Comments about ‘Leavitt: Romney backs Count My Vote initiative’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Feb. 23 2014 10:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
jean22
Bountiful, UT

Thank you, Mitt! A voice of reason!

Pappy
Saint George, UT

With all due respect Brother Romney, you were a loser in November, you are a loser in February. It is time to hang-it-up. I would love to see you and all the other "formers" go after the Party of Obama. Defeat them, not the Caucus system, if you want to regain the Senate and keep the House in 2014.

Utah_1
Salt Lake City, UT

Perhaps Mitt Romney should be blasting Count My Vote for having no run off.
"I’m concerned that that kind of approach (some caucus/convention systems) could end up with a minority deciding who the nominee ought to be. And that I think would be a mistake," he told The Globe. "I think we should have the majority of the party’s voters decide who they want as their nominee."

Utah's Count My Vote / Buy My Vote (CMV) doesn't get a majority of the parties voters to decide who they want. We do that now. CMV has no run off and almost eliminates the possibility of the party picking between 2 candidates, so virtually no majority candidate.

Count My Vote is proposing a primary with no run off and unlimited candidates. If the poorly drafted proposed law passes, the nominee will be selected by a minority almost every time. Currently a nominee is selected by 60% of the delegates or the majority at a primary between 2 candidates.

American Patriot
Eagle Mountain, UT

This whole Count My Vote operation is nothing more than a process for the power brokers in politics to eliminate the real thinking and political savvy individuals that function in the caucus system. The caucus system is like a burr under their saddle and they want to eliminate it as fast as possible.

Not having a caucus system will hurt those in rural voting precincts. In the end only those with the deep political pockets will win key offices in Utah and the people will end up being nothing more than fodder to the political elite. I was a state delegate and there's already enough corruption in the Utah GOP to last a lifetime so let's not make it worse by enacting the Count My Vote fiasco.

Utah_1
Salt Lake City, UT

in 2008, Jason Chaffetz beat 12 year incumbent Chris Cannon 60/40 in the prmary with Rep. Cannon endorsed by Pres. Bush and the 1st lady, Mitt Romney, Sen. Hatch and Bennett. When Jason Chaffetz won the nominee, the endorsers backed Jason.

I am thinking about why Utah changed from the neighborhood caucus election system in 1937 (just so one democratic state senate president could get elected governor for 8 years) and Count My Vote / Buy My Vote is proposing to change the system again (just so one former republican governor can get elected to the US Senate)

I really hope the public is smarter than that. In the 1937 case, it was the taxpayers that got stuck with the bill, and the current poorly drafted proposed law would do the same thing again. This time it will cost taxpayers, about 1/2 of it born by smaller counties, almost $1,000,000 and then about $900,000 every two years if Count My Vote / Buy My Vote were to pass.

Someone has to have a pretty big ego to want to buy a state's entire election system (or get Mitt to jump in as well) just to get elected to a specific office.

Linus
Bountiful, UT

"Convention/caucus systems exclude so many people," the email reads.

Wrong! The convention/caucus system excludes no one! When such falsehoods are told in support of a proposition, it feels so much like politics as usual lately.

All interested citizens are invited to their local caucus. All are invited to come informed and prepared to share their views. Anyone who attends, especially those who have done due diligence to be up-to-date on the issues, is eligible to be chosen to represent their caucus at the state convention. This system puts career politicians at risk because their future is in the hands of those most informed. Massive media campaigns paid for by big spenders and special interests can't control this system so they hate it.

Please, help Utah keep government in the hands of an informed public. Help defend the convention/caucus system from big money and life-time-tenured, divine-right politicians.

Mark from Montana
Davis County, UT

When a sitting politician tries to counter the will of the people, typically it is because he is either trying to protect his own ambitions / power, or he is very courageous in the face of a misled public.

Where do you think Curt Brambles reasoning lies?

Yorkshire
City, Ut

I would love to just go vote, be done, and have my vote count.

I know some people favor the caucus system but there are just SO many reason why people can't or won't get involved.

A simple vote gets rid of all those reasons and makes it so everyone can just have their say without all the rigamarole.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

Giving credit where it is due -- Romney got this one right.

Iron Rod
Salt Lake City, UT

Are some people feeling that their little empires might be threatened?
Really what is wrong in letting the people vote on this issue themselves?
Let the people decide

Editorial Notes
At Home In, UT

"An interesting thing about this, if you look at people who support it, almost anyone who has ever been a governor or a member of Congress or senator or a state legislator, they want this change to be made," Leavitt said Sunday.

Yes, it makes sense that those with established connections and power bases would indeed be in favor of this.

As governor, Mr. Leavitt lobbied for a western states primary, but would now disenfranchise most Utah counties-relegating them to "fly-overs".

There was no movement for this when the caucus system was serving the power players. The good 'ole boy Republicans are just sore in behalf of Bob Bennett. I believe Mike Leavitt would love to unseat Mike Lee and this is his way to do it. Remove the process from it's roots and put the power back in the brokers' hands, now that caucuses may no longer serve the good 'ole boys.

jim l
West Jordan, UT

Don't agree with Mitt on this one.

jcobabe
Provo, UT

Increased voter participation is a laudable objective, but I see no certainty from the "Count My Vote" initiative that this result will be obtained if direct primaries are implemented.

There are any number of recent schemes that have apparently been quite effective in turning out the popular vote. Third-hand accounts of supporting comments would appear to be of this genre. Letters from the Church urging people to participate in the local grass-roots political process would seem a more legitimate effort.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

All you need to understand about Count My Vote is that money drives the primaries and grit drives the caucuses. That's how we got Mike Lee and Jason Chaffetz.
If you take a look at those who are the driving force behind CMV they have one thing in common; MONEY.
It's sort of like the Utah Compact. It's driven by the Chamber.
These elite interests are not the interests of the people.

evansrichdm
west jordan , UT

Yes we should have each voted counted. I feel that in a caucus system even if you show up and make a point that the people that does get to vote can totally put aside you positions and vote the way they want. If we all get to vote that that opinion is not bush asided.

Sure you can say that only those that are up to date of issues should be allowed to voted, but how do you determine who is up to date on the issues. The cascus systems sounds to much like a elistist club that thinks they know better then the rest of us and we should just follow their ever so great wisdom. Let the people vote that is the Ameican way, at least the America I was taught to love and respect in the classroom.

NubliusPublius
SPRINGVILLE, UT

Yorkshire expresses exactly what is wrong with the direct primary system. It sounds so simple . . . Just go vote, be done, and have my vote count. Your duty as voter is so much more than that. It takes time and effort to become sufficiently informed to cast a responsible vote. CMV is supported by the big money big names that will run politics (even more than they already do) is the caucus system is eliminated. Your voted does count in the caucus. Under a direct primary, who really benefits? Radio and television stations, newspapers, billboard companies, and the few with money to buy access to their advertising.

FT
salt lake city, UT

Mitt's opposed to the caucus system because it's given the party a long string of ineffective, partisan politicans.

Doug S
Lindon, UT

I remember hearing Doug Wright describe how he and his staff wouldn't even publicly interview Jason Chaffetz in the run-up to the convention because Chaffetz was polling so low (KSL likes obscure candidates to remain obscure, apparently). When Wright talks about it, you can still hear in his voice a tone of outrage that this upstart--UPSTART!!!--got the Republican nomination by making an end run around Utah's major press outlets who, if they'd had their druthers, would have made darned sure that Chaffetz' candidacy never saw the light of day.

Chaffetz' successful dark-horse run--which was accomplished by making his case directly to locally elected delegates, rather than toadying to the state's current power structure for endorsements and funding--really tells me all I need to know about the virtues of the current system and the motives of the "[dis]Count My Vote" initiative. The people who think they can control the money and the narrative will tend to support the initiative; those who feel their only option is a bona fide grass-roots effort will tend to oppose it.

Jamescmeyer
Midwest City, USA, OK

It's interesting to try and consider something like this. On the one hand, I understand the cons of "Count My Vote" a lot more than the pros. On the other, Br. Romney is possibly the most sound and well-reasoning of any politician I've ever known, continuing to be vindicated in his concerns and claims to-date, particularly regarding the White House. I put a lot of trust in what he says, assuming such communications attributed to him in this matter are so.

DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

What a surprise!

Two powerful elite career politician "moderates" who have alienated their party's base are in favor of a scheme that ensures they, and their pals, with big bucks for advertising, and lots of name recognition can continue in office.

They want "increased voter participation" but only if the "voters" are basically ignorant except for a few snippets of propaganda fed to them by slick and expensive advertising. It worked to get Obama elected, so Republicans should select our candidates that way too?

Many people are (easily) confused into thinking that somehow voters will not be able to vote if caucuses continue. They are wrong! Caucuses help narrow the field, and if no clear consensus nominee emerges, there are still primary elections. And, of course, at the general election EVERYONE gets a chance to vote to pick from among the candidates of ALL the parties.

Don't fall for the "Buy my vote" propaganda and hype. The caucuses are much better for our state.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments