Sincere question - if a union endorses a candidate,

how much pressure are members of the union under to vote for that candidate in the caucus? I realise that there would not be any overt pressure - but there is always pressure to conform in some fashion, and this seems to be one of those situations where the majority could exert undue influence over individual voters.

Although I admit that I am opposed to the caucus system because it utterly defeats the principle of the secret ballot - which I believe is fundamental to the democratic system - the issue of the Nevada caucus, the at-large precincts, and union endorsements in general have made me curious.

*puts on flame-proof suit and prepares to be eaten alive by increasingly cranky, politically hyper-active (in a good way!) DUers . . .*

My mom is part of the teacher union in LA (UTLA), and all she gets is a mailer of which candidates she should vote for and why.

we had a meeting and voted on a paper ballot. They put the results in the newsletter (Dean), and that was the end of it.

but here a union endorsement means feet on the ground and phone banks set up, mailings to all members.

However, no one exerts any type of pressure to vote for him.

That it will defend and protect them.

If someone belongs to a union, it's to that person's advantage to vote for that candidate.