Decades ago, my mother\u2019s good friend and neighbor Ruth\nbegged her to attend a caucus meeting in Golden Valley, Minnesota. Something was happening to the Republican\nParty and Ruth was worried. There was a\nstrong, well-organized religious movement that infiltrated the Republican caucuses,\nsuccessfully electing friends and relatives to be delegates, and taking over\nleadership positions. The Republican\nParty of my parents and grandparents was dying as their shared values for\nfiscal responsibility, local control and a small federal government became\ndistant memories. Even the definition of Conservative, which was based on these\nvalues and the philosophy for educated, well-thought out change has been\nreplaced. Now Conservative means highly emotional decisions led by self-proclaimed\nprophets dedicated to ending abortions, influencing school choice and other\nbeliefs held by the religious right. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Why didn\u2019t this religious movement form its own\npolitical party, instead of hijacking my ancestors\u2019 legacy? It takes time and\nmoney to organize. Plus, it\u2019s easier targeting\nwell-established groups with strong reputations, but weakened by lack of involvement\nby its members. By the time long-term members discover what has happened, it\u2019s\nusually too late to salvage\u2014and the integrity, the history is lost. The era of thoughtful change conflicts with\ntoday\u2019s 24\/7 news cycle and the sensationalism that drives it. Malicious gossip is exciting, decadent, it\nmotivates the masses. Moral discussion\nand decision-making does not. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Even candidate debates that used to be organized by\nThe League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to voter\neducation and participation, has been replaced with the media, whose motivation\nis ratings and revenue. The day of\ndignified, thoughtful discussions about issues, is now the worst kind of\nprogramming with candidates taking potshots at each other and raising their\nhands at the moderator like anxious Kindergarten students needing to use the\nbathroom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Our country was founded on revolution and\nrebellion. Maybe it\u2019s just in our\nblood. In 2012, Ron Paul, a Libertarian\nleaning Republican used a rousing strategy when campaigning for the Republican\nParty\u2019s presidential nomination. The Ron Paul Revolution. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
There was controversy during the Iowa Caucuses that\nyear. Did Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum\nwin the straw poll? It really didn\u2019t\nmatter because as those two campaigns squabbled about the results, Ron Paul\u2019s\nmovement successfully won what was truly important, dedicated delegates. Supporters\nwilling to sacrifice personal time to attend the county, district and finally\nstate convention in order to assure that Ron Paul delegates moved on to the\nRepublican National Convention, where delegates from across the country\nformally choose the party\u2019s presidential candidate. Even though there was a motto that election\ncycle \u201cAnyone But Romney\u201d, national leaders intervened in the Ron Paul movement\nto assure that Romney, a more moderate choice was the candidate. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
It isn\u2019t just Republican leaders that yearn for a\nmoderate candidate. Democrats have\nBernie Sanders, a declared Socialist who currently hangs his shingle with the\nDemocrats. He gave Hillary Clinton\nstrong competition in the 2016 presidential race. Once again, national leaders intervened to\nmake Clinton the moderate candidate instead of Sanders. This election cycle\nSanders took off like a rocket, basically tying for first in Iowa, winning New\nHampshire and Nevada. Joe Biden, the\nchosen moderate with the long resume, isn\u2019t creating the passion that Bernie\ndoes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trump is our president because his supporters love\nhim. He tweets his mind. There is nothing politically correct in his\nspeech and many people admire his candor. \nReligious Right Republicans continue to support Trump, even though his\nhistory and lifestyle really couldn\u2019t be held up as a sterling example of\nreligious morality. It seems political\npower usurps God. Karma. The secret is to live long enough to enjoy it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Grassroots movements annoy those at the top who feel\nthat they are politically wiser. Ordinary party members should simply follow\ntheir leadership. Nevertheless, for a number of election cycles, people are\nsending a very clear message to leadership that they want change. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Targeting the Iowa Caucuses as the obstacle for\nmoderate candidates\u2019 campaigns tanking won\u2019t solve the problem. Actually, if the process was strengthened,\ninstead of eliminated, it might help. Caucus\nmeetings have very specific parts that are designed to work together and could\nsafeguard these continuing takeovers by candidates and their supporters who\ndon\u2019t support the party\u2019s platform. This\nis the key to the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Each party has a platform, which is a detailed job\ndescription for choosing the right candidate to represent the values, beliefs\nand priorities of the party and this is where the process breaks down. The\ncandidate is supposed to represent members of the party. Although eligible voters are allowed to\nparticipate in either party\u2019s caucuses, these late comers may not know or even\nsupport the party platform. So how\nmeaningful is the contribution by these people to the party\u2019s selection process? <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The job description or platform is fluid and changes\nas party members across the state meet to hopefully discuss what needs to be\nadded, subtracted or updated. \nUnfortunately, since this takes time, many neighborhood caucuses will\nnot read or discuss the planks to the platform, preferring to hand them in to be\ngiven to the platform committee for discussion at a later date. This is a decided loss, since some of these\nchanges may be new ideas that candidates have been sharing with Iowans for\nmonths. This would be important\ninformation to discuss, while figuring out which candidate is the best fit for\nthe party\u2019s platform. It would also be\nhelpful to refresh party members\u2019 memories, before choosing the best candidate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Iowa Democrats continue to receive criticism for their\npresidential preference process. They use a math formula to determine a\ncandidate\u2019s viability. It\u2019s similar to\nranking a job applicant\u2019s skill set for a job opening. When a candidate doesn\u2019t have enough party\nmembers in the caucus to earn a delegate, these members are allowed to either give\ntheir support to another candidate who they believe will best represent the\nneeds of the party or lobby the members from another candidate\u2019s group that\nisn\u2019t viable to support their candidate. \nThese are not votes. Although the\ncandidates are awarded a certain number of delegates, and delegates are elected\nby the party\u2019s caucus members, these delegates may not even vote for the\ncandidate if they go on to the national convention, and the vast majority of\nthem do not go on to this convention. This is all done out in the open and a\nwell-organized campaign knows the results of the caucus meetings before the\nparty gives the official results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Republicans have a much simpler system. They conduct a straw poll to show candidate\nsupport. Campaign representatives are\nallowed to view and count the votes for their candidate. But once again, the election that takes place\nis for delegates, who may not be bound to the results of the straw poll. For example, although Santorum was declared\nthe winner of the Republican\u2019s state- wide straw poll in 2012, Ron Paul\nsupporters successfully won the delegate elections, so the straw poll results\nwere simply symbolic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So with the presidential process being done in the\nopen, why aren\u2019t the numbers adding up? \nThe Democratic National Convention (DNC) put an unrealistic and\nunnecessary burden on Iowa Democrats, who should have said no, but Iowans are\njust too darn nice. New policies were\ndemanded this time without proper training, resources or a realistic\nimplementation. Added to this disaster waiting to happen was a last minute\nsecurity patch put on an app sanctioned by the DNC. It\u2019s important for national leadership to take\nresponsibility for their role with the problems in Iowa, otherwise history has\na way of repeating itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Probably the most important part of both the Iowa\nRepublican and Democratic caucuses is electing volunteers to the central\ncommittee and the platform committee at the county level. These are the leaders and the keepers of the\ntwo parties, who may want to have thoughtful discussions during the interim about\npossible changes that could keep the Iowa Caucuses from future hijacking. They may also want to discuss why the needs\nof the moderate or no-party voter has greater value to leadership, then the\nparty platform? Why are members spending\ntime working a platform that isn\u2019t respected? \n\nYes, thoughtful\ndiscussions. My ancestors would be\nproud. \n\n\n\n<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Decades ago, my mother\u2019s good friend and neighbor Ruth begged her to attend a caucus meeting in Golden Valley, Minnesota. Something was happening to the Republican Party and Ruth was worried. There was a strong, well-organized religious movement that infiltrated … Continue reading