Caucuses are open to the charge of being undemocratic and seem to favor the privileged young, white, college-educated singles who tend to vote for Obama, apparently contributing to the difference between Clinton and Obama in caucuses versus primaries. Participation is great, but it’s questionable whether the caucus format is representative of the people. I’ll support either Obama or Clinton; I’m not trying to knock Obama with this, it’s just how it is.

Hmmm! I wonder if anyone would have said this in any other election. Before this year the ones that attended caucuses tended to be elderly or older, married whites with long-term Party ties. I think that what has happened was that these folks, who largely supported Clinton, have had their little games taken away from them.

And not all those who are supporting Obama are “privileged young, white, college-educated singles”. If that were the only demographic that supported Obama he’d be getting less than 15% of the vote in any Primary…and easily be clobbered in every Caucus…which is made up of ALL different demographics. In Texas Obama also received substantial support from Black, under-privileged non-College educated individuals.

And I think that you’ll find that Obama draws caucus support across the board. I really hate it when someone that is drawing 55% of the age 40-50 years old at a caucus is supposedly only drawing “young people”. Or when 45% of the women support a candidate suddenly ALL women support the other candidate! And frankly, I don’t know how one can argue that the young and college-students are “privileged”. Most are living on Top-Ramen and taking out heavy loan burdens to afford to go to college, more attend community colleges part time…than attend four-year schools on their parents ticket!

Frankly this is the sort of patronizing sort of divisiveness that Clinton’s advisors are noted for…the guys that created the concept “Soccer Moms”. It splits, and winnows, and disembodies people down into identities that they may not even relate to. It assumes that people make decisions based upon biological factors out of their control (sex, age, race) rather than social connections.

There’s been a lot of talk about how caucuses are “undemocratic”. Many of the same people who argue this say that the Primaries should be closed to non-Party members. To prevent cross-overs would they also terminate Democratic registration for the elections months in advance? Would they exclude people who were unregistered from participation in the Primary, or those who wish to change party? More and more Parties and States have realized the undemocratic nature of requiring registration a long period of time before an election…some states are allowing walk up registration (and then holding the vote to ascertain legality later).

Caucuses were held in the past in a limited time frame mainly because the participation was low, and it kept costs down for the party. It was a social event…from when the parties were essential clubs, and decided representatives to determine candidates by the membership in attendance.

This year has been something so massive…mainly BECAUSE of the participation of the Obama supporters that it’s clear that some new system will need to evolve. Caucus sites were too small despite the limited time frame scheduled. This suggests that caucuses could be extended into a full day event, organized in ways where rolling meetings occurred. Or maybe the use of multiple-prefential ballots could be utilized for those who could drop them off after listening to short 10-minute candidate presentations on videotape. Or candidates could have representatives there all day, at all caucuses ready to answer questions. Part of the purpose of a caucus is not simply to have someone mark a ballot because they recognize the name or heard a rumor. It’s supposed to be “educated voters” participating.

Of course, there is a residency requirement for a “natural born citizen” as well.

It is possible that George Romney may not have been a “natural born citizen” as his parents may not have been US citizens after several generations resident in Mexico and their elders leaving to avoid US polygamy laws. George was born in a polygamist Mormon colony in Mexico, his uncles were actually members of the Mexican government (an automatic loss of citizenship). Thus to become a citizen, he would have needed to undergo naturalization…and thus have been ineligible.

No problem with Mittster.

Yes, but what about single mothers, elderly folks, disabled people, members of the military ………………..

Exactly.

Christy:

folks who stick it out — for three long hours on a Tuesday evening — to get to the delegate selection?

oldgold could add: hourly workers who don’t have the privilege of getting off work at that particular time and can not afford the loss of income or have to work early the following day, don’t have internet and cell phone communications to organize for the “chaos”, and people with limited English fluency.

Caucuses are open to the charge of being undemocratic and seem to favor the privileged young, white, college-educated singles who tend to vote for Obama, apparently contributing to the difference between Clinton and Obama in caucuses versus primaries. Participation is great, but it’s questionable whether the caucus format is representative of the people. I’ll support either Obama or Clinton; I’m not trying to knock Obama with this, it’s just how it is.

This morning I wrote to my Congressman to thank him for becoming a signatory to Wexler’s impeachment hearing letter to Conyers. I had written him a month ago when he wasn’t a signatory, so maybe I made a difference.

I’m also a delegate to help my Democratic Senate candidate get through the primary process.

- Tom

On to some newer Joni Mitchell…her latest version of Both Sides Now from her same-titled album (the one with her own artwork on the cover). Gorgeous, richly orchestrated version, full of ache and wisdom…love it.

I was listening to her Blue album last night, a Christmas gift from my son.

Thanks for the daily motivation to act, Christy. The FDL calls to action are frequently what cause me to cross over from fuming about something to picking up the phone and working my way down a list of Senators or Congressmen. You also provided the extra kick in the butt to get me out going door to door in the 2006 election; and I did that again in this Primary too – door to door for Edwards, driving out of State to help in the NH primaries.