General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf a caucus does not allow for absentee ballots, wouldn't that be discriminatory against those who
would have a problem getting to where the caucus is held?
I would like to keep this in the General Discussion area, so I would appreciate that no specific discussion of Democratic candidates is involved.
Thanks
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)But not necessarily illegal or anything.
still_one
(92,409 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)If the stte party desires voting instead, they hold a primary.
This is the political system we have. If you dislike how the party conducts the choice for presidential nominee in your state, get involved and work to change it.
The time to do that for the 2016 race was 2012 and before.
still_one
(92,409 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)If the state primary is early enough, it's much cheaper to stack it on a primary election promoted by the state. Otherwise, it's cheaper to pay for a caucus than to pay for an election.
So it comes down to whether or not to wait, have less of a voice, and let the state pay for it or hold it earlier and go on the cheap with a caucus.
Whether or not states hold primaries at all is also a state by state decision. Many that do hold them so late that the party MUST hold a caucus or pay for a special primary in order to seat delegates before the national convention. In the cases where a caucus determines the delegates, a primary held aftre is referred to as a "beauty contest".
still_one
(92,409 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)this will be especially true in Nevada, of course.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)exboyfil
(17,865 posts)That is a discussion my daughter and I had when we were caucusing.
Shut ins, those who have to work, those who have college classes, those who don't have transportation, those who have to watch children (we did have a baby or two), and even some high school activities were going on that night.
still_one
(92,409 posts)No Vested Interest
(5,167 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,373 posts)I REALLY dislike caucuses. You must be physically present to vote in them.
One really strange thing about Nevada's system is that it ALSO has a primary, which will be on June 14, 2016. http://elections.mytimetovote.com/dates/nevada.html
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)I wish they'd get rid of them.
ProfessorGAC
(65,191 posts)It's an anachronistic piece of nonsense that might have had a place 100 or more years ago.
It's just silly and exclusionary, now.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)their caucus system and this is only their second contested Democratic caucus. They switched from Primary style voting to expedite getting Nevada the earlier place in the process that it now has.
This is part of why Nevada is so very hard to poll currently.
DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)... I would find caucusing nearly impossible.
Am very grateful my state has a primary instead.
still_one
(92,409 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 19, 2016, 09:20 PM - Edit history (1)
DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)... but there's no way I'd last the day, especially in an open, noisy, crowded space, that may or may not have adequate heat and/or bathrooms.
still_one
(92,409 posts)TipTok
(2,474 posts)... when I told them I was out of state military.
still_one
(92,409 posts)zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)Strangely, it's how representatives were initially chosen. Most of the folks at the continental congress, or the constitutional convention were chosen roughly this way. Folks would gather in pubs and have lively discussion. At the end they would elect people to go to the state level and elect folks to go to the "continental" level. In many cases, these folks went for in essence "one event" and had very specific instructions on how to vote.
Not saying it is how it should work in the modern world. I do think that some "socialization" of voting has value.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)still_one
(92,409 posts)or at the minimum from reading some of the comments, a process which excludes anyone who cannot physically be present, which excludes some people
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I work second shift and weekends. I would not be able to attend a caucus.
napi21
(45,806 posts)Here's the definition of the word CAUCUS:
1. a meeting of the members of a legislative body who are members of a particular political party, to select candidates or decide policy.
synonyms: meeting, assembly, gathering, congress, conference, convention, rally, convocation
"caucuses will be held in eleven states"
the members of a caucus.
2. a group of people with shared concerns within a political party or larger organization.
synonyms: members, party, faction, camp, bloc, group, set, band, ring, cabal, coterie, pressure group
"the conservative caucus"
DeadLetterOffice
(1,352 posts)... the question posed is whether caucuses are inherently discriminatory in their structure, and the answer to that is clearly YES.
still_one
(92,409 posts)in a caucus
SamKnause
(13,110 posts)I suffer from agoraphobia and panic attacks.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)any reason, from work, caregiving, illness, infirmity, housebound, etc etc could keep someone from caucusing. they should at least have a mail in option.
still_one
(92,409 posts)learned something about the caucus structure