SO, who knew Iowa and New Hampshire, states that consist of less then 2% of the population and do not proportionally represent our diverse population would be so pivotal or to be perceived as such in determining the Presidential nominee. I get it, it is possibly related to having the “Napoleonic syndrome”. You would understand this if you were as vertically challenged as I am. Yet, they are not the smallest populated states, so I was curious to understand how they carry such clout.
I have researched the current Democratic process regarding caucus and a primary. A caucus is when voters meet in local venues to discuss the candidates they support and try to influence other voters. Everyone present knows your position since voting is usually by show of hands or standing in groups. A primary is similar to a general election where voters cast their ballots in private. Both processes require candidates to achieve 15% or more of the overall votes to get a portion of the delegates assigned to them.
To put it bluntly, caucuses are run by the Party; are time consuming; driven by peer pressure if your candidate does not get 15% and often held in confined areas. Primaries, run by the state, take up less time, and are secret ballots that often equal a larger turnout.
Presidential caucuses, limited to a select group of elected officials, started informally with Jefferson’s nomination and ended in 1824 with Jackson’s. To appear more inclusive, Party Conventions replaced the caucus and were the polarizing factions up until 1968. They were influenced by “Party Bosses” not necessary representing the interests of the mass population. Often a “Dark Horse” or a compromise candidate who owed future favors ended up with the nomination.
So how did Iowa and New Hampshire become first? States determine how delegates are chosen. Smaller states have more restrictive requirements and a smaller pool of decision makers. Iowa laws require a pyramid system of selecting delegates while New Hampshire just wrote it into their State Constitution that they would be the first democratic primary. The Party has not challenged it.
I wondered why do campaigns start two years in advance. Don’t they have day jobs they should be showing up for? In my research I realized candidates prior to the 20thcentury did not even campaign. It was considered self-serving when the position should be an honor not something one should be trying to claim. My “WOW” moment (yes, I know who Oprah is) in the current election was when I realized most candidates worked for either State or Federal Government. So we are paying their salaries and yet they are not showing up to work.
In my opinion we should shorten the time frame for candidates to run ads and campaign. It certainly would reduce the cost and have an audience more focused on political issues debated by candidates versus drawn out, boring rhetoric.
Check out this short New York Times video regarding the Iowa Caucus.
On another note what is going on in Rhode Island with the women starting their own caucus?
A good source of information and interesting read for adult’s-
Cowan, Geoffrey. Let the People Rule. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2016.
For the younger generation -
Roosevelt, Eleanor and Markel, Michelle. When you Grow up to Vote. New York: Roaring Brook Press, 2018
I have researched the current Democratic process regarding caucus and a primary. A caucus is when voters meet in local venues to discuss the candidates they support and try to influence other voters. Everyone present knows your position since voting is usually by show of hands or standing in groups. A primary is similar to a general election where voters cast their ballots in private. Both processes require candidates to achieve 15% or more of the overall votes to get a portion of the delegates assigned to them.
To put it bluntly, caucuses are run by the Party; are time consuming; driven by peer pressure if your candidate does not get 15% and often held in confined areas. Primaries, run by the state, take up less time, and are secret ballots that often equal a larger turnout.
Presidential caucuses, limited to a select group of elected officials, started informally with Jefferson’s nomination and ended in 1824 with Jackson’s. To appear more inclusive, Party Conventions replaced the caucus and were the polarizing factions up until 1968. They were influenced by “Party Bosses” not necessary representing the interests of the mass population. Often a “Dark Horse” or a compromise candidate who owed future favors ended up with the nomination.
So how did Iowa and New Hampshire become first? States determine how delegates are chosen. Smaller states have more restrictive requirements and a smaller pool of decision makers. Iowa laws require a pyramid system of selecting delegates while New Hampshire just wrote it into their State Constitution that they would be the first democratic primary. The Party has not challenged it.
I wondered why do campaigns start two years in advance. Don’t they have day jobs they should be showing up for? In my research I realized candidates prior to the 20thcentury did not even campaign. It was considered self-serving when the position should be an honor not something one should be trying to claim. My “WOW” moment (yes, I know who Oprah is) in the current election was when I realized most candidates worked for either State or Federal Government. So we are paying their salaries and yet they are not showing up to work.
In my opinion we should shorten the time frame for candidates to run ads and campaign. It certainly would reduce the cost and have an audience more focused on political issues debated by candidates versus drawn out, boring rhetoric.
Check out this short New York Times video regarding the Iowa Caucus.
On another note what is going on in Rhode Island with the women starting their own caucus?
A good source of information and interesting read for adult’s-
Cowan, Geoffrey. Let the People Rule. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2016.
For the younger generation -
Roosevelt, Eleanor and Markel, Michelle. When you Grow up to Vote. New York: Roaring Brook Press, 2018