by Teh Nutroots | Damozel has convinced me: Christopher Hitchens is sometimes right. I think he's
right here about the nature of the Iowa caucus, but I also think the
process isn't going to change. Americans nod off when anyone talks to
them about process, except in cases---the 2000 election being a case in
point---when something goes wrong. And even then all that happens is
that people show they don't understand the process. "We don't have a
president!" people anxiously told one another as the votes were being
counted, oblivious to the fact that William Jefferson Clinton remained
in office till January and the inauguration....
Anyway, here's Hitchens on Iowa:
[S]omething as absurd and counterdemocratic as this can be so only if the media say it is so, and every four years for as long as I can remember, the profession has been promising to swear off the bottle and stop treating the Iowa caucuses as if they were a primary, let alone an election. Credit Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post for being the first writer this year to try to hold his fellow journalists to that pledge:
Without that massive media boost, prevailing in Iowa would be seen for what it is: an important first victory that amounts to scoring a run in the top of the first inning.
"It stinks," says veteran political reporter Jack Germond. "The voters ought to have time to make a considered decision, and the press ought to be a little less poll-driven, and we're not." Between the coverage and the hyper-compressed campaign calendar, he says, "the whole system this year is absolutely a disgrace." (Slate)
Reporters describe the rules as "arcane."(Slate) Hitch:
Campaign aides are showing up at Iowan homes "with DVD's that [explain] how the caucuses work." Nobody needs a DVD to understand one-person-one-vote, a level playing field, and a secret ballot. The DVD and the other gifts and goodies...are required precisely because none of those conditions applies in Iowa.(Slate)
If you've ever, or even never. wondered how it works, here's Hitchens' description:
It's only when you read an honest reporter like Dan Balz that you appreciate the depth and extent of the fraud that is being practiced on us all. "In a primary," as he put it, "voters quietly fill out their ballots and leave. In the caucuses, they are required to come and stay for several hours, and there are no secret ballots. In the presence of friends, neighbors and occasionally strangers, Iowa Democrats vote with their feet, by raising their hands and moving to different parts of the room to signify their support for one candidate or another. …
What [the Iowa caucus does] does is give the whip hand to the moneyed political professionals, to the full-time party hacks and manipulators, to the shady pollsters and the cynical media boosters, and to the supporters of fringe and crackpot candidates.
(Slate)
MEMEORANDUM DISCUSSION HERE. Also: protein wisdom, Political Machine, Betsy's Page and CBS News
RELATED BN-POLITICS POSTINGS
Primary 2008: Polls Don't Seem to Mean Much
* Something's Amiss at Gallup: Approval Ratings 7 Mid-East Peace
* Why Democrats Beat Republicans in Gallup Poll
* Polling Data Inadequately Reported
* CNN Poll: Bad News for Dems, No News for Republicans?
* New Poll: Record Low Approval of Bush & More
* Approval Ratings: What do the Numbers Mean?
* Hoping for More Careful Polling Analysis
Comments