Project Wonderful

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Too Unlegit to Uncommit

Iowa Republicans are planning to revoke the uncommitted option in some counties after Occupy the Caucus announced its plans to caucus uncommitted in both the Democratic and Republican primaries.

For those unfamiliar, an uncommitted vote essentially means you show up at the caucus and vote for no one. You literally stand in a clump of people (or vote or whatever Republicans do) supporting "uncommitted" as if uncommitted were a person and you were his or her loyal fan. In 1972 and 1976 "uncommitted" won the Iowa caucus.

There are three main reasons to caucus uncommitted. One, as happened to my favorite Precinct Captain in 2008, is that you can't get enough votes to gain an additional delegate for your candidate, but you can combine with another group in a similar situation to keep the front runner from gaining said delegate. Second is that you would be happy to support any of the candidates in the general election and you want to participate in the party business that takes place at the caucus without stating a preference. Third, as is the case in question, is to show a vote of no confidence in the candidates being offered.

"If you're not satisfied with choices, not happy with the system, this is a way to have our voices heard," said Drew Vesey, a 24 year old activist who plans to caucus with the Republicans.

Again, I couldn't be more excited about the Occupy Movement's choice to bring the fight to the politicians. Maybe it's because I'm an election nerd but participating in the system to threaten re-election prospects resonates much more with me than the ill-defined goals and game plan of the earlier OWS movement.

The Story County Republicans are sore losers. Not that it's any surprise. 2011 has been a banner year for Republicans attempting to "legally" but unethically disenfranchise those who disagree with them. It's not as if Republicans didn't participate in the 2008 Democratic primary in order to deflect support from either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama depending on who they found less threatening. Perhaps if one of the country's two large political parties was not in the business of suppressing the rights and desires of a large and vulnerable chunk of the population, we wouldn't need the Occupy Movement in the first place.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the caucus.


No comments:

Post a Comment