Log in

No account? Create an account
an albuquerque not animate be armada. [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Okrzyki, przyjaciel!

[ website | My Website ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Iowa Caucus [Jan. 19th, 2004|10:24 pm]
Okrzyki, przyjaciel!
Well it's all over except for the punditry -- I'm pleased that Edwards pulled a strong second. Surprised that Kerry won so decisively. I think it's clear that as anti-war as the Democratic party is, here in Iowa they were hesitant to support an openly anti-war candidate. I am surprised Kucinich came in at 1 percent; I think he was the big loser with respect to the caucus rules; I bet there were many precincts that his supporters were just below 15%.

The Shimek Precinct Caucus was off the hizzy. There were more people in that Gym than I've ever seen -- 424, with about 160 of those being people registering to vote at the Caucus. The Edwards group's first canvas was below the 64 needed to be 'viable', but after some wandering around talking to the undecided and Clark people, we got up to 71, giving us one of the 9 delegates from our precinct.

So there was a lot of running around and horse trading between camps. The non-viable Gephardt contingent went en-masse for Kerry. When it was all over, Kerry & Dean ended up with 3 delegates each, Kucinich with 2, and Edwards with one. This means that the solid anti-war vote in our precinct came out on top of the more centrist candidates. But I live in what is probably one of the top ten liberal precincts in the whole country, so don't mind us.

People were generally quite nice, and things never got cut-throat or divisive; I heard over and over people saying that the important thing was beating Bush, and that all the candidates were pretty darn good. I really believe that as a life-long Democrat that every one of these guys is perfectly deserving of respect and support. Consider that every one of the top 4 candidates has served in government longer than the current president, and none of them has been touched by a hint of scandal.

Those of you who get your news from the right wing fantasy press probably don't agree, but whatever. At some point maybe the scales will fall from your eyes and you'll see how you've been led astray.

From: alleybcat
2004-01-20 06:38 am (UTC)
Wow.... I am so glad to read a first hand report of an Iowa Caucus. I was up most of the night a few days ago enthralled by the CNN report of how a caucus works. I love that you can try to presuade people to come to your side... do you think that it is an effective way to chose a candidate? do you think that it would work outside of Iowa?

(p.s. this is gil's better-half :-) speaking)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chaircrusher
2004-01-20 07:28 am (UTC)
Iowa has had this peculiar way of doing business since forever. The only reason we're still doing it this way is that a deal was cut with New Hampshire, such that Iowa could stay first in the nation so long as we didn't have a regular primary.

The caucus thing is cool as an event -- you get to mill around for hours with your neighbors. I'm not sure it would work in a more urban state. Would there be metal detectors? Would people in Boston want to be crammed into a room with the strangers who just happen to live in their precinct?

It's also not a secret ballot. That works in Iowa, but I think that it's important that people get to vote without intimidation.

Are you the top half or the bottom half?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)