Why We Shouldn’t Give a Damn Who Wins the Iowa Caucuses

[CajunBlazer]

Early in the 2016 Presidential election year all eyes will be on Iowa because on February 1st the state will host their first in the nation Presidential election process, the Iowa caucuses. Presidential candidates have long since been crisscrossing the state shaking thousands of hands. The television news channels are already featuring the latest results of polls taken in Iowa and it has been projected that the Presidential campaigns will spend as much as $30 million dollars in the state before the caucuses have been completed. No doubt on that Monday evening the major networks will have scores of reporters on hand waiting breathlessly to report the latest vote tabulations. However, if you look closely at how the caucus process works, and how few voters are involved, you will inevitably come away wondering why anyone would care which candidates will win in Iowa.

http://www.cajunscomments.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=775&action=edit

[ProfessorGAC]

1. Been Saying That For Years

For the last 3 decades (at least) winners are a "follow the money" proposition.

The Iowa caucuses are useless but since the media loves the horserace, we hear all about it, ad nauseum.

[4139]

2. The Corn Ethanol Lobby always wins the Iowa caucuses...

[Fred Sanders]

3. 91% white Iowa and 94% NH are overinflated media-hyped regional beauty contests; the whole process is steeped in white privilege.

California, Texas, New York, Florida.....each has a county or city district with more voters than Iowa and NH combined.

[yeoman6987]

5. And good luck to candidates being able to afford campaigning in

California, New York, Texas and others. One reason they start with small states is because they are cheap and easy to travel in for hotel food and other things like commercials.

[oldandhappy]

4. Amen. Thank you.

Would like to see a chart for the past three decades re who wins in Iowa and who the candidates are and who wins the election.

[CajunBlazer]

6. I looked at that....

....and the results are inconclusive. Iowa has been a big media deal ever since a little known Southern politician named Jimmy Carter received his first real national attention by winning in Iowa. It didn't hurt a guy by the name of Barrack Obama either.

[oldandhappy]

7. Thank you

I guess I am not sure which Repub won in 2012 -- results kept changing. And I have no memory of 2008 at all. I accept your inconclusive! I have wondered about it recently.

[pnwmom]

8. I agree. Caucuses are not representative of the state's voting population. At all.

Only the most ardently political of voters will sit through the hours of voting on platform issues, etc.


We went to a caucus years ago -- never again. Once we finally got through all the reading of rules and platform points, etc, and got to actual voting, it turned out there was no one who wanted to be a delegate for the candidate the majority of us chose. This was probably because the delegate had to commit to a further day-long event on a Saturday.

So we had to elect someone who hadn't even voted for our candidate to represent us at the State caucus -- and hope he DID represent us.

Oh and there's that other thing -- there's no such thing as a secret ballot in a caucus.

[ileus]

9. ...unless our candidate wins then it's important.

[CajunBlazer]

10. Why do some of the states stick with the caucus process?

instead of moving to true election process. It just seems so cumbersome, archaic, and undemocratic.

[Charlie Brown]

11. didn't Tom Harkin win in 1992? nt

[CajunBlazer]

12. Yep....

Harken won Iowa in 1992. He received 78% of the vote while Bill Clinton received only 3%. In 1988 Dick Gephardt received 31% followed by Paul Simon (27%), Michael Dukakis (22%). On the Democratic side most of the time the eventual nominee won Iowa but that doesn't make the caucus process a democratic way to chose a nominee.

Recently on the Republican side Iowa has been less predictive. In 2012 Iowa was won with Rick Santorum 25% followed Mitt Romney also at 25%, but with fewer total votes. In 2008 Mike Huckabee won with 34% followed Mitt Romney (25%), Fred Thompson (13%), and John McCain (13%)