Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:07 PM Mar 2016

Did Minnesota Caucuses Give Sanders an Advantage?

That's an excellent question, but one that doesn't have a good answer. Basically, we don't know. Caucuses are a great way for an enthusiastic campaign to have an advantage, by turning out more caucus-goers, but the same thing applies to primary elections, too. Caucuses generally have a much lower turnout than a typical primary election, so a smaller number of people decides who wins.

I chaired the caucus for my own precinct yesterday evening. Turnout was good, although lower than in 2008. The caucus was busy, friendly and a bit hectic, but everyone got to vote. As it turned out Bernie Sanders got 37 votes, while Hillary Clinton got just 21. That was similar to the statewide results with Sanders getting 62% and Clinton getting 38%.

Would the results have been different if a regular primary election had been held? Were Sanders supporters more enthusiastic about turning out, or do the results accurately reflect the opinion of the population? There's no simple answer, really.

Based on past caucus results, though, it's probably an accurate reflection of opinions in Minnesota. Over the years, the caucuses have produced similar results to the primaries that are held in August, after the Democratic nominating convention is already over. I imagine that this year is no different, really. Sanders prevailed here, and congratulations to him for that.

Should Minnesota keep its caucus and convention system? That's a question that comes up every year. Personally, I prefer primaries, but in Minnesota, the primary election is always held late in the year, and is for legislative offices, both federal and state, along with local offices and issues. There's an organized effort to switch Minnesota to primaries, and I'm part of that, even though I find the caucus system interesting and useful. But, switching would be difficult for the reasons below:

Our convention system consists of three separate conventions. The first, at the State Senate District or County level, feeds the congressional district convention, which feeds the state convention. How we'd hold all three before an early primary is the problem. And we'd have to do that, really. That's why the precinct caucuses in presidential election year include a presidential preference election. We need to do that so we can determine how the delegates to the national convention will be allocated at our state convention, which is held not too long before the national convention.

In 2016, we have held our caucuses. The delegates to the Democratic national convention will be allocated proportionally according to how people voted at those caucuses. There it is. We have 77 pledged delegates to that convention, along with our unpledged delegates, who include our Governor, our Democratic House and Senate members and our DNC members, who will be elected at the state convention. We're a pretty small player, really, as states go.

Bernie gets the majority of our delegates. I'm good with that. I suspect that a primary would have produced a very similar result, although there's no way to tell, exactly. We've had our caucuses and the people who cared enough to attend have made their wishes clear. So be it. I'm not concerned. Either of our candidates would make an excellent President and I'll be supporting the Democratic nominee, as always.

Should we change to primaries? Probably. They're more fair and allow more people to vote. Will we change? Probably not before the 2020 Presidential election. We might before the 2024 Election. I think that's likely. But it will require a wholesale overhaul of how the Minnesota DFL Party operates. It will require a serious change to our convention system. That's why it won't happen for a while.

Thanks for reading, and congrats, again, to Bernie Sanders!

34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Did Minnesota Caucuses Give Sanders an Advantage? (Original Post) MineralMan Mar 2016 OP
I know you causused for Hillary, but you have never been mean to Bernie fans. Thank you for that! thereismore Mar 2016 #1
The funny thing about that is that I was so busy that MineralMan Mar 2016 #2
Wow, quite a story! Thanks for sharing thereismore Mar 2016 #3
I wasn't alone. I talked to a friend who also MineralMan Mar 2016 #4
Many don't realize that these things can be so chaotic because most are volunteers blm Mar 2016 #24
Caucuses do tend to be more liberal Buzz cook Mar 2016 #5
I don't know. From my experience, caucus goers are MineralMan Mar 2016 #9
I read this a short while ago. Buzz cook Mar 2016 #27
Yes. I think that's probably right. MineralMan Mar 2016 #29
I have mixed feelings about caucuses. The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2016 #6
I don't complain about systems that are in place, really. MineralMan Mar 2016 #10
Thanks for the up date. Wellstone ruled Mar 2016 #7
I'm a relative newcomer. I moved to MN in 2004. MineralMan Mar 2016 #11
First time for me here in Nevada. Wellstone ruled Mar 2016 #17
There you go. MineralMan Mar 2016 #18
And your choice for Wellstone ruled Mar 2016 #20
This country is full of differences. MineralMan Mar 2016 #21
Congratulations to Bernie on his BlueMTexpat Mar 2016 #8
Yup. He got out the vote, for sure. MineralMan Mar 2016 #12
I am so proud of Minnesota RobertEarl Mar 2016 #13
The results are what they are. MineralMan Mar 2016 #15
I met some grassroots activists from MN loyalsister Mar 2016 #14
I think everyone who goes to the caucuses MineralMan Mar 2016 #16
Gee, wouldn't we want "an enthusiastic campaign"? highprincipleswork Mar 2016 #19
Of course. MineralMan Mar 2016 #22
Thank You MineralMan! kydo Mar 2016 #23
You're more than welcome. I just like to MineralMan Mar 2016 #25
Thanks for sharing. Personally I'm: Primary > Caucus. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #26
I prefer a system that encourages more people to be engaged in the process. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2016 #28
There is a process for absentee voting in MineralMan Mar 2016 #30
Thanks. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2016 #31
We caucus in Washington and I think it's become obsolete LisaM Mar 2016 #32
Yes, there can be problems of scale. MineralMan Mar 2016 #33
The precinct chairs were old-timers (I know them slightly) LisaM Mar 2016 #34

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
2. The funny thing about that is that I was so busy that
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:13 PM
Mar 2016
I forgot to vote at the caucus. So, Hillary didn't get my vote. I realized that right after I turned in our ballots and the count. A facepalm moment, to be sure.

The caucus was so hectic and I had so much to do to make sure everyone voted and all of the forms and documents were filled out correctly that I never had a moment to vote and just didn't notice.

So, I ended up not actually caucusing for Hillary. It's funny, but my vote wouldn't have changed the result, really.

By the time I got home from the caucus, I was

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
4. I wasn't alone. I talked to a friend who also
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:17 PM
Mar 2016

chaired a caucus in the same building. She never managed to vote in her precinct caucus either. I think it happens a lot. Last night is about the busiest I've been for a long time. A caucus chair never gets a moment to think about anything but making sure everything goes smoothly and properly.

I loved doing it, though!

blm

(112,919 posts)
24. Many don't realize that these things can be so chaotic because most are volunteers
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 07:09 PM
Mar 2016

and doing their best to cope, especially when turnouts are greater than expected.

Salute to you, MM - for being someone who shows up to do the work.

Buzz cook

(2,470 posts)
5. Caucuses do tend to be more liberal
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:17 PM
Mar 2016

And Minnesota has a liberal history as well.
Not sure if this gives Sanders an edge because from what I've read caucuses do tend to reflect the general electorate overall. The difference between the liberal caucuses and the less liberal primaries is not great enough to effect the election.

Certainly Sanders with 61% beat that point spread.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
9. I don't know. From my experience, caucus goers are
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:23 PM
Mar 2016

almost all very politically savvy. Only the most dedicated voters show up, really. Someone who follows Minnesota's elections closely said this morning that the caucus system favors populist candidates. That could be true. Marco Rubio won the Republican caucus handily here, too. He's an off-beat candidate and Minnesota's the only state he has won.

On the other hand, primaries also attract more politically-aware voters than the general election, too. It may be a wash, overall, in the actual results. Minnesota sometimes votes its own way, for sure. That we elected Jesse Ventura as Governor is proof of that.

Anyhow, I love ground game politics, which is why I enjoy the caucus system. I still think we'd be better off with primaries, though, and will continue to push for that. I'm a small-time political player here, though.

Buzz cook

(2,470 posts)
27. I read this a short while ago.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 08:35 PM
Mar 2016
http://dcommon.bu.edu:8080/handle/2144/3887

The authors conclusion is that, as far as representing the general electorate, the difference between caucus and primary is a wash.
She didn't go into other benefits or negatives of the two systems.

My analyses and results suggest that
although these two electorates may be
demographically and ideologically distinct, each
voting population’s final candidate choice is not
substantially different. Even in the 2004 Iowa
Democratic caucus, the race that showed the
largest demographic and ideological differences
between the caucus and general electorates,
there was only a 0.2% difference in predicted
vote share. This data suggests that although
primary, caucus, and general election voters may be
different, the country is not in grave danger
of electing an unrepresentative candidate – even
if the general electi
on voting population, which
is supposedly more representative of the aver
age American, showed up
to the polls at the
caucuses or primaries, there would not be a substa
ntial change in electoral outcome. In this way,
my study supports the research of Geer, whos
e research suggested
that while there are
discernible differences between
primary and general election voti
ng populations, “the biases are
small enough to have few consequences wh
en selecting candidates” (Geer 1988, 929).


Sorry that the formatting from the pdf didn't translate.

My position is a selfish one. I like going to the caucus, with the potential to be sent to the county and or district convention. I haven't gone yet but there is a chance of being sent to state as well.

Lots of fun.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,276 posts)
6. I have mixed feelings about caucuses.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:20 PM
Mar 2016

I've been going to them since the '70s and I agree that they are by no means a perfect way of selecting a nominee, mainly because by requiring people to show up all at once at a particular time they will inevitably exclude people. The process was created many years ago at a time when communities were smaller and probably does not fit so well any more with the way people live and work. It might be better to switch to a primary to be sure everyone can vote.

On the other hand caucuses serve well as party meetings and encourage people to get involved in the political process. My caucus, in SD 62, was more crowded than I've ever seen one. But it was well-organized, fortunately. Because of another commitment I had to leave after submitting my ballot, but it looked like a lot of people were staying for the agenda, and that's great.

I have observed, over the years, that the people who complain most loudly about the caucuses are often the ones who lost. I'm not saying that of the OP because he acknowledges Bernie probably would have won a primary as well (Minnesota being a pretty progressive state), but I've heard and read that complaint many times from caucus losers. At least some times it's a matter of whose ox got gored.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
10. I don't complain about systems that are in place, really.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:26 PM
Mar 2016

They're what we have. I wish, though, that more people had participated in determining the delegate allocation. Still, I sort of suspect that if we'd held a primary election yesterday, the result would have been quite similar. It's the nature of the beast in Minnesota. We love underdogs here, I think.

I'm not a native here, but I've sort of adopted the attitudes here. I'll continue to participate in whatever the system is here, as long as I can. It's always educational and often entertaining as can be.

 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
7. Thanks for the up date.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:20 PM
Mar 2016

As you mentioned,the old Primary was always darn late in the year and the turn around time was so short. When we went to the Caucus system,we knew it was going to be chaos at best,and now we know.

You and I have seen this before,going to be interesting.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
11. I'm a relative newcomer. I moved to MN in 2004.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:28 PM
Mar 2016

I learn fast, though. Normally I don't chair my precinct's caucus, but they didn't have enough district volunteers to act as caucus conveners, so I got handed the convener's packet as I walked in the door. It's OK. I know the drill, but this was my first time chairing a caucus, which was most interesting.

 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
17. First time for me here in Nevada.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:42 PM
Mar 2016

Went to our local Junior High for our caucus,signed in and found our Precinct Meeting Room,the Packet for the Caucus was on the Desk at the front of the room,okay,no Chair Person,at ten minutes before the appointed meeting time,11 am,I and another person opened the package read the cover and called the Caucus to order. The Hillary and Bernie operatives had our backs,and it was a real sharp learning curve,but with our ten minute crash course in Nevada caucus meetings,with a room of 75 people,we made it happen and we got our totals called in by the required time,and the rest is History. The Caucus Chairperson for our Precinct was taken to the ER so we had a real citizen participator Caucus.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
18. There you go.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:45 PM
Mar 2016

Sometimes a guy just has to do what's needful. Sounds like you did a great job!

Excellent story!

 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
20. And your choice for
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:49 PM
Mar 2016

Candidate bested mine by 2 to 1. Best part,wonderful blend of people in attendance especially in a city that is so transient and dependent on the entertainment industry.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
21. This country is full of differences.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:53 PM
Mar 2016

People have different needs and priorities. That's what makes politics so interesting, really.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
12. Yup. He got out the vote, for sure.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:31 PM
Mar 2016

It's always great to meet my neighbors at the caucus. It's a friendly event, pretty much. I enjoy the process, even though I'd prefer a primary election.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
15. The results are what they are.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:39 PM
Mar 2016

I am involved in politics because the process is so important. I'm a Democrat because Democrats govern better than Republicans. I'm part of the local DFL organization because I have the time and understand the process. The people's voice is what is important. That's the bottom line.

Different states have different circumstances and different outcomes. That's not surprising at all. I don't criticize the people in other states for how they decide to vote. I don't live there. I live here. Before that, I lived in California. I have chosen where I live, because I can, since I work for myself at an occupation that isn't location sensitive. I like Minnesota. I liked California. That's why I've lived in those states.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
16. I think everyone who goes to the caucuses
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 04:40 PM
Mar 2016

here meets that description. It takes an effort to participate. You have to understand and care.

I like that about the caucus system.

kydo

(2,679 posts)
23. Thank You MineralMan!
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 05:14 PM
Mar 2016

Thank you many times fold for sharing your experience, knowledge,and opinions about caucusing and/or/vs primaries.

We primary where I am. Which is FL. All my voting life I have lived in areas where it is a primary and not a caucus. My first vote was for Clinton in 1992 in VA. The rest have been in FL, and my picks were, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama, and Obama, respectively.

I am torn over the caucus vs primary. Part of me likes the idea rallying around and almost literally standing up for or behind a candidate. But I also don't think it is very inclusive, as it is only at one time. So if you are running late, have to work, not in town, or any of a many different reasons, you can not vote at a later or earlier time and still be counted.

Again, Thank you for sharing your experience from your caucus. And for taking the time to work at your caucus! So many people just let others do things, it is reassuring that there are people like you do what you do.

Thank you!

Agnosticsherbet

(11,619 posts)
28. I prefer a system that encourages more people to be engaged in the process.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 08:38 PM
Mar 2016

Everything I've seen about caucus systems tends to convince me that they discourage the maximum engagement of the population in the political process.

That said, I have never lived in a state where they use the caucus system.

One thing has my curious. I am retired Navy, so how does the caucus system mange absentee ballots?

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
30. There is a process for absentee voting in
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 08:45 PM
Mar 2016

Minnesota caucuses, but I have never seen it used. I believe you have to request it, and it isn't publicized. I will look to see what is required tomorrow and reply back. I saw a place on the form for absentee votes yesterday, but that was the first I'd heard of it. I will check it out.

Good question.

LisaM

(27,759 posts)
32. We caucus in Washington and I think it's become obsolete
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 08:50 PM
Mar 2016

One problem is schedules - people are a lot busier than they were even 20 years ago, and to narrow it down to a two-hour window as we do is not helpful. This drastically favors people like college students and is really difficult for people who are, for example, caregivers, or nurses, or who drive buses, or what not. That's going to skew the results versus a primary, which was purposely designed to capture multiple shifts during a workday (and which allows for absentee voting). I also noticed a huge change in 2008. The caucus turnout (very heavily weighted in favor of college students) was too large for the space we had. The precinct chairs had trouble keeping order, and the caucus goers were in no mood to thoughtfully consider the party platforms we are supposed to vote on, which is supposed to be part of the process, they bypassed them entirely and the precinct chairs were too intimidated to prevent it. Some very nasty speeches were made, and some people were pretty upset by it all (me included). It also allowed for a little bullying, people who shouted the loudest got heard the most.

When you had 20-30 people showing up in a precinct, it worked. When there were 1000 people crammed into one building (maybe 8 precincts?) it didn't, and I still have hard feelings.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
33. Yes, there can be problems of scale.
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 08:58 PM
Mar 2016

I haven't seen that happen, but I can see how it might. If I were a caucus chair in such a situation, I would invoke Robert's Rules of Order and insist that they be followed. I'm an easy going guy, but I can handle a crowd if necessary.

Such a thing has not occurred for me. In Minnesota, the conventions are run under those rules of order, just to keep things moving smoothly. It works fine.

Congress runs on them, too.

LisaM

(27,759 posts)
34. The precinct chairs were old-timers (I know them slightly)
Wed Mar 2, 2016, 09:12 PM
Mar 2016

They let themselves be pushed around. It bothered me immensely that they didn't enforce the rules of the caucus that we were to vote on a platform. Yes, it's tedious, but the people who work for the party spend a lot of time putting these things together and deserve to be heard. This year, I am prepared for something like this, and will be willing to speak up if necessary. We are also moving to a different venue - last time they put us all into a new community center that didn't have enough separate rooms, this time, we're going back to the local elementary school, which should work better.

Even if they fix that, I still don't like that you have to go during this two-hour window, which for us is occurring on Easter weekend (stupid timing). I've heard of other places where it's going to happen during spring breaks. I didn't like when it seemed to only cater to college students, but conversely, I don't like the idea of making it so the caucus is held when they're out of town. It should be able to accommodate every voting sector.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Did Minnesota Caucuses Gi...