Caucus vs traditional voting

We have seen in the past that the caucus system lends itself to manipulation. Ron Paul's experience with them comes to mind.

 

Could you elaborate? Was the caucus system manipulated by Ron Paul supporters for their advantage or manipulated against Paul?

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

I favor closed primaries.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

I do, too.

I had a friend at work cursing me out because he was a member of Party 1, and wanted to be able to vote in Party 1's primaries at the state and federal level. But since his county was dominated by Party 2, he wanted to be able to vote in Party 2's primaries in county and municipal elections.

"It's not fair!"

 

Both.

But specifically, establishment republicans manipulated the caucases to defeat Paul.

 

Well, here in Minnesota Paul used the caucus rules to his advantage, manipulating them to place higher than support would indicate.

 

Paul's people were also using tactics of disruption, shouting down the opposition to get rules changes, at local caucases, with mixed results. But , in the end, the establishment out manipulated his people and stole the delegates in Iowa and Maine.

Either way, I believe the caucus process lends itself to manipulation.

 

IIRC, here in Minnesota, although Santorum handily beat Paul something like 60% to 20%, Santorum only got a handful of delegates for the convention whereas Paul got a couple dozen delegates.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo using Tapatalk.

 

This cannot be. Ron Paul is perfect and such actions are beneath him. Everyone should vote for Paul because he is the only one who stands for real freedom. Whistling

 

.
.