I think that Senator Hatch would have preferred a primary system for determining
the candidate. I never liked the caucus system while in Utah. It
disenfranchised many voters. If you had to work on caucus night, if you were
out of town and in many cases if you had small children at home and had to take
care of them. A primary lets everyone vote and is a wider system. It was the
outcome for Bennett that energized the Hatch campaign to ensure that a small
group of activists did not control the system once again. This year the
caucuses had record breaking attendance but that will not last year after year.
Fatigue will set in and candidate will once again be selected by a small group
of political activists that tend to be on the extreme edges of both parties.
Now is the time to make the change and by the next cycle have primaries to allow
everyone a full opportunity.
I think a lot of delegates to their neighborhood caucuses had the impression
they were OBLIGATED to vote the apparent majority at their caucuses. Granted,
many attendees got involved with the purpose of retaining Hatch.Now
that the delegates understand that they're not necessarily COMMITTED to
vote for Hatch, they (hopefully) will study all the nominees and vote their
conscience.For MANY attendees, it was a new experience.
by his words, oper doesn't want the will of the people of Utah, as
represented by their votes in the caucuses, to prevail.That reminds
me of what happened in the North Dakota convention. Santorum got approimately
40% of the votes; at the convention Romney got approximaely 60% of the deleates.
The will of the North Dakota voters was subverted.That is a BIG
reason why we need to do away with the caucus system. Let the people go to the
polls and cast their votes. Then the will of the people will be known. Then
the candidate for whom the people voted will get what the people wanted -- the
The caucus system is fine. Besides, if Hatch won a fragmented primary, folks
like Marc would be griping that the "will of the people" was not heard
because no one got a majority. The caucuses give us a chance to interact with
pour neighbors to see what is up. Marc must be upset because he didn't get
elected to be a delegate. Either that or he's a RonPaulBot. I support
Hatch and I'm not a robot.
the question isn't may be ignored... It's how many times it has been
ignored and how many times will we allow it to be ignored?Time to
put the caucus system into the ground... About 6 feet deep!
Of COURSE Senator Hatch would have preferred a primary instead of the caucuses -
because that would have made it easier for him to win with a lot less effort.
The caucus system works just fine, and we'd be foolish to get rid of it.
All you gotta do to get rid of Hatch is vote democrat.
I wonder if Hatch will go Lieberman and run as an independent if he's
dumped by the Republicans. If so, I think he remains in the Senate...
The current (2012) make up of the US Senate is 47 Republicans and 53 Democrats.
The majority party in the Senate is in charge of choosing a majority leader and
making committee assignments, where the real business of the Senate takes place.
Committee chairmanships are determined by the Party in Power, and by seniority
of Senators. For the Republican party to re-gain control of the Senate this
year, ALL Republican senators up for re-election will need to be re-elected, and
in addition, there needs to be an additional 4 seats pick up by Republicans.
Key Senate races to watch this election cycle will take place in Maine,
Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wisconsin. Politically-savvy prognosticators
suggest that the Republicans have less than a 50/50 chance of re-gaining control
of the Senate in this year's election.Orrin Hatch is 78 years
old, Chris Herrod is 46 years old, and Dan Liljenquist is 37 years old. Each
meets the Constitutional requirements to run for the Utah US Senate seat.
Republican state convention delegates, your task is to select the candidate who
will best represent ALL the Utah electorate for the next 6 years. Vote with