Minnesota Will Replace Caucuses With Presidential Primary In 2020

FILE - In this Dec. 3, 2015 file photo, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton takes questions about the state's projected budget surplus in St. Paul, Minn. Dayton was taken to a hospital for testing after fainting Sunday, Jan. ... FILE - In this Dec. 3, 2015 file photo, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton takes questions about the state's projected budget surplus in St. Paul, Minn. Dayton was taken to a hospital for testing after fainting Sunday, Jan. 31, 2016, during an event in the Twin Cities suburb of Woodbury, his chief of staff said. Dayton was to remain in the hospital overnight as a precaution. (Glen Stubbe/Star Tribune via AP, File) MANDATORY CREDIT; ST. PAUL PIONEER PRESS OUT; MAGS OUT; TWIN CITIES LOCAL TELEVISION OUT MORE LESS

Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton (D) on Sunday announced that he signed a bill creating a presidential primary starting in the 2020 election to replace the current caucus system.

Critics of the caucus system argue that caucuses exclude voters unable or unwilling to attend a lengthy process.

The Minnesota secretary of state, Steve Simon, told Minnesota station KMSP in March that the primary could allow more voters to participate in the primary.

“Keep in mind if it’s a real primary election, unlike a caucus, there would be an absentee period where people would vote before the election. Not so with caucuses, where you need to be there in person at a particular hour, 7 p.m., or else you can’t vote,” he said.

45
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Good! That’s one. Only another 20 or so to go.

  2. This is not an election as we think of the general election. It is a party chosing the candidate of their choice to represent the party in the general election. Independents and others not registered to a party or not willing to spend the time and energy to understand issues and know candidates should not be allowed to participate.

  3. So only party types that can take off time from work and/or afford a babysitter are qualified?

    You can still have closed primaries.

    And there are plenty of idiots on all sides of the political spectrum that vote and/or caucus.

  4. I am completely opposed to caucuses because they disenfranchise voters, even those who show up to vote.

    Think of what we just saw in NV, which has a closed caucus only available to Democrats. If a Democrat who had studied the issues and made a decision showed up to the first caucus to vote, they would have the expectation of their vote being counted. But if the delegate their vote selected got the flu or just drunk and didn’t show up to the county caucus, that vote is lost. Even if the delegate did show up to the county caucus, now there’s another level where a delegate can skip and disenfranchise the voters again.

    Then there are primaries, where that same voter shows up, casts their ballot, and it is counted.

    I prefer the latter.

  5. Bad news for Bermie

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

39 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for bdtex Avatar for pluckyinky Avatar for gulliver Avatar for kendyzdad Avatar for mymy Avatar for leftflank Avatar for chammy Avatar for wiscojoe Avatar for dave48 Avatar for horrido Avatar for tomdibble Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for mike_in_houston Avatar for denisj Avatar for leeks Avatar for captaincommonsense Avatar for pshah Avatar for ryokyo Avatar for dodgson Avatar for ozziecat Avatar for edhedh Avatar for ljb860 Avatar for marcinmin

Continue Discussion