Does anyone know why Puerto Rico is now a primary and not a caucus?

[yourguide]

Does anyone know why they changed it? It all sounds a tad on the shady side to me...

[yourguide]

1. ???

[babylonsister]

2. Here's one take; the date has been changed, too:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/07/puerto_rico_democrats_seek_to.html

[yourguide]

4. Thanks for that...

just what I suspected/needed to know.

[MonkeyFunk]

3. What's shady about it?

I don't understand.

[yourguide]

6. go back to making

your crappy powerpoint videos on behalf of John McCain and Karl Rove.

I emailed the link to the McCain campaign and told them you were looking for a gig.

[MonkeyFunk]

8. What the hell are you talking about?

I've never made a video in my life!

Wow, that's some kinda crazy!

[yourguide]

10. My apologies monkey

I got you confused with an HRC supporter that is making videos attacking obama.

As much as I dislike Hillary, I would never make ads trashing her.

Anyway, I rescind and apologize.

[MonkeyFunk]

11. Oh... and here's a bit of irony from YOUR profile:

"Yes, you may find it impossible to believe but I actually disagree with you, I am a democrat, and I am a member of this board who wants to see the BEST democrat get the nod.

So if you are here for those reasons stop assuming anyone who disagrees with you is a troll, knucklehead."

[yourguide]

15. I didnt call you or anyone else a troll

not sure how your point is relevent.


And of course, trolling my profile is always charming.


:hi:

[MonkeyFunk]

18. You accused me, wrongly, of

working for John McCain.

You're really not well.

[yourguide]

19. Yes and I APOLOGIZED

and stated I got YOU confused with another poster.

[MonkeyFunk]

22. OK

now can you explain what you think is shady about PR changing from a caucus to a primary?

Michigan also did that this year. States seem to do it with some frequency - I'm not understanding what's shady about it.

[yourguide]

24. well it seems a little odd

that it's been scheduled as a caucus, and as far as I know it's always been a caucus, but suddenly now that every delegate is now in play it is changed to something that HRC feels is more favorable to her.

that's all, the timing is suspect, however regardless of it being a caucus or a primary I dont think this state will be favorable to obama at all.

what I also find unusual is the fact the PR is even allowed to vote in the primary when they arent allowed to vote in the general.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. You're not explaining

When was it changed from a caucus to a primary? What preceded the change that makes you suspicious?

Who do you think is behind this suspicious change?

You're not answering why it's shady. Perhaps they just want more people to participate?

[yourguide]

28. what is suspicious

is that traditionally it's always been a caucus, but caucus' for whatever reason do tend to favor Obama. Now that its a tight race, it's flipping over from what it's traditionally been to something that seems to favor another candidate.

That's all.

[MonkeyFunk]

30. So it's becoming MORE democratic

That's good, no?

Isn't it better that more people get to vote? Or is it shady because you think it might not benefit your candidate?

[yourguide]

32. No, it's shady

because it's arbitrarily changed in favor of one candidate.


Look, like I said - I don't think he's going to do well in PR but I think HRC supporters would be calling foul if PA suddenly changed to a caucus so lets be fair here.

[MonkeyFunk]

37. Allowing more people to vote

arbitrarily favors one candidate?

That's some pretty twisted thinking.

[PATRICK]

5. The sensible answer

they gave was to avoid the caucus chaos seen in other states. I think it is very likely to be dangerously intense, expensively and physically overwhelming and in the final heat of a hot contest a controversial disaster in the making. They have excellent Dem ballot turnout every election and the caucuses are just an appendix tacked on to the assumed insignificance of their primary vote. The state party is free to determine format and this has very rational and fair-minded explanations.

Somehow, because of Obama's caucus strength we are assuming this is a ballots vs. caucus election which makes them both appear somehow rigged or illegitimate or the campaigns more concerned about scooping up delegates than accommodating people and states to express their choice as best they can.

I think Obama will easily take Puerto Rico by either method.

[yourguide]

7. Not so sure about that

she typically splits latino voters 65%/35%.

[ButterflyBlood]

12. Puerto Ricans aren't the sem as mainland voters

Much like Hawaii vs. mainland Asians.

[yourguide]

16. My BF said the same thing

and said the puerto rican community tends to go against what the latino community does in the US so you never know...

[quantass]

39. But didn't Clinton pardon that Puerto Rican terroist group as a favor

Way back when Bill was prez he pardoned the 14-member of a puerto rican terrorist group that bombed some 40+ places in america and hillary is was the one that asked bill to do it because she wanted to build a stronger tie with latinos so when she ran for prez she could have their vote...so i am guessing she has the island.

[jenmito]

9. Obama expects to lose Puerto Rico. It was leaked out in that memo accidentally given to the media

as it was attached to some other papers. So far he predicted every state correctly except for Maine, which they thought they'd lose but they won.

[yourguide]

14. Like I said, she is getting latinos 65/35.

I cant imagine him winning - tightening the gap maybe but winning, no.

[jalynn]

17. Hmm...

No chance of Obama thugs strong arming in a primary, as "rumored" to be happening at caucuses. Article states,

"The Puerto Rico contest is expected to favor Clinton, who has done well so far among Hispanic voters and represents many native Puerto Ricans in New York. Changing from a caucus to a primary, as Democratic officials on the island have proposed, would likely increase Clinton's chances as well."

[yourguide]

20. oh STOP

the only strong arming has been the lawsuits filed on behalf of the HRC campaign and the leaked memos from the same campaign stating "take control of the caucus".

[ButterflyBlood]

13. Because they fearred a caucus couldn't handled projected turnout

There's been chaos in other caucus states due to that.

[ruggerson]

21. Democracy sucks, doesn't it?

We can't have more people voting. That's bad.

[yourguide]

26. No, not at all but again

it's always been a caucus as far as I know so it does seem suspect that it's changed.


regardless I dont think he'll do well either way in PR.

[JackORoses]

23. because Hillary needs PR and we all know she sucks at Caucuses

so she just had them change it.

[McCamy Taylor]

25. Many Puerto Ricans are also of African descent. How do you know Obama won't do well?

Maybe you should wait to see how the vote comes out?

The population is Latin/African right? They are a US colony/state. Maybe they will be attracted to Obama because of his international experience.

[yourguide]

29. I hope so...but we shall see.

As another poster pointed out, even on the obama internal projection of wins/delegates, they have PR squarely in the loss column.

I wish could see that memo.

[rodeodance]

31. ITS SWEET.

[inf8]

33. Puerto Rico has 63 delegates, winner-takes-all. More important than any other state.

The margin of delegates in California was 44 so it's even bigger than California.

[yourguide]

34. Nope

it's not winner take all. delegates are decided proportionately

Both Brooks and Barone are wrong. Puerto Ricans will vote according to much the same proportional representation rules that govern Democratic party primaries and caucuses in the 50 states. The notion of Puerto Rico being a "winner-take-all" jurisdiction stems from previous presidential primary contests, which were pretty much over by the time the Puerto Ricans got to vote. John Kerry swept Puerto Rico in 2004 just as Al Gore triumphed in 2000 because they were the only candidates left in the race, and the party bosses could manipulate the caucus process.

This time will be very different, according to several Puerto Rican Democratic leaders I contacted earlier today by phone. At present, Puerto Rico is scheduled to hold a caucus--not a primary--on June 7. If the race is still competitive, participation is likely to be very high, and there is no way that one candidate will sweep all the delegates.

-snip-

Traditionally, he says, Puerto Rico has chosen to hold caucuses because they are "less expensive" than a primary, but the island may switch to a primary this time round, if the race is still competitive.

from: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/will_puerto_rico_decide_everyt.html

[inf8]

35. I stand corrected.

Thanks. I have heard reports that Clinton could win big there because of how Bill Clinton stopped the US military from dropping bombs around the island in military drills. In any case, math-wise, it wouldn't make much difference since delegates are rewarded proportionally.

[HeraldSquare212]

36. Because the party leader supports Clinton and she does better in primaries.

Just another instance of changing the rules in the middle of the game.

[MonkeyFunk]

38. I can't believe people are seriously

complaining about holding a primary over a caucus because of who they think benefits.

Astounding. Are you really afraid of letting as many people as possible vote?