 90 percent white, compared with just 75 percent nationwide. That fifteen-point gap is a disaster in a nation where race often shapes a community’s politics. Hispanics have emerged as the largest and fastest-growing minority group in the country. Illegal immigration is one of the most controversial topics this campaign season. But with Hispanic populations ranging from 2-3 percent, voters in Iowa and New Hampshire have almost no experience with the issue.

It gets worse. Over the last half-century, our country has emerged as a predominately urban and suburban nation. More than 80 percent of us live in metro areas; and a third of our population is gathered in just 10 massive super-urban clusters. But Iowa and New Hampshire still resemble the America of the 1950s. Between a third and one-half of their citizens still live in small towns, relying heavily on 19th-century industries that most of us abandoned a generation ago. The two early-primary states rank near the bottom—32nd and 46th respectively—in their contributions to America’s GDP.

As a consequence, our presidential candidates wind up spending months in rural diners, standing on hay bales, talking to white people about social and economic issues that most Americans don’t care about. It’s a troubling fact that Hillary Clinton’s plan for revitalizing family farms and small town economies is far more bold and sophisticated than her plan for solving the health care crisis.

Unfortunately, the disconnect runs deeper. There was a time not so long ago when white, rural Americans voted pretty much the same way as voters in big cities and suburbs. Iowa and New Hampshire were reasonable proxies for the rest of us. But Ronald Reagan and his political descendants have converted small town folks into a far more conservative, Republican-leaning block of voters. Even Democrats and Independents in those states tend to be more right-leaning than their counterparts.... If we staged a first-in-the-nation primary in one of the big states (Florida, say) all that would change. The candidates would spend time in urban neighborhoods and sprawling suburbs, as well as far-flung rural counties. Politicians would hear from blacks and Hispanics, as well as small-town whites. They would kiss babies and make speeches and ride through downtown neighborhoods in 4th of July parades.

The whole article is good, I recommend it.


Old paradigms, old processes, all from past centuries. Time for a fresh look that is more representative of We, The People. My opinion. YMMV.

[IA_Seth]

34. And there's the rub...

"And if you think NH isn't charming, you might want to think again. The house parties, the meet and greets, the little Q and A's at the town halls, they're very grassroots-ish. Pumpkins and old guys with pipes who say "Ey-ah." ADORABLE!"

My concern isn't what you think of NH. I could care less. I care how MY state does it. If you don't live here, stay the f out of it. I guarantee you that if the Iowa Democrats really wanted a change, they'd get one. And that's my opinion.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Debi]

36. Howard Dean would have not risen above an asterisk if he were forced to run a national primary

Don't blame Iowa for Howard Dean's 2004 campaign implosion, blame a campaign that wasn't prepared for the 24/7 media blitz and negative campaigning that occurred (hell, I blame Joe Trippi and his greed more than I blame Howard Dean). Would you have felt better if the campaign would have been successful in Iowa and New Hampshire but imploded in New York or California?

I don't know how you get the idea that Iowa is 99% conservative with our Democratic Governor, Democratic controlled state house (and executive Branch) our 3/5 Democrats in the House of Representative and 50% of our U.S. Senators being Democrats. Are they 'conservative' Democrats? And you also are mislead about Iowa being 99% rural. The majority of Iowans now live in the urban areas of the state (which is why almost 1/3 of the land mass of Iowa is represented by one member of Congress - so many folks have moved from the farmlands of the state to the cities). Yes, the majority of Iowans are white, however diversity is celebrated here and blacks, hispanics, bosnians, asians, native americans, indians and all other races are represented in our businesses, schools and minority recruitment is encouraged for elected office.

Sorry, you don't know Iowa. Reading about it on the internet really doesn't qualify as 'knowing' the state and whether or not Iowa represents America. If you think tarmac-to-tarmac campaigns and T.V. ad and lit drop campaigns would better serve America, so be it. If only the most wealthy or most well funded candidate is what you want, you are welcome to them. However, I think being able to speak with a candidate and ask them a face to face question and look into their eyes when they answer me is much better than watching once more a practiced stump speech from behind a rope line.

You still haven't come up with proof of bullying or intimidation at an Iowa Precinct Caucus. You can write about New England town hall meetings and 'personalities' but until you actually can provide anecdotal evidence that a negative event occurred, I'm going to continue to believe the Iowans who tell me that those things have not happened and you are just blowing smoke.

[MADem]

41. You are WHITE AND RURAL. You do not represent "America."

You are a subset of America, but asking IOWA to gatekeep a national election is as idiotic as asking Harlem to do it. You only get ONE viewpoint--and we are a multicultural, multicolored society.

I came up with evidence--I asked you to look downthread. But here, ya want more, let me do your fucking gooogling for you! Here's a report from an IOWAN--is this person a liar, too?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/2/27/133738/397

Think about how unfair that is. My vote only gets to count toward the candidate of my choosing if at least 15 percent of my neighbors who show up on a cold night in January agree with me. In my white-collar suburb, that meant that you were out of luck if you wanted to caucus for Gephardt or Kucinich in 2004. They were well below the viability threshold. People living in a different part of Des Moines might get to join a group large enough to win delegates for Gephardt or Kucinich, but not in my neighborhood. In my precinct Dean was also just barely short of viability at the first count, but people in his group were able to persuade a couple of others to join them--hence Dean gained one delegate.

The 15 percent threshold for viability is one reason why the caucus results do not necessarily reflect the raw votes, as William Saletan and Matt Schiller wrote during the last election cycle. Like I said, I prefer primaries.


But the salient point is, pockets of heavy support in Iowa are less valuable than broad support spread across the state. The winner needs to be viable in as many precincts as possible. Thousands of people might turn out for you on a college campus, but if you are not viable in a lot of other areas, you probably won't win the caucuses.

If you are a real junkie, look at the caucus results from 2004 by county.

The chart is hard to read, but one thing that's easy to notice is that Kerry and Edwards were viable just about everywhere. There are huge differences in how the counties voted--in some areas Kerry crushed Edwards, and in some areas Edwards crushed Kerry. But you can tell that they were not shut out in many areas. Kerry did a lot better in some of the population-rich eastern counties, but Edwards was able to make up much of the difference by edging out Kerry in Polk County and dominating many of the small and medium-sized counties.

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977172130

The Democrats have a much more interesting process. The names of each of the candidates, plus one for undecided, are placed on a table. Voters then sit at the table of the candidate of their choice, forming a preference group. Now the fun begins! Each group tries to recruit participants from other groups, especially the “undecided” or particularly small groups who are not viable. This polite, but intense campaigning continues for about 30 minutes. After voters have shuffled around, a head count is taken to see which candidates have a viable group. Viability can be anywhere from 15% to 25% of the attendees, depending on the number of county delegates to be elected.


Now the FUN begins? Fun, my ass--all of the Kucinich supporters in conservative, suburban neighborhoods will be bullied to change their minds, because he's not 'viable.' Same with the GravelBots. Now, those are the only two candidates I've decided on--I've decided not to vote for them--but I certainly don't think it's right to deny those who do support them the right to represent their opinions if they happen to be sitting in the wrong living room.

That ain't democracy. It just ain't.

[1corona4u]

45. Uhh...

I hate to break this to you...but given the pitcure you're trying to paint, your own state is a "subset" of America...you might want to revise your thinking.


USA;
80% white
12.8% black

Iowa;
94% white
2.3 black

Mass;
86.7%
6.9%

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[1corona4u]

75. Woefully outdated, LOL...no....they are the most current from the Census Bureau

They are 2005 & 2006 figures;

Mass;
>>Population, 2006 estimate 6,437,193 299,398,484 <<<<<<
Population, percent change, April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006 1.4% 6.4%
Population, 2000 6,349,097 281,421,906

White persons, percent, 2005 (a) 86.7% 80.2%
Black persons, percent, 2005 (a) 6.9% 12.8%


USA;
White persons, percent, 2005 (a) 86.7% 80.2%
Black persons, percent, 2005 (a) 6.9% 12.8%


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html



USA TOTALS;

Population,>>>>2006 estimate<<<< 299,398,484

Population, percent change, April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2006 6.4%

Population, 2000 281,421,906


White persons, percent, 2005 (a) (a) 80.2% <<<<<<------

Black persons, percent, 2005 (a) (a) 12.8% <<<<<<-------

American Indian and Alaska Native persons, percent, 2005 (a) (a) 1.0%

Asian persons, percent, 2005 (a) (a) 4.3%

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, percent, 2005 (a) (a) 0.2%

Persons reporting two or more races, percent, 2005 1.5%

Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, percent, 2005 (b) (b) 14.4%<<<<<<<<-----

White persons not Hispanic, percent, 2005 66.9% <<<<<<<<<-------(NonHispanic White persons are those who responded "No, not Spanish/Hispanic/Latino" and who reported "White" as their only entry in the race question.)




http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[1corona4u]

81. It's still 80% white...

66% represents people; "NonHispanic White persons are those who >responded< "No, not Spanish/Hispanic/Latino" and who reported> "White"< as their only entry in the race question.

The difference isn't in the color of their skin, it's in the way they answered the question.

Not that it really matters. It's just semantics. And "whiteys" is not an acceptable way to address whites. It's the equivalent of.......well, you know.

[MADem]

82. How many hispanics are there in Iowa? You're using numbers to pretend they don't count.

You're taking an entire culture and divvying it up between black and white. Hispanics ARE a large percentage of this nation, and they do count. Maybe not as much in IA, but everywhere else.

Whatever--you keep moving those goalposts, and telling everyone that IA is just like everywhere else. Yeah, no difference between IA and NY, or CA, or FL, or NJ, or even VA....

IA is still a more homogenous culture than most states. It just is.

You'd better report that Whitey shit to the mods, if it really bugs you, then, eh? And while you're at it, make sure they ban anyone on this forum with the WHITEY name--and piss off a few longtime members.

Sorry, Whitey is NOT the same as the word that sounds like Knicker. It's not invective, it's slang. Otherwise, it would be a word you can't say on tee vee, and I hear it on tee vee all the time, in the context of describing someone of the caucasian persuasion.

When Whitey becomes an oppressed minority, maybe the meaning will change. But right now, it is simply a colloquialism for the word caucasian, and also the name of an Irish American criminal with a famous brother on the run from the law.

:eyes:

And on edit, one more time because you are not reading--I do not advocate MA as a first in the nation state. We are NOT representative of America. We are TOO LIBERAL.

[1corona4u]

83. I gave you the links to the Census Bureau....you can find the information there.

If you don't agree with it, maybe you should call them and let them know.

[MADem]

84. Answer: Not many. At least not ones who can vote.

There's a sizeable undocumented population, though. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/chronicle/5322009.html

Now more than 115,000 Hispanics live in Iowa, comprising almost 4 percent of the state's population of 3 million. Though their community is tiny by Texas standards, their numbers increased 37 percent between 2000 and 2005, according to the Iowa Division of Latino Affairs.

The rapid growth of Iowa's Hispanic population, particularly the estimated 55,000 to 85,000 here illegally, has fueled a fierce debate in the state that will hold the first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses on Jan. 3.

[karynnj]

87. NJ is pretty close to MA in being liberal

it is nowhere near average for the country.

[MADem]

89. Then pick VA, FL, NY, CA, any state with a little mix.

I don't think MA is a good fit for a 'decider' any more than I think IA is.

[Debi]

38. Oh, Seth, give it up.

After all, since you are white and live in Iowa you are not representative of the United States of America. AND the poster did cite ONE WHOLE ARTICLE whining about Iowa and New Hampshire so we MUST be WRONG and the poster must be right.

We'll just have to go back to our white, conservative, rural farm houses and wait for some campaign to offer us a seed cap and some overalls to wear to the caucuses where we will rough up our neighbors until they support our candidate. Then we can go home, milk the cows and slop the pigs and rassle up some supper for our men (you just relax in your recliner and drink your beer while the missus gets you your dinner). Democracy is well served once again Yeee-Haaa.

We can't have any culture in this state, I mean WE'VE never been to a town hall meeting in New England. :eyes:

[MADem]

42. If you bothered to read for comprehension, I don't like Town Meeting either.

I like one person, one vote.

And I provided, above, the perspective of two Iowans, and their words bear out my perspective.

If your candidate isn't viable, well, fuck you. Come over here and support MY candidate, or you've wasted your evening.

Not Democracy. Not by a long shot.

[Debi]

49. And yet you have the opinion of more than two Iowans here in this board

Who all believe the caucus process is democracy in action.

Caucuses aren't one man one vote and never intended to be, but let me ask you: In a straw poll or voting procedure what happens when your candidate doesn't garner enough votes to receive delegates to the county convention? They're vision and platform just no longer exist. The campaign is over and their supporters aren't elected as delegates to any of the following conventions so the candidates positions are snuffed out. Not very democratic.

However, if a candidate is non-viable in the caucuses their supporters can move to another candidate and negotiate to bring their candidates positions to convention (this happened with Kucinich and Edwards in 2004. When Kucinich wasn't viable his supporters joined with the Edwards supporters AND then some of them were able to move to the county/district/state conventions AND some of Kucinich's proposals moved with them). Seems more democratic than just saying 'you didn't get the majority of the votes so you and your ideas are out'.

[CTLawGuy]

51. well

evidence was provided of people who had a negative caucus experience--I assumed so, because it was deleted for some reason. It's a shame because I wanted to read it.

I think, if the anecdotal evidence was real, that you'd have to retreat from your extreme position that no one could possibly ever feel intimidated at a caucus. I have encountered many people (im from New England) who do NOT share their political preferences with anyone and these people would have a very difficult time caucusing. I can't imagine that nobody in the state of Iowa feels that way.

[Debi]

52. Hello, darboy, it's been four years since we've discussed the caucuses

I enjoyed our conversations from 2003 because although you held strong to your opinion you did not call me or Iowans names nor did you tell me to FO. We just disagreed.

The deleted post did not contain specific comments only stated 'Deaniacs' said they were steamrolled. As a Dean supporter I think that is a dubious comment. The Dean campaign did not train his precinct captains or prepare them for caucus in any way (thank you Joe Trippi), the Kerry and Edwards campaigns did. Don't blame other campaigns for being organized, blame the Dean campaign for being disorganized.

The post also informed me and everyone on this board that the only people in Iowa who caucuses were 'F'ing white conservatives', which is far from the truth. In fact the majority of Iowa caucus-goers are from the more liberal side of the party.

Good to see you again.

d.

[CTLawGuy]

53. thanks for the civility

I wish our guy had done better in 04.

All I want is an acknowledgment that the caucus system has drawbacks. You completely dismissed the notion that anyone would feel intimidated at a caucus.

I claim people may feel intimidated not because the other people there are necessarily bad or mean, but because not everyone has self-confidence, and also some people might fear that broadcasting their vote might come back to harm them in some subtle way.

I am also from New England. New Englanders are very private, libertarian people. Outsiders mistake that for "unfriendliness." In reality New England has an ethos of leave your neighbor alone. We don't poke our noses in other people's business. It doesn't mean we don't care for our neighbor, (i.e. education, gay rights laws, health care programs) we just don't feel we have the right to be part of their personal business.

New England has the lowest % of fundies in the country, and people do not talk about religion to strangers. (Watch a debate between 2 Connecticut senate candidates and then watch one between 2 Arkansas senate candidates to see the difference.)

So, coming from that perspective, forcing people to declare their choice, even in front of neighbors, is problematic. Most people I know would probably go to a caucus if there was one, as would I becuase I'm a loudmouth ;), but not everyone would. And they have a right to vote too.

[Debi]

54. I know you want me to admit that, and just as four years ago I'm gong to disagree with you

but it's okay that we disagree. It's only our opinions. I think that one-person-one-vote has severe drawbacks (no party building, no continuation of ideas for the 'losers', no enticement for civic participation for the voter) but that is just my opinion.

How about this, if I ever meet an Iowan who tells me that they refuse to caucus b/c they are afraid of any of the things that you've stated I'll post about our conversation on this board. Deal?

[CTLawGuy]

55. ok deal

I agree with your assessment of primary drawbacks.

It shame you can't even acknowledge my criticism of the caucus system is legitimate...

Edit:

Let's try a DU Poll on this issue, and see what people say.

Link to poll: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3782591

[Debi]

56. I'd agree with your poll if it were Iowans or former Iowans

we both know what you're going to get otherwise. Screwball....oops, there I go namecalling.

The only reason I won't acknowledge your critisicm is b/c I haven't experienced the negatives you've discussed and don't know anyone who has. They are the same as unicorns to me, could be but you gotta show me first.

Headed over to your caucus-haters poll now, will I be the one vote or one in ten?

[CTLawGuy]

58. no nothing can exist unless you've seen it

riiiight.

[Debi]

59. Now, don't be getting snippy

I'm sure things exist w/out ME seeing them. I told you that if I run into a distruntled (one who has been bullied or intimidated) caucus-goer I will tell you about it. And I know if you find one you'll let me know.

[CTLawGuy]

61. I've found a few on my poll

go check it out. I'll bump it for ya.

[Debi]

68. Thank you for educating me

unfortunately (since your poll was a private vote)I'll never know who the Iowans were who won't caucus and what experience they had that made them feel this way (which makes me wonder, how do you know they were Iowans?).

[CTLawGuy]

71. I never meant to limit it to Iowa

this is about caucuses in general.

Hopefully someone will share their story in the thread.

[Debi]

72. Keep me posted n/t

[MADem]

65. Well, dear, I am going to repeat that I heard from Deaniacs that they WERE steamrollered.

And that is NOT a slur.

But go ahead and have the comment deleted again.

Man, you ARE what Democracy Looks Like---in Iowa.

Don't like it? Whine loudly enough, and make it NON VIABLE.

My point stands. Go on, steamroller me.

[MADem]

64. Well, I think you're arguing from a partisan attitude that has no basis in fact.

It isn't a democratic process. It just isn't. If I con a preponderance of my like minded friends who support, say, Richardson, to go to a caucus, I can overwhelm the Kucinich people.

You can "believe" all you want. Some people believe in Santa.

You admit it yourself, in your last paragraph--why should someone HAVE to "move to another candidate" pray tell? If some poor bastard wants his support to be registered for Kucinich, why should he be forced by you clowns to move it to Obama, or whomever? Because a bunch of idiots in his district don't agree with him, he has to switch his vote? Bullshit.

Sorry, one person, one vote, with ALL THE VOTES COUNTED--not some poor assholes deemed "not viable" by the Whitey Majority--is democracy.

Calling ANYONE "non-viable" isn't democratic--even if you want to write in your own name.

You proved my point.

[question everything]

24. Thank you. I have been saying the same thing

about caucusing in Minnesota ever since we moved here.

Can you imagine getting out at night in the middle of winter in Minnesota for several hours?

Again, if you are out of town, or have to work, or just came back from work tired and want to spend time with the family, or sick - as I was two years ago - you are out of the game.

Further, the caucuses select delegates for county and then for state conventions that endorse the local candidates. And if you are not endorsed, you often drop your campaign. Thus, the primaries that take place, oh, in September, I think, are nothing more than rubber stamps of several thousands - maybe - activists who get out at a cold Minnesota winter night.

And, as I posted at a different thread. In contrast to the secrecy of the voting booth - an important principle - in the Iowa caucus you have to stand up and be counted.

And then you barter for the winner. At my caucus in Iowa some years back, our candidate won by a toss of a coin.

[MADem]

32. A coin toss, eh? Jeez. Ya gotta wonder how Howard Dean would have done

had not an all white, conservative state had first crack at him? I think he could have gone all the way, myself, if the first primary was in, say, Connecticut or New Jersey.

[Debi]

39. Are you talking about Howard Dean?

The White Conservative Governor from a Rural state?

:rofl:

I can't take you anymore, you are just full of it.

[MADem]

43. Conservative? Look who's 'full of it.'

Way to show your ignorance. Civil unions and egalitarian statewide education funding aren't 'conservative' perspectives, but thanks for playing.

:rofl: yourself--it's even funnier when people get SNARKY and they're dead fucking wrong!

[Debi]

48. You know nothing about Governor Dean's tenure in Vermont

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_32/b3845084.htm

<snip>

Many who worked with Dean are astonished at his current image and comparisons to liberal icons such as George McGovern. "The Howard Dean you are seeing on the national scene is not the Dean that we saw around here for the last decade," says John McClaughry, president of the Ethan Allen Institute, a conservative Vermont think tank. "He's moved sharply left."

Conservative Vermont business leaders praise Dean's record and his unceasing efforts to balance the budget, even though Vermont is the only state where a balanced budget is not constitutionally required. Moreover, they argue that the two most liberal policies adopted during Dean's tenure -- the "civil unions" law and a radical revamping of public school financing -- were instigated by Vermont's ultraliberal Supreme Court rather than Dean. "He was not a left-wing wacko," says Bill Stenger, a Republican and president of Jay Peak Resort, who says he supported Dean because of his "fiscally responsible, socially conscious policies."

Business leaders were especially impressed with the way Dean went to bat for them if they got snarled in the state's stringent environmental regulations. When Canada's Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd. wanted to build a new manufacturing plant on 700 acres of Vermont farmland in the mid-'90s, for instance, Dean greased the wheels. Husky obtained the necessary permits in near-record time. "He was very hands-on," says an appreciative Dirk Schlimm, the Husky executive in charge of the project.

<snip>


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/073ylkiz.asp

<snip>
Dean charmed nearly everyone in the boardroom. He came across as erudite, policy savvy, and, believe it or not, a friend of free markets--at least by the standards of the Tom Daschle-Dick Gephardt axis of the Democratic party. Even when challenged on issues like environmentalism, where he favored a large centralized mass of intrusive regulations, Dean remained affable.

"You folks at Cato," he told us, "should really like my views because I'm economically conservative and socially laissez-faire." Then he continued: "Believe me, I'm no big-government liberal. I believe in balanced budgets, markets, and deregulation. Look at my record in Vermont." He was scathing in his indictment of the "hyper-enthusiasm for taxes" among Democrats in Washington.

<snip>

http://selectsmart.com/president/Dean.html

<snip>

Taxes & Spending: "I am a true fiscal conservative though," said Dean. "I cut taxes in Vermont, taking the highest municipal income tax (in New England), and making it the lowest." "The biggest problem with our economy right now is that Republicans don’t know how to manage money," started Dean, later saying the opposing party has the habit of borrowing, spending, borrowing, spending." "In a Dean Administration, the Democratic Party would reclaim the mantle of fiscal responsibility."
"Social justice can only be achieved through a balanced budget", Dean said. He thinks he will appeal to fiscal conservatives, because he is the only Democrat in the field who has balanced a budget:

<snip>

[MADem]

66. Yeah, all conservatives are pro-choice and pro-universal education funding, AND

pro health care for all.

Thanks for showing me what you know about what defines a conservative.

Hate to tell you this, but some conservatives liked Bill Clinton's balancing of the budget.

An ability to be fiscally conservative does not make one 'conservative' in other areas.

But thanks for playing, there, "Debi." I know way more than you do, and that's plain.

:eyes:

[karynnj]

74. He was forced by the courts to go with civil unions

It wasn't an idea that he pushed - and he chose to sign it in private. His environmental record was not as good as Kerry's.

[Debi]

78. So many people 'created' who Howard Dean was in their minds

without looking at his record or listening to his own words. I think that was part of the reason for the implosion of his campaign. My husband liked him b/c of his position on the war, I liked him b/c of his work on behalf of the disabled in Vermont. But as Democrats his pro-business (and not so friendly to Labor) positions concerned us as well as his pro-business (and not so friendly to the environment) positions. We knew who he was before we supported him, that made it easy to support him until he dropped out. I can't tell you how many 'Dated Dean Married Kerry' people there were in Iowa.

[MADem]

80. Oooh, he signed it in private, so that makes him "Conservative?"

And he wasn't as good as Kerry, so THAT makes him "conservative?"

Give me a break.

:rofl:

[karynnj]

86. OIf course he is NOT a conservative

and I never said that he was. The significant point was NOT that he signed it in private, but that he was not only not the force behind it coming to be, but he was not even for it happening when it did. His position on gay unions is the same as Kerry's was. The point I was making was that Dean was not seen as an extreme liberal in Vermont, but as Debi's post does an excellent job of showing, a moderate. You are the one who was arguing that he was more liberal than Kerry, who I know is your less liberal Senator.

In 2003, I was initially for either Kerry or Dean. As we have vacationed every year in Vermont for 18 years, I briefly read the Vt papers for a short time each year and was surprised that he ran against not just a Republican but a progressive opponent in many of his elections. The Burlington Press carried criticism of him from both sides - in addition to support. Both VT and MA are pretty liberal states and both Dean and Kerry were moderate for their state.

I suspect that you are comparing Dean's words in 2004 versus Kerry's record. To be fair, compare Dean's record as a moderate governor with Kerry's record - neither is Bernie Sanders or Ted Kennedy - nor would they have a chance to win if they were

[MADem]

88. No, Debi said he was, and you jumped in. NT

[karynnj]

47. As a New Jerseyan, I doubt it

The problem that Dean had was that although he had been attacking the other candidates, when he became the front runner, there was an increase in the research done on him and all the others attacked him - just as HRC was recently the candidate attacked the most. It was his reaction that hurt - sitting in NJ - I was really shocked that he whined that he did not want to be a pin cushion. That comment sounded almost prissy to me - a former midwesterner living in one of the less sarcastic parts of NJ. That would have cost him in NJ.

Dean did NOT do better amoung blacks, than whites. The bigger difference is that I doubt Edwards would have played as well. With the same face to face contact that Iowa had, I think the race would - if anything been a bigger Kerry victory. He likely would still have had the reunion with Rassmann, and had the fireman and vets behind him. NJ also has a large number of veterans. In the diverse NJ culture, people who met her would have loved THK. Kerry's long term work with Youthbuild would have worked extremely well in NJ - not to mention the black minister who had been one of Kerry's crew would have been great. Not to mention, Kerry had an ace that only people in NJ understand the full value of - BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN, who saw him as the real deal.

The best thing to making NJ first would be that the coverage would be far greater - because of the proximity of NYC and Philadelphia. (It also makes it incredibly expensive) That would also be a negative (though progressively less so). In the past , if a speech didn't work or an answer was lame - the candidates could rethink things and hone their message before most people saw it.

[MADem]

67. My point is that NJ is not a caucasian state. There's 'color' in there.

And urban centers. AND rural, too. It's a bit of everything, it's dense (population wise, not in terms of thinking skills) it's countrified, citified, rural and suburban.

Who knows how Dean would have done in NJ--but at least we'd get a sense of his "viability" (IA word) with an electorate that reflects the nation.

[karynnj]

73. No state reflects the entire country

I know NJ doesn't. The thing is that you are conflating 2 things, wanting more diverse first states and the idea that that would have led to Dean. I just don't see proof that in NH and Iowa that Dean was the strongest in the small minority communities. Do any of the NH or Iowa people know?

Also, I really do think that Kerry had assets in NJ that would be worth more than in Iowa.
1) NJ has two media markets and one is Philadelphia - most people in South Jersey had known Teresa for decades when she was married to her first husband. Even in north Jersey, she led to many cross over votes in my Republican area.

2) As I said, Bruce Springsteen.

[MADem]

77. Some reflect it better than others. NJ has city, country, suburban, rural.

And I am NOT conflating two things.

Dean may, or may not have, gotten a better shake elsewhere. Certainly, in NJ, Bruce would have helped Kerry, as would the proximity to PA. That's just an EXAMPLE, NJ. Let's put Dean to the side ENTIRELY, if that confuses the discussion.

Pick ANY state with cities, with an urban/rural/suburban mix, with population density, with whites, blacks, hispanics, a multitude of people--not a white bread farming state. I'm sorry, HOG PRICES should not be way up on a list of presidential discussion points. The hostage taking in Iowa just has to stop.

What we aren't getting is a viewpoint FROM AMERICA. We're only getting the viewpoint of white and mostly RURAL America. And they aren't the driving force anymore. They were fifty or sixty years ago, but not anymore.

And we're also getting is a constructed and inaccurate viewpoint where, if you happen to be in a caucus where your candidate is "not viable" well, he, and your vote, gets tossed in the trash. Not counted. That's bullshit.

You aren't going to get a diverse opinion out of either IA or NH. They're homogenous states. They're WHITE. I would like to see some states with a bit of color out front for a change...but that's just me. IA and NH don't want to kiss the cash cow goodbye, because the idiotic time-wasting rituals in those two states bring in a boatload of cash. That's why they'll fight tooth and nail to place tradition over meaning in these opening contests.

[depakid]

25. It's a dysfunctional way to choose a nominee

Using an archaic 19th Century procedure in the middle of a midwest winter is bad enough.

Moving it to January 3rd was just insane.

Yet another reason America well deserves the "leaders" that it gets.

[Redneck Socialist]

40. God forbid you care enough to be engaged in the process. n't

[MADem]

69. God forbid I think it isn't the job of ANY group of people to tell me that my choice isn't

"viable" and thus my support doesn't COUNT, and I "need" to switch to another candidate.

How would you like to be in a room with a bunch of people who say the candidate you came to support doesn't have the "minimum number of supporters" so you need to pick someone else?

That's OK with you?

To me, it's bullshit. That's how it works in Iowa, though.

[zulchzulu]

15. Thanks for checking this out and clearing it up

I'm surprised Estrich didn't say the caucus is an all-day event on January 5th...

[Debi]

16. And only people who's name begin w/S are invited

:eyes:

[IA_Seth]

19. Yay! n/t

[Debi]

27. You and your buddy Susan!

[Nutmegger]

21. Thank you.

R&K

[Yukari Yakumo]

60. One problem with your argument

which meant students who attend college in Iowa could caucus in the cities and towns where they go to school

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you have to be a resident of Iowa to caucus in Iowa? Your argument seems to imply college-age caucusers are, in fact, not Iowa residents.

If they are Iowa residents, what's the problem?

If they are not Iowa residents, doesn't that render your point moot?

[Debi]

70. Students attending Iowa colleges (from out of state) can register as Iowa residents

to participate in the caucuses or choose to stay registered in their home state and participate in that state's process.

Iowa residents who go to college away from home can either register and caucus in the town they go to college or stay registered in their hometown and caucus there.