Home › Opinion › Editorials
And the Iowa caucus proves -- what?
Story Tools
More Editorials
The Iowa presidential caucuses have become such an accepted part of the political calendar it's easy to forget what bizarre rituals they are.
But on Thursday, an estimated 150,000 Iowa Democrats and 80,000 Republicans will gather in public libraries and church basements in 1,784 precincts to propel one or more of a dozen possible candidates to their party's nomination. Or not. Some years, like 2004 and 2000, it works. Other times it doesn't.
The numbers are only a fraction of the Iowa electorate and an infinitesimal percentage of the national electorate, and, being disproportionately over 55 and female, unrepresentative of both.
The two parties' caucuses operate by slightly different rules, with the Democrats' predictably being more complicated. Straw polls are taken with candidates required to get at least 15 percent of the vote to be considered "viable." Failing that, "supporters of nonviable candidates have the option to join a viable candidate group, join another nonviable candidate group to become viable, join other groups to form an uncommitted group or chose to go nowhere and not be counted." And all that has to be done within 30 minutes. Iowans are serious about their civic duties but they're not going to take all night performing them.
The caucus chair then multiplies the number of members in each preference group times the number of delegates allotted that precinct and divides by the number of eligible attendees at the caucus. The candidate with the most delegates wins -- sort of.
What the caucus is doing is electing delegates to a later county convention, which in turn chooses delegates for a district convention, then the state convention and finally the national presidential nominating convention by which time Iowa has been all but forgotten.
One other thing: The choice of candidate is nonbinding on the delegate.
Posted by Hedcutter on February 18, 2008 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe the Iowa caucus" proves" that most people see through Hillary and Bill Clinton:
"Billionaire Vinod Gupta, the owner of InfoUSA, a data-processing and marketing firm in Omaha, has paid Bill Clinton "$3.3 million in consulting fees, has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Clintons' campaigns and contributed $1 million to the Clinton Foundation. Gupta has given the Clintons the use of his private jet, and has accompanied them on vacations, including a New Year's Day jaunt to Acapulco in 2002.
Gupta's generosity to the Clintons led to a revolt among some stockholders in his company. They are suing InfoUSA, alleging that Gupta wasted $900,000 in company funds flying the Clintons around the world and paying the former president huge fees for little work." (Newsweek, Feb. 4,2008 edition)
This and other flagrant money schemes bordering on criminal were done at a time when Hillary was the most likely candidate to win the Oval Office. Surely Bill was not just selling his influence (for hundreds of million$) as a past president; he was selling his future influence in the Oval Office.
Posted by plh on February 20, 2008 at 10:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey I live in Iowa and this year the caucus' were the most disorganized chaotic mess I have ever seen. There was virtually no checks and balances for new registrees. I have found 2 in my small township that were definately not suppose to be there, several others that are highly questionable. All Obama supporters. This happened all over the state.
Many are having buyers remorse and are switching to Hillary. After Edwards dropped out the Edwards yard signs were replaced by Hillary signs. Hillary or Obama was not my first choice I remained uncommitted but will support Hillary at the convention. I lived in Texas and strongly believe in the slogan DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS.
Hopefully Texas voters are strong minded and won't be influenced by fleating momentum, fancy speeches and no substance
Posted by careaboutit on May 31, 2008 at 4:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, Texas voters are strong minded, and when they do go and vote are usually on the right track for the good of everyone. As far as being influenced by momentum, fancy speeches and no substance, well, that remains to be seen. Of late, with all we are hearing about Obama and his friendships, alliances and whatever with questionable people, especially those who lean to violence and communism, I hope Texas is listening and cares about who Obama is really supporting.
(Requires free registration.)
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.