What do you think of Minnesota's system of party caucuses?
Posted at 5:00 AM on February 6, 2012
by Eric Ringham
(23 Comments)
Filed under: Politics/Government
Minnesotans will gather Tuesday night to declare their preferences for president, elect delegates to party conventions and help shape party platforms. What do you think of Minnesota's system of party caucuses?
Comments (23)
I need party caucuses to be online and asynchronous. In other words, whenever and wherever.
Not only is the process disorganized and disenfranchising, it is also pointless. The straw poll is non-binding. Delegates to the national conventions won't be decided for months and then by an even smaller group of Minnesotans and it will likely happen after the race is decided by voters in other states.
Caucuses exclude large numbers of voters from the primary process. In 2008, I was recovering from surgery and I had limited mobility. Because the venue was (over) crowded, it was terrifying. There was limited handicap parking and limited places to sit.
Also, what about those individuals who have to work? Are single parents of small children? Have night school?
It is unreal to me and unfair.
In 2008 Eagan (Republican), I had to listen to 90 minutes of speeches, including one from a guy who lived in his parent's basement running for state office.
Then we went to a separate room and it was another 30 minutes before we voted. There were so many people we had to cast our vote on a piece of paper that was torn for 30 people. Somehow there were only two pencils. There was discussion among neighbors or sharing of ideas.
It was incredibly disorganized but I will go again tomorrow. If its as disorganized I will never go again. Though tomorrow I am bringing a pen.
The caucus system discourages turnout and disenfranchises anyone who wants or needs to keep their political views private.
Caucuses are gatherings where the active compete to see who gets to tell others how to live. The benefits of inactivity and not competing will remain underrepresented, and individuals will continue to be suppressed by the amplification of political parties.
My voting aged kids, my wife and I comprised the totality of our precinct's caucus-goers in 2008. It was a hoot, but also sad at the same time because nobody else showed up. My take away is that it seems a primitive way to get the grassroots organized. (BTW, none of the kids even brought hot dish!)
Caucuses promote groupthink. The less we have of that, the better.
A thoroughly wasteful and pointless process that could be replaced by facebook with a far higher participation rate and a more representative outcome.
Will I attend this year - probably .. again. (groan) - .... but ... not to see what my neighbors are doing - but to try and stop the silly and inane platform ideas from ever getting started.
I don't like them as a participant or as an efficient way of picking candidates. I think rank order primaries would be a better system and arrive at middle of the road candidates more likely to win general elections.
The caucus system in MN narrows the influence to those who are willing to spend a great deal of time and potentially money attending multiple levels of party meetings. I suspect they work well for small communities, but when you are talking about a state with a population in the millions a caucus system concentrates power in the hands of too few people.
On the Democratic side the presidential preference 'caucus' is a farce. It is really a hybrid of a primary and a causus that takes the worst aspects of each and the best of neither. There is no discussion of the candidates prior to voting (the only real value of a caucus). There is no ballot security. Voting is on scrap paper, stuffed into envelopes, counted in some backroom. You have have to be at the caucus in about a one hour window in order to vote with no provision for absentee voting. Thus, the party arguing against a potential voter ID amendment is a party whose caucus system causes widespread voter disenfranchisement. Democrats - Time for a process change before the next presidential campaign in 4 years!
Listening to, considering, and voting on the resolutions put forth by my neighbors has always been the most interesting and valuable part of the caucus for me. I will be there with my own resolution tomorrow night.
Primaries include more moderate voters. The caucus system is dominated by partisan zealots.
\\None of us in our immediate neighborhood have not put up yard signs for any candidate or initiative by choice over the years.
Should have deleted the word "not." More coffee needed. Sorry.
\\ But, it's good way to find out which neighbors are on your side.
This statement explains in eloquent terms why I have not--and will not--go to a caucus. I went once roughly 30 years ago and left wholly unimpressed.
It is my responsibility to understand what each candidate stands for, supports and opposes. I have zero interest in listening to a litany of "talking points" collected fresh off the internet or cable news programs. None of us in our immediate neighborhood have not put up yard signs for any candidate or initiative by choice over the years. Having seen yard signs (and yards) vandalized in recent elections elsewhere in our community, it simply is not worth the trouble or hassle.
When November comes, my wife and I will greet our neighbors at our polling place. They will not ask how we voted, nor will we ask them how they voted. We will instead get caught up on how their kids are doing and we will be asked about how ours are doing and where they are.
I think the Minnesota caucus, being as early as it is, is a great way for neighbors to exchange views about the various candidates. If it were later in the year, it would be less meaningful. A primary, especially at this juncture, is pretty much based on who's the most partisan among the hard-core party members, and therefore not really representative of who the full electorate might wish to support as their standard-bearer later on.
Whatever party you caucus, go to caucus and and share your ideas with your neighbors. It is through that mix of ideas that each of us improves a bit on what we are thinking, refines it a little, bumps off the rough spots and great ideas are formed. These ideas move up the party lines and eventually form the platform of the party - if we all go those parties won't be extreme or whacko they will reflect the goodness and the collective wisdom of our communities. Get off the couch on Tuesday night and quit yelling at the TV! For the love of Minnesota get to your caucus! Attend your precinct caucus on Tuesday, February 7th at 7:00 p.m. Use the Minnesota Secretary of State Precinct Caucus finder to determine where your caucus will be held. See link: http://caucusfinder.sos.state.mn.us/
Minnesota Election Caucus Finder
Thank you Max. Plus, the idiots are all in the lower two tiers of Iowa counties and are more properly Missourians.
Iowa a state (caucus system) that chooses Rick Santorum deserves no defense.
Undecided. I think they are better than a primary at times because you get no cross over voting to skew the results.
But, the process of proposing and voting on new amendments to the platform drive me nuts.
But, it's good way to find out which neighbors are on your side.
The caucus system is great because it provides a path for an otherwise unknown, and perhaps underfinanced candidate toward the nomination. A candidate like Margaret Anderson Kelliher, for example, without money, without name recognition, but who had a lot going for her, would never have had the chance she did at securing her party's nomination without the caucus system.
Without the caucus system, the rich candidate, the candidate with the deep pockets would take the nomination every time, instead of just most of the time.
There is none of the razzle-dazzle of the modern campaign—just concerned locals getting together with their neighbors for a chat about the candidates, with all the folksy ineptitude that entails. Jefferson would have been proud.
In a bigger state, or a more urban one, or a less homogeneous one, or one with a primary rather than a caucus, the parish-fete-committee-meeting atmosphere would be swept away. It would be entirely up to the pundits, the attack ads and the campaign mailers to set the tone.
Caucuses are different in that they get to engage with the presidential campaign at a meaningful, personal, everyday level. If only the rest of the country could be more like that.
Meh
| February 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | |||
Master Archive
Recent Entries
- Have changes to the airline passenger experience affected your willingness to fly?
- Should marijuana be available for medical use in Minnesota?
- Do the struggles of Minnesota's business icons signal trouble for the state's economy?
- Do you know whether insurance would cover your losses in a major storm?
- What kind of recycling program would you be likely to use the most?
- Would you support paying people for organ or tissue donations?
- Have personal relationships in the workplace ever presented a problem for you?
- Do you think Facebook is a passing fad?
- Will you be less likely to visit the Minnesota Zoo without its dolphins?
- Should authorities in the Twin Cities change the way they warn people about tornadoes?
Public Insight Network
The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.More
Categories
Services
In The Spotlight
-
Sound Learning
Looking for ways to ensure your students are doing quality research from credible sources? Sound Learning is a launching point to Minnesota Public Radio's content on the Web. -
The Current Music Blog
Your daily note for good music, news and pop culture. With attempted jokes.
- Become a Member
- Member Connect Accounts
- Leadership Circle
- Sustaining Members
- Member Discounts
- Become a Sponsor
- Tax Information
- Planned Giving
- Vehicle Donation
- Donate Stock