Which Aspect Of The Primary Process Do You Hate More -- Caucuses or Superdelegates?

[THUNDER HANDS]

Caucuses are limited excersizes that don't allow absentee-voting or voting for people who can't make at a designated time.

Superdelegates aren't regular voters, yet they count towards the overall vote.

Which is more undemocratic? Which do you hate more?

Caucuses seem to favor Obama.
Superdelegates seem to favor Clinton.

[joshcryer]

1. Caucuses are essentially local level things that are the exact opposite of voting.

You go in and have to deal with campaigning right there in the polling place. Lots of pressure.

Delegates, superdelegates, and caucusing in m opinion are all garbage, but I think caucuses have the most room for disenfranshisement or manipulation. I think Kerry won in 2004 because he had superior caucusing power compared to Dean.

[mrmx9]

3. I prefer caucuses to early voting - its madness you can cast a vote one month before election day!

Caucuses involve people more as they debate the issues - there is nothing wrong with them in most states where union machine politics isn't a factor.

By contrst early voting ruins primaries as you are not getting the best representation of people's views on election day!

[joshcryer]

4. But what happens is the most vocal and charasmatic people come out and rule the day.

People can't actually sit down and have a discussion, it's more about people standing around yelling "vote for us!"

[CTyankee]

8. With all of its flaws, caucusing is probably more similar to Athenian style

"pure" democracy, which has its flaws certainly (look what happened to the Athenian Empire and Democracy in the 5th century!).

I voted for superdelegates. I can't think of a more undemocratic and manipulative idea. It repulses me to even think of it as existing in our party...

[NoBorders]

2. Superdelegates are about connections and party elites

Caucuses are about regular folks getting involved.

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. Most super delegates are Democrats who the people elected to imporant offices

I that is a strong enough democratic link. We the people have elected them as our leaders, they deserve a say in this. I do not feel the same about most if not all Party officials being super delegates however.

[NWHarkness]

5. I'm in favor of both

We don't just vote for president at our caucus, we elect our local party officials, circulate petitions for state and local candidates and recruit volunteers for the fall campaign. They are, if anything, more democratic than a primary election, because they allow a maximum citizen input into the political process.

And what, exactly, is wrong with allowing the people who actually carry the party on their backs every year to have some say in who we nominate every fourth year? You want more progressive superdelegates? Elect more progressives to political and party offices?

But, you know, I'm old fashioned. I think the Democrats ought to be picking the Democratic nominee.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

6. neither...I hate the "open" part of the many states Primaries