Random Thoughts 14: I can see clearly now 2020 edition
- Thread starter Cybirdy
- Start date
- Status
I bet she went to the caucus undecided and the conversations there led her to choosing Pete. That would (partially) explain why she didn't know that much about him.
I answered an online questionnaire to see which candidate most closely matched my views. I was shocked that the question that asked about requiring voters to take what amounts to a poll test was actually agreed to by most of the candidates. I think that uninformed voters can be very dangerous for our democracy, but a poll test? Really?
Also, this (now) Minnesotan will gently help you with Amy's name. You got the A and U mixed up.
I have a niece who was born with a small non-functional extra thumb. The doctors wanted to wait for a while to remove it. It was kind of cute and funny when she would suck on the extra thumb.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
I keep forgetting the differences they have, the Ds require a 15% slice to be viable. Rs just cast a ballot. Maybe she started with Amy and she wasn't viable there and then jumped over to Pete?
Got an email from collegeboard that my daughter has free access to their college tools for some reason. They misspelled my name. Nobody spells their name how they have my name. May pass on their help.
I was going to go to the D one last night but the daughters game came first and they lock the doors at 7. Game was still going. If one candidate has a lock on theirs, I like to go to the contested one and caucus for the one closest to my views. That way I can try to get as close to the two people I would most prefer on the ballot. I have never understood, the not viable thing and now you MUST find somebody else.
I understand it, but I don't like it. The parties want the field winnowed as quickly as possible so their future nominee can start building their war chest for the general election. As a voter, I want options still on the table after the first couple of weeks of caucus/primary season. I liked Iowa not getting ignored when I lived there, but I also recognize that Iowa and New Hampshire have an out-sized influence on who gets the opportunity to get elected President. It often makes the later primaries meaningless.
I don't really understand the way you guys do this either. Especially because it's at such a local level that as it went, someone not viable in one precinct in Ames.........was the leader in another. I think if they want to capture the spirit of the caucus with less....fuss... ranked choice voting at the state level is good option.
I understand winnowing the field down, but does it make a whole of difference if they say that X got 0 delegates versus getting 3% of the vote. It's still a small set. The problem with that style is it requires you to find someone else. What i have read, one of the issues was there one or two candidates whose backers just left or stood there versus finding someone else and the head people got confused and it miscalculated a few things. That wasn't the only issue, but read that it made a problem.
The Rs just have vote and then tell the percentage of votes. Seems to be the easiest and cleanest way. Then delegates are split on the vote percentage.
I'm not backing it, I just understand why they do it. If a candidate spends a month less battling other candidates in their party that could be another $10-20M in their war chest for the general election. In my opinion if someone supports a candidate, they should have the option of staying with them even if they are "not viable". Even in ranked choice voting like they do in Minneapolis you can vote for other candidates after your first choice or choose not to.
The idea is to have discussion about the candidates for Pres and other positions if deemed necessary. They also have people sign up to be delegates at the regional convention and there they select state delegates and there the national ones. A little other business is done also.
There were cookies on the table where I was standing for my candidate. There were no cookies on the table where Lew was standing for his candidate. I took great pleasure in pointing out to him that WE had cookies. Got a laugh from both groups.
Side note: his candidate didn't need the cookies - they won our whopping ONE delegate.
So will you be home baking cookies while Lew is a delegate for his candidate?There were cookies on the table where I was standing for my candidate. There were no cookies on the table where Lew was standing for his candidate. I took great pleasure in pointing out to him that WE had cookies. Got a laugh from both groups.
Side note: his candidate didn't need the cookies - they won our whopping ONE delegate.
Correct. When people are milling about and groups are in close proximity, it makes it easier to count the stickers. Generally the non-viable candidate stickers are superseded by the stickers for the candidates still being counted.
Regarding the overall head count, our precinct had numbered name badges that we wore to indicate that we had signed in. It was an easy matter to check how many were there as participants (we only had one "observer" who was the non-state Biden staffer).
- Status
