Whither South Carolina: Primary or Caucus?

as a political junkie, and a closet political elitist (0.00 / 0)

(that is to say, as much as i want to expand the vote, i also wish people would work a little harder to be part of the process)i would love nothing more than an all caucus system. but as a political realist, i know this would not improve the health of the democracy, so i will enjoy the caucus states, but not encourage the spread of the same. a caucus would be ideal for an extreme ideologue like ricky rick, where maybe a thousand well placed die hards could swing into tipping points at several locations and either give him an outright win or at least a much better than expected 2nd or 3rd place, which would drive tea party money to him and give him a shot. i think my worst fear is a romney/santorium ticket winning and something happening to romney and we have an unelected pres rick!

---

by: UplandPoet @ Mon Jun 27, 2011 at 10:38:33 AM UTC

Organization (0.00 / 0)

While caucuses sometimes reward more "hard-core" candidates, they also reward candidates with better ground-level organization. That's not Santorum, so I think you're safe. :)

---

by: SarahLawrence Scott @ Mon Jun 27, 2011 at 15:04:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm just not convinced this is all that big of a deal. (0.00 / 0)

Faced with the threat of losing their presidential primary funding and having to foot the bill for the contest themselves, the South Carolina Republican Party is talking about the potential dire consequences. These are nothing more than (over-)exaggerations used as a means of maintaining the state funding.

If you're going to take any of those quotations away from that article in The State, I would suggest Katon Dawson's. If the SC GOP is stripped of the funding, I would expect them to "man up" and pay for it.

I won't rehash all of the points I made over at FHQ, but I will append a link for those interested.

---

by: Josh Putnam @ Mon Jun 27, 2011 at 16:51:44 PM UTC

you would the think the "small govt, big business" party (0.00 / 0)

would want the state out of the party's business, but then, they tend to be hypocrites everywhere else, why should this be different?

---

by: UplandPoet @ Mon Jun 27, 2011 at 17:37:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Josh (0.00 / 0)

I read your logic, and I think you and I are looking at a few different things.

First, I think that Nikki Haley WON'T allocate state funds. I also believe that the RNC won't allocate funds. Thus, we'll be in a caucus situation. A caucus isn't simple: you have to go, as an individual, prepared to spend a few hours, and have conversations (and sometimes arguments). It's a true bottom up procedure. I agree with Scott that there is a reward for ground organization, but not to a huge extent, as a great boots-on-the-ground effort pays off in most contests: caucus, primary or general.

My thought is that generally, caucuses are straight party operations and the independents who could "moderate" within the wacko fringe, won't have that opportunity.

I don't care that this will be the first race since 1980 where SC calls the GOP candidate wrong. I don't care if they pick Michele or Mittens. My concern is Spunky. I think she'd actually have a shot. And I DO NOT want to be running against her next year. I have a theory on this, and I'll be posting it in the morning.  

---

by: DocJess @ Mon Jun 27, 2011 at 22:34:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

doc, spunky is drawing no people of color, brown or black (4.00 / 1)

nor anyone under 40. she is hot with the white over 40 group, but even there she isnt drawing that many. i think she isnt the threat, i think michelle is a bigger threat, but i doubt she will beat obama....

---

by: UplandPoet @ Mon Jun 27, 2011 at 22:58:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

she and john wayne gacy:) (0.00 / 0)

http://politicalticker.blogs.c...

---

by: UplandPoet @ Mon Jun 27, 2011 at 23:12:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed (0.00 / 0)

Yeah, we're talking along slightly different lines here, but my point was that regardless of what Governor Haley does (a veto now seems clear), the state GOP will pick up the tab for the primary. The caucus just wasn't/isn't on the table.

And even if it was, my second point, by extension (in my linked post), was that South Carolina is not part of the current frontrunner's strategy. The Romney campaign is operating under the premise that "if we win SC, great; if not, where is the next state where we do play well".  To the Romney camp, SC is expendable.

---

by: Josh Putnam @ Tue Jun 28, 2011 at 11:50:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]