Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
as for being private, caucus voting is very different from poll booth voting. To answer your question; no!
as for restaurant workers I doubt many had intentions of being delegates, so unless they are worrying about the process, I don't think the rest of us need to worry.
I think restaurant workers, or people who work evenings in general, might have been interested in selecting delegates through the caucus process, but their work schedules prohibit their participation. That is problematic in a society where participation in the election process is essential.
I think restaurant workers, or people who work evenings in general, might have been interested in selecting delegates through the caucus process, but their work schedules prohibit their participation. That is problematic in a society where participation in the election process is essential.
As someone who has lived in Iowa since 2008, or three caucuses, I have to say that I sincerely doubt it.
I'm currently involved in rehearsals for a play. Choosing to go to rehearsal last night rather than the caucus was a no-brainer for me because I'm not interested in any of the R or D candidates this time around. I expected there to only be about five people there (out of a cast of about 65), but instead there were only about five people missing. In discussing the matter with a few people in their 30s I found that several of them had never been to a caucus and really had no interest in what went on there.
Bottom line, people who are very tuned in to the political process tend to have a hard time understanding how little the vast majority of the country cares. It's a little sad, but that's just how it is.
And all of that aside, employers in Iowa are generally very accommodating to those who want to take off to caucus. At restaurants and other business that employ mostly part-time help there is always someone willing to take an extra shift to their co-workers can attend.
Yup. That can happen if you don't start paying attention until a few weeks before.
It can also happen if you start paying attention in late 2014 when potential candidates start putting together exploratory committees and just don't want to commit to a candidate until you have every possible piece of information available.
As someone who has lived in Iowa since 2008, or three caucuses, I have to say that I sincerely doubt it.
I'm currently involved in rehearsals for a play. Choosing to go to rehearsal last night rather than the caucus was a no-brainer for me because I'm not interested in any of the R or D candidates this time around. I expected there to only be about five people there (out of a cast of about 65), but instead there were only about five people missing. In discussing the matter with a few people in their 30s I found that several of them had never been to a caucus and really had no interest in what went on there.
Bottom line, people who are very tuned in to the political process tend to have a hard time understanding how little the vast majority of the country cares. It's a little sad, but that's just how it is.
And all of that aside, employers in Iowa are generally very accommodating to those who want to take off to caucus. At restaurants and other business that employ mostly part-time help there is always someone willing to take an extra shift to their co-workers can attend.
Which doesn't mean that some people might very well have been interested in attending. But their work schedules prohibit it.
Just because you and the people you know are not interested does not mean that no one is interested. In fact, the large turnout actually rebuts your assertion.
Good for O'Marley aND Huckabee for dropping out, now it's time for Gilmore, Santorum, Fiorina, and Paul to drop. Carson too.
Bush, Kasich, Christie should wait until after New Hampshire.
I'm surprised that Santorum hasn't already dropped out. He put all of his poker chips down on Iowa.
Paul has a specific niche that he plays well to, so although he may not be racking up delegates left and right, he may stay in to get his message across.
I can't see much of a path for Carson either. If he does poorly in New Hampshire, which could very well happen, he may drop out then.
Carly Fiorina may have a larger audience in New Hampshire, but I think she'll drop out if she does poorly there.
As for Jim Gilmore, why drop out? I can't imagine that he's spending much money. He must be doing this for fun.
Which doesn't mean that some people might very well have been interested in attending. But their work schedules prohibit it.
Just because you and the people you know are not interested does not mean that no one is interested. In fact, the large turnout actually rebuts your assertion.
Since you obviously chose not to read the last paragraph of my post, here it is again:
Quote:
Originally Posted by duster1979
And all of that aside, employers in Iowa are generally very accommodating to those who want to take off to caucus. At restaurants and other business that employ mostly part-time help there is always someone willing to take an extra shift to their co-workers can attend.
Good for O'Marley aND Huckabee for dropping out, now it's time for Gilmore, Santorum, Fiorina, and Paul to drop. Carson too.
Bush, Kasich, Christie should wait until after New Hampshire.
Interesting choices, given that Paul finished stronger than all three of the candidates that you think should hold on through New Hampshire, and Fiorina finished virtually even with two of them. Care to elaborate?
I read the article before posting the link, so I understand what you're saying about momentum, but why does the media need to influence voters in the first place?
If Massachusetts were first, for example, I doubt if someone like Cruz would have gotten a lot of votes. I grew up there and proudly displayed my "Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts" bumper sticker.
I voted for the first time in 1972. That was when the eligibility age was 21. (oops, now I'm telling my age
LOL! Well I get to be younger than you but not younger enough to brag.
I actually like the fact 2 smaller states go first, followed by a bigger but not huge state. I like the idea that there is a population that really gets to meet the candidates up close and personal over a long period of time. I like that the media gets to dig deep into their backgrounds one by one over months as they rise to the top. I feel like a real vetting goes on this way.
I do think they could take turns with which 2 smaller states go first, as well as which state is third.
I think restaurant workers, or people who work evenings in general, might have been interested in selecting delegates through the caucus process, but their work schedules prohibit their participation. That is problematic in a society where participation in the election process is essential.
Exactly!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
