and Primaries Caucuses
Primary elections Caucus Superdelegate McGovern Fraser Reforms Review Question: How has the method of selecting presidential nominees changed over time? main question: what does democracy demand of elections? 1796-1824: o not very democratic at all o it's not really regular people who participate in the elite process democratic national convention: o this is how we got to have this mixed voting system from such an elite system o background information: major losses in Vietnam Johnson criticized for war He's competing in primaries and is losing (to put this into perspective, look at Obama. People say that Obama is hated right now but at least there's no doubt that he's going to be the democrat representative Kennedy (anti-war) comes in and Johnson says that he's not going to run anymore Martin Luther King Jr. assassinated assassinated Johnson on the day of the California primary o Results: The elites are voting against popular vote and supporting the vice president instead of Kennedy Mogovern frasner reform o New voting process here pimary/caucses actually mean something Current election rocess: o Super delgates: for the most part, they don't change the outcome. o In the case of Obama/Clinton, they could've swayed the votes to Clinton but decided to go with the popular vote. President Carter o Very unlikely president who invested in the first caucus in Iowa and won through that strategic method o The earlier states = Iowa, NH, etc. National process (opposite of the state-by-state process we have now) o Only the big population cities/states would be campaigned
-
-
-
-
Candidates with less money wouldn't have a chance.
Chapter 1:
Democracy