Which is really the better way to select our candidates — caucus/convention or primary elections? I have been both a state and county delegate many times over the last 30 years. I enjoyed it, but I am not sure the convention system gives us the best candidate or even a real reading of what the voters want.
Using the state-wide GOP races this year, we see some interesting numbers. In the U.S. Senate race, Orrin Hatch garnered 59 percent convention vs. 66.5 percent in the primary, a 7.3 percent increase. In the Attorney General race, John Swallow got 54.5 percent convention vs. 68 percent in the primary, or an increase of 13.5 percent. And in the Auditor's race, Auston Johnson got 55 percent convention vs. 46 percent in the primary, or a drop of 8.9 percent.
It would seem, and this is not scientific, that with the difference in each race, the voters in the primary do not trend the same as those at the convention. Perhaps it is an anomaly or perhaps the votes that come from the conventions are not an accurate representation of the voters. I think it is time to drop the caucus/convention system and go to a primary only system, preferably held early May.
Salt Lake City
- In our opinion: Scouting success will come...
- My view: Why moderates lost the caucus vote
- Top scandals and controversies of each United...
- Lois M. Collins: Kids' summer 'bucket list'...
- In our opinion: Big screen exploitation of...
- Letters: No welfare, ever
- Top scandals and controversies of each US...
- Tolerance and the same-sex marriage debate
- Letters: No welfare, ever 66
- Letter: The real death panel:... 30
- My view: Why moderates lost the caucus... 30
- Tolerance and the same-sex marriage debate 26
- In our opinion: Big screen exploitation... 25
- Matthew Sanders: Imploding trust in... 20
- Charles Krauthammer: Americans deserve... 17
- Michael Gerson: As government's... 15