Oh, you mean like....Having a PRIMARY?I guess the
delgates don't like/trust their own caucus system.
So even the delegates think the system is messed up and the voters should be the
ones to decide who represents them. Interesting, no?
Although I am in no way a liberal, I believe in what LDS Liberal said above. The
caucus system is set up so that they go to the convention and vote the wishes of
the people they are representing. Now we have someone who said that they decided
to let the voters do the job? The voters did the job when they voted you as
delegate. What is it going to be? Caucus or primary? Make a decision and
let's go with it. Don't make your own decisions on what you think you
should do which in this case is not what are in the by-laws of the convention.
We attended meetings to elect you to do your job, not go there and do what you
want. We can get that kind of treatment with our folks in Washington, D.C.
Please do not be dishonest with our system. Change it, do what it says, or get
To Let's be real | 8:28 a.m.The caucus delegates did exactly
what they were supposed to do (and this is a BIG part why I don't like the
caucus system). They are not supposed to do what the people attending the
caucus want them to do. They are supposed to review all the alternatives, and
select the one thy think is best. They did do their jobs.My
preference is for a primary election. As I have said numerous times, at least
with a primary election the voters know that their votes will go where they want
the votes to go.
I appreciate so much the delegates allowing me to vote AGAINST Hatch.I only wish they would have done the same thing with Herbert.Now,
I'll be voting for Peter Cook since there's NO WAY I would vote for
Herbert after I saw what he did regarding illegal immigrant trespassers.Its time for a change in the Governors slot anyway. The I-15 corridor
payoff, the DABC debacle, the UHP trooper who KEEPS her job after falsifying
reports; ALL these things tell me we badly need a change in executive
leadership.I'm HOPING Peter Cooke WILL take his oath of office
seriously regarding lawbreakers present in the state of Utah. Too many years of
one party Governorships makes for a WHOLE LOT of department heads that need
Furry,I agree with all you said in your post. I hope you are not offended
by me so saying, as we so often disagree.LDS Lib,I hope you
realize BOTH parties operate under the caucus system. And one of the letters to
the editor this morning was from a first time delegate who said they did NOT
like the caucus system.I asked a party operative what one could do
to push away from the causus to preferably a primary system, or at least an
adjustment to the caucus system where the delegates are allocated according to
the support the candidates recieve at the caucus - I got no response.
What a shame, now misinformed voters will force Hatch out of office, at a time
when he can finally be of value to our State. He's build credibility and
tenure in Washington and now we'll throw that away. What a shame to
relegate Utah to the back of the pack again. And if this is really a problem
then why in the world wouldn't we want someone there who can actually help
our state vs a newbie who will have little ability to do anything.
"Let's be real" said: "The caucus system is set up
so that they go to the convention and vote the wishes of the people they are
representing. Now we have someone who said that they decided to let the voters
do the job? The voters did the job when they voted you as delegate."My caucus elected me as a delegate specifically because I had not made
up my mind and they trusted me to make a good decision when I got more
information at the convention. I think this is often the case. 2/3rds of our
caucus wanted hatch, 1/3 weren't sure. I think our caucus was well
represented by the three delegtates they chose.
I think the system is good. The primary comes around for candidates where it is
too close to call, such as we saw with Hatch. If the delegates can represent
that there is strong enough support to avoid a primary, then great. If they
can't, then it goes back to the voters to make sure that they don't
mess up (like Obama did with the health care). The primary is a safety net for
I'm sure that a few delegates specifically threw their vote. But I am also
sure that there wasn't any kind of organized effort to avoid a primary. As
a delegate, who spoke with other delegates, I have a pretty good sense of
this.But let me expand on the difference between the
caucus/convention and a primary:In a primary, voters cast their
votes almost exclusively based on a few sound bites. They don't have a
chance to really get to know the candidates, so they can be easily swayed by
advertising. Candidates are elected based on sound bites rather than a larger
view of how the candidates will represent us.In contrast, in the
caucus/convention system, the delegates get a chance to really intimately get to
know the candidates. For the most part, they vote based on learning how the
candidate would represent them, not just on a couple of sound bites.If we can just learn to trust our precinct delegates to represent us, just as
we have to trust our elected representatives, we'll realize that the
caucus/convention system is FAR superior to a primary in selecting our political
@Johnny Triumph"What a shame, now misinformed voters will force
Hatch out of office, at a time when he can finally be of value to our
State."I think that you'll find that your concerns are
unwarranted. The beauty of a primary is that most people only vote based on
sound bites.Hatch, as almost all incumbents, has a large war chest
to outspend his opponent. Since Hatch was allowed into a primary, he has already
won the election. All he has to do is spend his money to send out lots of sound
bites that tell people how wonderful he is and how terrible his opponent is, and
the voters will vote for him in droves.
Another headline by the Deseret News to persuade voters that Hatch is the man. I
don't believe a delegate would not use their power to vote how they want.
Everyone I talked to voted for Hatch much to my dismay. I don't understand
why all voters can't be informed. I wasn't a delegate but my country
means enough to me that I read the paper and stay informed. It hasn't taken
any great effort on my part to do so. It's so sad that money can buy
elections in this day an age where we have the internet to inform us of what our
Senators and Congressman are doing and voting on.I would just add that it is too
bad that campaign finance laws are so lax that it allows such discrepancies to
exist so that one person gets to spread his lies so much so that people believe
him. I like the France’s campaign laws for that reason. The candidates
there can’t advertise and are supposedly given equal tv time by the news.
Look at Hatch's record it isn't good and has made America bankrupt.
We are just left to vote on Liberal Republican's once again. I hope the
Delegates are happy and I wish they would have done their homework.
As a contributor to this article and a state delegate, I didn't anticipate
my thoughts being misconstrued to mean that I think the caucus/delegate system
is messed up or ineffective or flawed. Actually, quite the contrary. I think
the delegate system is a reflection of our representative system at large and it
promotes informed voting. I think the general public at large would be hard
pressed to get the in-depth look at the candidates that the delegates receive.
For those who want a popular vote do you also want every piece of legislation to
be decided by a popular vote rather than our congressmen & women? We elect
representatives and grant them a level of trust to do our bidding. If you came out of caucus feeling like your views weren't represented
then you either need to make sure there are more like minded individuals there
or accept that perhaps your views aren't supported by a majority of people
that attend caucus.
To lost in DC 1:24 p.m. 4/25Furry,I agree with all you said in
your post. I hope you are not offended by me so saying, as we so often
disagree.--------------------------Not in the slightest.
I agree with a fair amount of what you say too. We both have a
right to our opinions, and I enjoy exchanging opinions (to a lawyer that's
called "arguing" - no connotation of acrimony intended). I enjoy a good
argument. Arguing with those who think differently gives me good insight, and
avenues of thought to explore. I learn things, and that's good.