Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CitizenUSA
“I’m still trying to figure out a way to quantify the impact of the early primaries on the process. I also have open/closed primary data, and I could run the numbers to see if independents are distorting the results.”

Another thing you may wish to crunch data on...

How many delegates were awarded based on caucus votes as opposed to direct vote primaries?

The simple truth is that winning in a caucus doesn’t relate to true support because the best funded is going to win.

With enough cash to invest any candidate can locate and bus to the caucus site enough supporters to stand in the corner and cheer, then go to a pizza party when its over.

Add to that the fact that a caucus isn’t a secret vote and you can see how things might be skewed as to how a real election might turn out. Would you want to caucus for who you really wanted if you knew that choice might get you booted from your church or even fired from your job?

20 posted on 02/07/2008 5:31:48 AM PST by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Beagle8U; CitizenUSA
Interesting analysis, CitizenUSA. There's been very little review of results and the process to this point. One thing that was interesting to me was the big divide between number of delegates and popular vote. I saw numbers yesterday of 4.2 Mil, McCain, 3.5 Mil, Romney, and 2.2 Mil Huckabee. And yet delegates were split something like 700+/280+/190+, for the three candidates.

How many delegates were awarded based on caucus votes as opposed to direct vote primaries?

That's a good question, Beagle8U. I wasn't familiar with cauceses prior to this primary season. (And I still don't really understand it.) After what happened in W. Virginia, this process stinks. I'd be ticked if I cast a vote that put my guy in the lead, then have two other voters combine their choices to override my vote, and the winner. Sounds like smoky, backroom, dirty politics versus a legitimate vote tally.

Add to that the fact that a caucus isn’t a secret vote and you can see how things might be skewed as to how a real election might turn out. Would you want to caucus for who you really wanted if you knew that choice might get you booted from your church or even fired from your job?

Another excellent point. A caller into Rush yesterday admitted he'd voted for Romney on Super Tuesday, but said he'd never admit to it in church. That wouldn't have happened in a caucus. We need more analysis of the various states processes. It's disheartening to realize a few states can weed out decent candidates before even a majority of people get a chance to voice their opinion.
22 posted on 02/07/2008 6:09:19 AM PST by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson