THE IOWA CAUCUS CON

Catherine · **Posted:** Sat Dec 29, 2007 7:07 pm

[url=http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20071226_exposing_the_iowa_caucus_con/]The Iowa Caucus Con
[/url]

By Bill Boyarsky

DES MOINES, Iowa—This may be the last place in America where political journalists are embraced as heroes.

Usually these reporters, particularly those in the mainstream media, take hits from academia and a growing number of media critics. In Iowa, they are eagerly welcomed when they show up to cover the state’s unique system of selecting presidential nominees. The reason is simple: The media is a co-conspirator in a con, the Iowa caucuses.

Quote:

Here’s how the caucuses work, as explained patiently to me by several participants, supplemented by my reading of the rules. Democrats and Republicans in each Iowa precinct hold a caucus. This is the first step in a long process. Any registered voter living in the precinct can attend. You can register at the door.

Remember this important point: The Democratic and Republican caucuses merely select delegates to county conventions, who pick delegates to district conventions. Participants at these events select representatives to the state convention, where the actual national convention delegations are chosen. So the highly publicized caucuses are merely the first step in a long process that is unimportant nationally because Iowa has relatively few delegates at the national conventions.

The Republicans’ system in Iowa is pretty straightforward. Their precinct caucus opens with a secret ballot straw poll on the presidential candidates. The caucuses then pick delegates to the county convention. The results of the secret ballots are phoned in to Republican state officials in Des Moines, where they are tabulated and released to the media.

That’s not the case with the Democratic caucuses. Caucus attendees cast a vote for their candidate or vote “undecided.” Candidates not reaching the 15 percent mark are dropped, and their supporters are urged to vote in a second round for a stronger candidate. That’s where the bargaining starts

.

dori · **Posted:** Sun Dec 30, 2007 12:22 pm

Oh, this is interesting. I didn't realize that is how it works.

Iowa makes a lot of money out of this! And who knows if we get the best candidates?

Catherine · **Posted:** Tue Jan 01, 2008 7:08 am

A great number of Americans don't really understand how our election processes work, dori. Consider this report:

[url=http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20071228_the_path_to_a_national_popular_vote/]The Path to a National Popular Vote
[/url]

Quote:

By David Sirota

Right now, many are frustrated about Iowa and New Hampshire voters having such oversized influence in America’s presidential elections. In a few months, as the general election campaign unfolds, we will be similarly frustrated about Ohio and Florida. Who arbitrarily gave this handful of states the disproportionate power to determine our national political path?

When it comes to the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, the answer is the parties. They decide which states select nominees first. In the general election, the culprit is the Electoral College. Most states award their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. However small the margin by which a presidential candidate wins your state, that candidate gets all your state’s electoral votes. That means if you don’t live in a “battleground” like Florida or Ohio whose statewide vote is perpetually up for grabs, you are ignored.

The nominating system is easily modified. Parties can add early primary and caucus states if they choose. Changing the general election, on the other hand, looks much harder. The Electoral College and its negative consequences seem locked into the Constitution.

But the operative word is seem.

The group National Popular Vote has developed an ingenious path around this constitutional obstruction: States can pass legislation mandating that all of their presidential electoral votes go to the winner of the national popular vote—regardless of the election outcome in their own state

.

Note how Mr. Sirota ends this report:

Quote:

By passing national popular vote bills in the upcoming 2008 legislative sessions, state lawmakers can bring America closer to getting the democracy our civics books pretend we already have.

dori · **Posted:** Tue Jan 01, 2008 9:46 am

Quote:

States can pass legislation mandating that all of their presidential electoral votes go to the winner of the national popular vote—regardless of the election outcome in their own state

Gore would have had it hands down! And maybe our electronic voting machines wouldn't have been such a factor as they are now.

Better would be to go to a strictly popular vote, period. The powers that be just won't allow that though, will they?

Quote:

By passing national popular vote bills in the upcoming 2008 legislative sessions, state lawmakers can bring America closer to getting the democracy our civics books pretend we already have.

Wonderful observation!

I really should know this stuff--considering people send me those dreadful letters now expecting a reply. I need to have some hint of what the correct reply would be.

I think this computer can talk. I should try to implement that to help with the reading. I hate being computer illiterate.

A Proud Liberal · **Posted:** Tue Jan 01, 2008 3:33 pm

dori wrote:

I think this computer can talk. I should try to implement that to help with the reading. I hate being computer illiterate.

Dori—
No one that has made more than 4000 posts to TVNL can be considered computer illiterate.

Reading programs are notoriously unreliable because they are unable to pick up clues from context, trust the best piece of hardware/software you have—your brain. If the actual reading is getting hard because of eyesight difficulties, use the magnifying ability of your browser.
APL

dori · **Posted:** Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:44 am

Thanks APL. I do use the magnifying ability of my browser, if I didn't I wouldn't be able to pick out anything from the screen. But eyes that work hard get tired and still see things wrong or not at all.

As for posting, it is just doing the same thing over and over. My computer is capable of doing so much more, but I am not.

There was an email in my box from the ONE organization. Apparently they ran a campaign to have people write to an unidentified person in Iowa, asking them to please look into the positions candidates have on helping the desperately poor. Great idea--there is a website where you can read those letters.

ONE.org

That wouldn't have taken much ability either but I still didn't participate--I get so many emails most of them are never read. Didn't see this one until today.

If anyone is having a drive such as this for the environment including global warming, I hope I do catch that. Have a few things to say about Mother Earth.

DO.g's · **Joined:** Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm **Posts:** 2533

First cons past the pole in IWOUuuuuuuuuuuuuuu...

Obama and Hicuupbee- 6:30 PM PST- as predicted by the King of the shituatshun room Wolf.

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:46 am

I'm hoping this means that Iowans are in an antiwar mood.

By the way, is is customary or necessary to concede a caucus vote?

In Call, Clinton Concedes to Obama

Quote:

By Anne E. Kornblut

DES MOINES -- Just before 10 p.m. est, Sen. Hillary Clinton called Sen. Barack Obama to concede the race in Iowa.

Earlier, as network after network called the caucuses for Obama, Clinton officials grew quiet.

They had been rapidly tamping down expectations as the returns poured in, saying that record turnout would favor their chief rival.
...

rooster · **Posted:** Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:06 am

and the record turnout was one of the key thins i was looking to see if it would actually develop for the dems.

won't be a pretty prospect for the repugs in november.

Catherine · **Posted:** Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:46 am

Looks like the dummy dust is still blinding the Republicans...Mike Huckabee... :roll:

he's Bush all over again! I guess that's what they want, and they've got him but please don't force him onto the rest of us. :evil:

What will happen to Huckabee in other states?

Will Obama continue to be the Democratic choice?

Who will win if these two are the final party choices?

shoeless · **Posted:** Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:51 am

Catherine wrote:

Looks like the dummy dust is still blinding the Republicans...Mike Huckabee... :roll:

In a surprising turn of events in the Iowa caucus, dumbass Iowa Republican rubes voted for a dumbass Arkansas Republican rube.

Catherine · **Posted:** Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:24 pm

Quote:

dumbass Iowa Republican rubes voted for a dumbass Arkansas Republican rube.

Supposedly it was the dumbass religious, female rubes that gave him the edge...can you imagine? I bet they supported Michael Vick, too! Makes me ashamed to be female for one of the few times in my entire life!

I guess these Iowan women want to be told again and again how important it is for them to submit to the males in their lives. :evil:

IDIOTS.

dori · **Posted:** Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:46 am

People who vote against their own best interests are frustrating. I hate it when women vote against women, blacks vote against blacks, Log Cabin types vote R, etc.

Do you suppose god made us for comic relief?

Channel Zero · **Posted:** Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:02 pm

Catherine wrote:

Looks like the dummy dust is still blinding the Republicans...Mike Huckabee... :roll:

he's Bush all over again! I guess that's what they want, and they've got him but please don't force him onto the rest of us. :evil:

What will happen to Huckabee in other states?

Will Obama continue to be the Democratic choice?

Who will win if these two are the final party choices?

Huckabee will continue to win some states.

Obama could win more states than not.

Hopefully the dems will learn this time around and just jam pack the polls to make Obama the next prez!

THE IOWA CAUCUS CON

Who is online