• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Montana Caucus's

A

Anonymous

Guest
I picked this off one of the blogs-- and have to agree 100%- these new Republican caucus's in Montana are just another reason/way that Republicans are disenfranchising many independent and average person Republican voters...

More government by the few- for the benefit of the few....
:( :mad:
Same thing GW has done for the past 7 years- could care less about what the average Joe Blow on the street wants/needs....


Today's the day, the day the Montana Republican party completely disenfranchises Montana voters and picks the primary winner in party only caucuses.

Code:
"Voting will be done by local and state Republican leaders, precinct committee people and GOP politicians elected to statewide and county office. All told, Montana's Republican presidential nominee will be decided by no more than 1,817 people. After the ballots are cast, that's it. There will be Republican presidential candidates on primary election ballots June 3, but the delegates will belong to the caucus winner regardless of how the public votes."


Yep, the tens of thousands that normally would express their opinion on who to elect are now completely ignored. The damnedest thing is the republicans think this is good. I think there are going to be a large number of independent minded voters who are going to be so upset at the Republicans over this that they will never vote Republican again. This will hurt Montana Republicans.
 

sw

Well-known member
Yes OT and I am one of the elitists that gets to vote. They did this because the Dems in the Senate killed a bill to move the primary up so that we have a voice in who gets the nomination, not waiting until June when it is all decided for us by states with earlier primaries. It is a "closed" caucus because the Republican leaders do not want Dems and independents calling themselves Republicans and coming in and voting since you do not have to register in any party in Montana. By my being a precinct captain for the last 8 years for the Republican party, I get to vote in the caucus. Our county has 20 votes in all, 16 precinct captains and our elected officials of the Republican party. Is it the best way to do this, I don't know, but I have been getting calls from all of the presidential candidates daily, that has never happened before, and we have had members of all of the candidates families, the candidate themselves or one of their representatives campaigning in Montana. That has never happened before. John McCain is the only candidate that has not put any effort into Montana. And for what it's worth, we called nearly everybody in our precinct and asked them how they want us to vote, kept a tally for each candidate and we will vote accordiingly, so more than 1800 people are having a say in this caucus.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
sw said:
Yes OT and I am one of the elitists that gets to vote. They did this because the Dems in the Senate killed a bill to move the primary up so that we have a voice in who gets the nomination, not waiting until June when it is all decided for us by states with earlier primaries. It is a "closed" caucus because the Republican leaders do not want Dems and independents calling themselves Republicans and coming in and voting since you do not have to register in any party in Montana. By my being a precinct captain for the last 8 years for the Republican party, I get to vote in the caucus. Our county has 20 votes in all, 16 precinct captains and our elected officials of the Republican party. Is it the best way to do this, I don't know, but I have been getting calls from all of the presidential candidates daily, that has never happened before, and we have had members of all of the candidates families, the candidate themselves or one of their representatives campaigning in Montana. That has never happened before. John McCain is the only candidate that has not put any effort into Montana. And for what it's worth, we called nearly everybody in our precinct and asked them how they want us to vote, kept a tally for each candidate and we will vote accordiingly, so more than 1800 people are having a say in this caucus.

He hired "Conman" Burns as his campaign Chairman :wink: :shock: :p

1/3 of Montana voters consider themselves Independents (one of the reasons all city/county elections in our county are now nonpartisan- and voters statewide have asked for the same)- and this will do more to move them away from the Republican party- by putting out the impression and feeling the Republicans don't want their input or them anyway...

90+% of the times when I vote in the primary in the June election I vote Republican--sometimes just to cast my vote for President if their is little or no contested state races....But this year if my vote doesn't count- I (and others) may vote Democrat instead...And from my old political days- I remember the experts say that tendancy is for a person to vote for the same ones in the general election, they voted for in the primary......

In fact the only candidates I donated money to last election were Republicans- but not sure if I will again...This is like a slap in the face, saying if you won't carry a card with an (R) on it- we don't want your input or care how you feel... If they don't want my input- they don't need my money either :wink:

A dumb move in my eyes-- and its getting tore up on the blogs...But I don't think the Montana Party stands much chance of winning anything this year anyway.....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
This is how the caucus's shook out...I was aware the state leadership was pushing Romney hard... It was interesting, that in some of the most conservative areas of the state like Garfield, McCone, Lake, and a few other counties-- Paul was the big winner......
In our county (Valley) he tied with McCain- and in the neighboring Roosevelt county he won....Lot of folks in this area don't want the same-o same-o BS of GW and the D.C. Republican establishment.....


1st Romney 38% 2nd Paul 24%
 

Hanta Yo

Well-known member
sw wrote:

They did this because the Dems in the Senate killed a bill to move the primary up so that we have a voice in who gets the nomination, not waiting until June when it is all decided for us by states with earlier primaries.

OT wrote:

....But this year if my vote doesn't count- I (and others) may vote Democrat instead

Go ahead, OT. It was the DEMS who killed the opportunity for MT to have any earlier primary. Now we're stuck with this.

Why don't you get involved? Sign up with the Clerk/Recorder to get your name on the ballot to be your precinct chair instead of complaining at your local watering hole?????????????????????????????????
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hanta Yo said:
Why don't you get involved? Sign up with the Clerk/Recorder to get your name on the ballot to be your precinct chair instead of complaining at your local watering hole?????????????????????????????????

Could have- the Repub precinct people were crying for volunteers about a week ago...Couldn't get anyone...Many, many folks in this area belong to neither party (many are more Libertarian leaning than anything- which I think was shown with Pauls doing so well in our county and all the surrounding ones (Roosevelt, Blaine, Garfield, McCone, etc)...)
BUT then I would then have to live with an (R) political cult group or a (D) political cult group and I won't do it.....I want the freedom to openly support and vote for the person I think is best-- not a cultist movement......

As it seems the Montana Republican party is kind of like Rush, Ann the Mouth, and the crew- if you've even talked to a Democrat they portray you as evil and in need of exorcism before you are safe to even be near ... :roll: I see where our good Montana Republican Party is going to again try to ban Lt. Governor Bollinger from the caucus's-even tho he has been a Republican all his life- because he had the audacity to try and get some bipartisan results for the state and ran on a coticket with a Democrat Governor.... :roll: :( :( Oh Sin of Sins :wink: :lol: :lol: :p

In fact Miss Hanta- I did one better than signing up to the county cultist group...I got the county to change the way the county races were run- and to do away with those nasty little (R) and (D)'s by everyones name- and to have all local/county races non partisan....
After I ran as an Independent- and showed folks you can actually win doing it- everyone said thats how these races should be- that partisan politics don't belong in local offices.....So the county election study group, put it on the ballot- and the voters of the county by a 3-1 margin, voted to do away with this partisan BS........
 

Steve

Well-known member
In most Primaries, it was decided before I had a chance to vote...

Seems nothing has changed... with my state being a winner take all state,.. My vote is not counted towards my choice but instead the delegates goes to the person I like the least of the three..

Seems the table was set for the party favorite Rudy.. and Now McCain...

In the dems super Tuesday voting you get a better result in that they earned the delegates... based on their share of the popular vote...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
A letter to the editor that sums up much of the same that I heard...And on the blog- the opposition to these "elitist closed caucus's" is running about 20 to 1 against.....


Published on Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Letter: Caucus takes away people's right to vote

I just finished watching the evening news and found out I will not be able to voice my opinion by voting in this year's primary. My vote will be decided by, I believe, a total of 1,800 people, and I have no idea of their identities and do not approve of them casting my vote. It is called a "caucus." Voters need to step up and say that caucuses are not the way!

I served 22 years in the Marine Corps for the right to vote and am being deprived of same by a party decision. I will not partake in a caucus. They are a way of forcing voters to follow, not lead!

"We the people" need to be looked at real hard by the parties! The more "we the people" are excluded from the decision process the closer, we get to being "sheep." I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't feel I need "shearing" or a herd dog at my heels.

The parties need to look in a mirror and figure out who they represent besides the reflection facing them! When it becomes self imaging, they are in the wrong business.

Guess I need to reevaluate where I need to cast my vote when the time comes. It is apparent I won't be voting today, but someone will vote for me - not!

George D. Nilson
Billings

http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/02/05/opinion/letters/50-caucus.txt?submitted=true#comments
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hanta Yo said:
sw wrote:

They did this because the Dems in the Senate killed a bill to move the primary up so that we have a voice in who gets the nomination, not waiting until June when it is all decided for us by states with earlier primaries.

Are you aware of why the Democrats killed the bill in the Senate to move up the primary?

It would have meant changing all Montana election laws (maybe even the State Constitution)-and filing dates (which are still open- Filing for state and local offices doesn't even open until January :roll: ) - and having a much shorter primary campaign or else a much longer total campaign period for local and state elections OR holding 2 primaries which would have had a huge increased cost to Montana taxpayers....Elections are not cheap!!!!

Luckily the "fiscal conservative" Democrats of the Montana legislature prevailed- and decided the state taxpayers couldn't/shouldn't be paying the costs of 2 primary elections, just so Montana could get 10 minutes of TV coverage on Feb 5th.....

The way it is now- Democrats (and Independents and even Republicans) still have a vote in the Presidential primary race in June...They are just limited to Democrat candidates... Which may be the way they vote in November too- since the Republican leadership has pretty well told them- we don't want your input or your vote....
 

fff

Well-known member
It sounds like the MT Republican Party is scared. I think they'll find that the closer they hold power (closed caucaus), the faster it slips away from them. Couldn't they have paid for their own primary election? South Carolina held their primaries on two different weekends. I was under the impression that the parties paid for those, not the state because, as you say, elections aren't cheap.

While it's frustrating to know the Dem race will be going on for a long time, it's also good to see that, in most states, every Dem vote counts. The delegates are apportioned out by the percentage of votes the candidate gets, not a winner take all as most Republican primarys are.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
fff said:
It sounds like the MT Republican Party is scared. I think they'll find that the closer they hold power (closed caucaus), the faster it slips away from them. Couldn't they have paid for their own primary election? South Carolina held their primaries on two different weekends. I was under the impression that the parties paid for those, not the state because, as you say, elections aren't cheap.

While it's frustrating to know the Dem race will be going on for a long time, it's also good to see that, in most states, every Dem vote counts. The delegates are apportioned out by the percentage of votes the candidate gets, not a winner take all as most Republican primarys are.

Yep-- and more and more Montanans are wondering where the Republican Party went- and is now coming from....Today I had a chance to talk to ranchers/grazing association members/strong Republicans that were wondering the same thing...First- they couldn't believe that the party had deserted the voters/populace of the state the way they had with the "chosen elite few" pick that it is now with the caucus method....In this area this had not been very well publicized and caught many wondering what was happening- and feeling deserted- which is no surprise with the state of disarray of the Montana Republican Party..... :(

But they weren't surprised since they had just finished attending the grazing meetings, involving the CMR Game Range (which was signed into law by President Ford) , where they thought they could/would be protected by Republican (GW) representation--but said they just found at the meetings where the US Fish and Game were moving ahead and making cows things of the past- and that their grazing there was done- as they turn it over to a total wildlife preserve :roll: ...

As far as dollars for an election- the Montana Republican Party has hardly been able to furnish toilet paper for an outhouse the last few years...They were a strong entity back during the Governor Racicot days- started falling apart when he left and his Lt. Gov. (first lady gov in state) took office- continued disintegrating with the GW administration....

Last year they could not even afford- or find someone to hire for State Chairman- and ended up having to get Representative Rehbergs Chief of Staff as the state chairman-- and use taxpayer paid funding to "share" the cost to pay his costs..... :(
 

Horseless

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
A letter to the editor that sums up much of the same that I heard...And on the blog- the opposition to these "elitist closed caucus's" is running about 20 to 1 against.....


Published on Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Letter: Caucus takes away people's right to vote

I just finished watching the evening news and found out I will not be able to voice my opinion by voting in this year's primary. My vote will be decided by, I believe, a total of 1,800 people, and I have no idea of their identities and do not approve of them casting my vote. It is called a "caucus." Voters need to step up and say that caucuses are not the way!

I served 22 years in the Marine Corps for the right to vote and am being deprived of same by a party decision. I will not partake in a caucus. They are a way of forcing voters to follow, not lead!

"We the people" need to be looked at real hard by the parties! The more "we the people" are excluded from the decision process the closer, we get to being "sheep." I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't feel I need "shearing" or a herd dog at my heels.

The parties need to look in a mirror and figure out who they represent besides the reflection facing them! When it becomes self imaging, they are in the wrong business.

Guess I need to reevaluate where I need to cast my vote when the time comes. It is apparent I won't be voting today, but someone will vote for me - not!

George D. Nilson
Billings

http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/02/05/opinion/letters/50-caucus.txt?submitted=true#comments

I don't get a daily paper so I haven't heard what is being said around the state. I have the same feelings as this guy's letter. I have been ticked off every since I heard about this caucus thing. Do you suppose there will be less voters turning out for the election in June? Their decision on president has already been made if they had plan on voting republican ticket. The state Republican party needs to hear our compllaints but they probably won't listen.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Yep--Horseless, its going to probably change the voting patterns....

The best response to the letter I saw came from the fellow that said, his son was unable to return a be a precinct committeeman- because he was in the US Navy in Iraq and GW wouldn't let him come home for the caucus---so he did not get to participate at all in choosing who his future Commander in Chief should be.....
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Yep--Horseless, its going to probably change the voting patterns....

The best response to the letter I saw came from the fellow that said, his son was unable to return a be a precinct committeeman- because he was in the US Navy in Iraq and GW wouldn't let him come home for the caucus---so he did not get to participate at all in choosing who his future Commander in Chief should be.....

You actually think that President Bush himself made a decision on rather a soldier got leave to come home on a specific date for a specific purpose?

That just shows how slanted your thinking is and how you use the Liberal writing techniques to spin things your way. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Yep--Horseless, its going to probably change the voting patterns....

The best response to the letter I saw came from the fellow that said, his son was unable to return a be a precinct committeeman- because he was in the US Navy in Iraq and GW wouldn't let him come home for the caucus---so he did not get to participate at all in choosing who his future Commander in Chief should be.....

You actually think that President Bush himself made a decision on rather a soldier got leave to come home on a specific date for a specific purpose?

That just shows how slanted your thinking is and how you use the Liberal writing techniques to spin things your way. :roll:

Its a figure of speech--I didn't think I needed to draw you a picture- but then again I forget who's reading some of these ... :wink: :lol: :p SHHHEEEESSSSHHHH- no wonder the Repub party is being discussed as possibly going the way of the dinosaurs :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Its kind of funny when you look at it--2 days after disenfranchising and pi**ing off thousands of Montana voters- and making the Montana Republican Party out to be a party controlled by a few of the elitist leadership- their chosen Champion has quit :shock: :wink: :lol: :lol:

Now what do they do? I can't see Rehberg/Iverson/party elite giving the votes to the second place winner- Ron Paul :???:- he doesn't fit what the neocon establisment wants ...Do they throw another party and caucus again? Do they allow the folks vote in the June primary to count?

Yep- this boondoggle will cost the Montana Republican Party bigtime- while gaining nothing- (except for some leadership folks getting some free drinks and eats and getting to hear some candidates give a speech over the cellphone :roll: ) :wink: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Todays paper had my answer for what happens to the "elitist chosen" Montana delegates.......

Since Romney "suspended" his campaign instead of "withdrawing" as a candidate, the 25 Montana Republican delegates are bound by party rules to vote for Romney on the first ballot at the national convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul in September. They can vote for anyone they want in later ballots. Montana's delegates will be chosen at a convention in June.

The only way these delegates can be freed of their obligation to vote for Romney on the first ballot is if he withdraws as a candidate or if he formally releases them to vote for a candidate of their choice.


The letters to the editor- and the blogs are really ripping this process apart....I liked this- out of a letter to the editor:


The most offensive comment after the caucus came from Mae Woo, a Paul supporter from Yellowstone County, who thought the caucus system worked well. She said, "In a way, this is better, because you have people voting who are the most educated." That has to be the most elitist, arrogant quote I have ever heard from any politician in my entire life.

Rep. Krayton Kerns of Laurel stated, "Without a doubt, this is the way to go for the Republican Party in general and particularly for Montana." Why is Kerns' vote more important than mine? Any time the majority of the electorate is left out of the decision-making process, it is a bad deal for everyone.

Mark Waddington Miles City, Mt. ("Republican for many years")
http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/02/08/opinion/letters/40-represent.txt
 

TSR

Well-known member
Steve said:
In most Primaries, it was decided before I had a chance to vote...

Seems nothing has changed... with my state being a winner take all state,.. My vote is not counted towards my choice but instead the delegates goes to the person I like the least of the three..

Seems the table was set for the party favorite Rudy.. and Now McCain...

In the dems super Tuesday voting you get a better result in that they earned the delegates... based on their share of the popular vote...

I don't like winner take all primaries or winner take all in the electoral system of choosing a president. A lot of people are not being represented imo but I don't like messing with the Constitution either. I wish electoral votes could be distributed according to the percentage of popular votes candidates receive in each state.
 
Top