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

Return to article »

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

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Santaquin, UT

I love Mitt, but he is wrong here...

Everyone can (and should) get involved...

If this is taken away, only those with Mitt's money will be sent to Washington...

Bad news for the rest of us...

Don of the Wasatch
Alpine, UT

The caucus system has failed the majority of Republican voters in this state. The majority of Republicans are not Tea Party extremists, but Reagan-type Republicans. In the past caucus elections, Reagan Republicans have been basically pushed out of participation because they were they were labeled as “RINO’s” – people who were not worthy to be called Republicans – they were not Tea Partiers. A real primary election where everybody’s voice counts is the only fair direction to go – and no compromised bill that would still prevent every Republican’s vote from counting. Politics is politics, and those who want to keep the caucus system and prevent the primary voting system know they would be losing huge political power if they can’t maintain their control through intimidation with the caucus system. But it’s time to let the true Republican majority dictate the course of Utah Republican policies.


@mcdugall -- "funding fathers", a Freudian slip? The caucus system gives ordinary people a much more active role in the political process than would ever be possible under direct primary. Be sure to plan so that you can attend your caucus this year and see what it's all about! Democrats meet on March 18; Republicans on March 20.


If you really want our vote to count? Ask most people what they think of the "Electoral College".
That system was created to insure the "right people" get elected. A popular vote is required for a constitutional-democracy to elect public officials by the will of the people.
Then and only then will each and every vote truly have the power it deserves.

And of course an end to legalized bribery which violates the very principles we hold most dear. Equality, fairness, impartiality, which is protected by law by the vote.
Bribery cannot be made lawful. Our current reality is flawed and without use of the facts available to all of its US citizen members. Political contributions, by corporations under corporate mission laws, can only be committing bribery by intent. Otherwise shareholder's money could be used for fraud/embezzlement and be justified under law, which it cannot. Ask any Utah State Bar member if this logic is correct?
BRIBERY: The offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of something of value for the purpose of influencing the action of an official in the discharge of his or her public or legal duties...unlawful by constitutional Equality Under All Laws..

New Harmony, UT

Mitt, I thought you better than this. I guess the others were right, and you are part of the the Old Dog Rino group. A sad day for republicans. Count My Vote is just a cover for "Let's get rid of the hick vote", they don't know who to vote for anyway. I guess you believe only the rich and famous should be elected then. Talk to some real voters in the State before you make such a commitment.


"don of the wasatch" I'm not the least intimidated by my caucus. My caucus contains a couple of big names in the Republican party that I'm sure you'd recognize. I say what I want to say, (yes, ALL Republicans believe in free speech), at the end of the night I know for a fact that there are no hard feelings. Sometimes people don't agree with me, but thats' o.k. AT LEAST I got to say it.
That doesn't happen in a direct primary. The winner of a direct primary will be the candidate with the most money and who has the backing of just a few party insiders.

People on these comment boards are always "railing" about BIG MONEY in politics. The caucus system, while it doesn't solve all of that problem, at least helps.

Lehi, UT

Count My Vote is exactly that, a change so that MY vote gets counted. I don't understand the need to stick with the caucus system. I have participated in this system for years. Family members have been delegates. It is flawed. My vote never counts. I don't get to vote for who represents my party. All I get to vote for is a delegate. Who knows what that delegate will do once they get to the convention.

Remove the middle man and let me vote. I'm smart enough I don't need a delegate doing that for me. I know who I want to vote for.

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT

Few DN readers are as suspicious as I am about Mitt Romney... the politician.

I don't see him reaching for some type of political advantage with this opinion...if in fact this is his opinion.

City, Ut

ksampow responding to Linus
Linus: "The convention/caucus system excludes no one!"

Actually it does exclude many because jobs, illness, emergency, family needs, or military service keep them from coming. If you can not make it at the scheduled time you are shut out of the process. I am a precinct chair and as such am one of those who have a voice in what is decided, but I know many are unfairly excluded by the current system. It is arrogant to think that that primary voters (which would surely include current caucus attenders) will be swayed by big spenders, while caucus attenders and convention delegates are above being influenced by big spenders. At every convention I have attended (and I have been to MANY of them) candidates are giving away flags, food, and other freebies to win delegates' votes.

Identifies part of what is wrong with caucuses.

There is no less finagling there than any other part of politics.

People who would be GREAT at being endorsed, nominated & elected often have no stomach for all the drama & futility. They have seen what a hammering good people take at the hands of those with a lust for power.

Pablo Sanchez De La Cruz Ramos
woods cross, utah

Your vote does count, it always has.

The biggest lie I have seen perpetuated is that the caucus system does not count their vote.

For those of you who are buying into this lie, allow me to share the process of the Caucus System:

- The Caucus is not the actual election. It is merely the staging ground to select a candidate to run.

- All of us have the opportunity to elect a neighborhood representative. This individual could be you if you would like.

- That individual spends hours and hours learning of the candidates for your specific party.

- The delegates vote on for the candidate they believe will best represent the people.

- Then, that candidate runs in the actual election and everyone votes and every vote is counted. The Caucus is not the election.

- So, anyone can run for office, regardless of money and backing. If they have great ideas, they have a chance to be the party representative to run in the actual election, which is not the Caucus convention.

- Without the Caucus Convention, it will be those with the most money and runs the most ads and buys the most votes.

City, Ut

coleman51 said: ...In the caucuses, only the extreme votes count. They are in no way representative of the general public. In my own district, extreme libertarians have taken over the vote and as such, our delegates don't represent my views. Someone who is conservative is not represented unless he holds extreme views.


Caucuses would seem a great idea and should be, but there is still a power structure and a 'hierarchy' that means some people get THEIR way at the expense of others with just as much right.

Provo, ut

Mitt you might want to read it before you agree with your buddy Mike. Its a bad proposal and I like the concept of branding it "buy my vote" which is the truer moniker for the idea.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

He rules Utah.

Deep Space 9, Ut

I find it funny that the people who are for the Count My Vote idea keep saying that their votes don't count in the caucus meetings. The fact is that they do. What they are really saying is that the results of the caucus meeting are not what they like.

Since they don't like the outcome, they are going to change the system to something that is easier to manipulate to their favor.

Sugar City, ID

"the real thinking and political savvy individuals that function in the caucus system."

It is really hard to believe you really said this. I suggest you change the mirrors on your walls.

Springville, UT

Can someone explain to me why the far right does not want a system where the voters can choose, but instead want a system that is controlled by insiders? I would really like to know. Is it they hate any sort of change no matter what, or is it because they are afraid the general population is more moderate than they are. It has to be one or the other.


From the posts here Looks like a bunch of people are confused about impact of primaries and the purchase of a place on the ballot by caucuses.Working people have to as implied,"work" and caucuses take time out of that essential activity leaving most folks out of the political process because they are somewhere else and cannot afford the time,effort and expense to ".politic".
In Utah where there is really only one party what difference does it make? Plenty because if the Teaparty infests and uses their typical insiduous ways say goodbye to sensible candidates,discourse and Republicans who are becoming as scarce as Ardvarks.Rinos are far more American that Cruz and others who seek the Presidency but would starve women and children,force women to bear the children of rapists or seprated husbands while subsidizing billion dollar corporations and plunging us into deficit with tax cuts for only the wealthy one percent and churches that politic incessantly.

sherlock holmes
Eastern, UT

The caucus supporters cannot frame an answer to a simple question:

Why not vote on the candidates instead of the delegates? It is time to remove the middlemen/women

LaVerkin, Utah

Joan Watson, you are correct in the last statement you made. You said, "We are either individuals with self directed functioning brains, or we are sheep led to and fro by the interests of others."
Unfortunately you think that the sheep go to the caucuses. They do not, they wait for the thirty-second television ad and then make a very big decision that is representative of those expensive thirty-second television ads that are indeed made by the interest of others. The individuals with self directed functioning brains take it upon themselves to study in depth the issues. And, those issues are unfortunately not discussed very well in those ads. Money produces those ads, and those who listen to and look at such ads are the sheep. Those with self directed functioning brains will indeed attend a local meeting (a caucus)as part of using their self directed functioning brain. Joan, it is those sheep that are led to and fro by the interest of others and do not have the time or desire to use their self directed functioning brain that accept the propaganda given out by those having money for expensive television ads.

Virginia Beach, VA

Hey Pablo Sanchez . . . I can't understand how you proponents of the caucus system can claim that pressure groups have less influence there than they would in a conventional primary election.

Pressure groups with money and influence have even more influence in a caucus system.

It's easier and cheaper to pressure and bribe individual delegates rather than the whole population of Republican voters. And the means used to sway those delegates' opinions are much less transparent to the voter.

to comment

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