Iowa Demonstration

Although voters do not have an obligation publicly state which party they align with, they still must only align with one party during the primary. Therefore, their ballots do not present every possible candidate, and thus, their scope of presidential candidates is limited. The goal of a primary should be to reflect how the state will likely vote during the general election. Blanket primaries accomplish this by allowing voters to select the best candidate from every choice available. This also shows how certain candidates fair in comparison with other parties’ candidates. Parties still have the ability to nominate their candidate with the highest number of votes, but the blanket primary gives more power to the voters than to political parties. Political candidates must market themselves to voters as an aggregate in the state, and cannot rely on party affiliation to be a driving force come primary season. Therefore, while open and blanket primaries are extremely similar, it is the fact that blanket primaries allow more freedom for voters that makes them the favorable

Primary elections are elections held previous to a Presidential election to decide upon the presidential candidate from the two main parties. These are held in each state, each of which then goes on to sponsor the winning candidate of their primary at the national convention, where the party’s presidential candidate is announced. This method of choosing a candidate came about due to the McGovem/Fraser Commission of 1968 (where Mayor Daley refused McGovem the chance to run as he was too liberal). It replaced the old system of decisions being made in ‘smoke filled rooms’ where party bosses were all powerful and made the decision.

Still this state holds a crucial role for both party’s elections. The state of Iowa is the first to cast its ballots. Those ballots are a very good indicators of the way other votes across the nation will vote. According to the recent polls, it is still undecided in Iowa. People are very indecisive about who they can vote. Despite multiple visits by the both candidates, voters are still unsure in this 11th hour. The reason behind the both candidates’ numerous visit is the fact that Iowa is the first to vote and whoever wins it, can have a head start. Hillary Clinton is most likely would strive to grab those six votes. The reason is the state has voted the Democratic candidate in five of the last six elections. But Hillary is not a popular choice towards the state’s most conservative Christians. While Hillary has succeeded to sway some conservative and Republican women to her side, she has still yet to convince her Democratic nominee running mate, Bernie Sanders supporters and young people. Lot of people in Iowa thinks both of the candidates are going to be disastrous towards this nation. Bryan Branscomb, an IT Specialist, said “Honestly, I'm a little lost. I feel both would be a detriment to the country." Some Iowans would still vote for Bernie Sanders if they could. So now, only thing I could say that no one knows who will own the state of Iowa this November

Winning the primary Ballot procedures Developing a personal following for the "party 's" nomination Incumbent advantage Sophomore surge Using the perqs of office Campaigning for / against Congress Impact of the way we elect individuals to Congress Legislators closely tied to local concerns Weak party leadership Primary versus general campaigns Kinds of elections and primaries: general versus primary elections Differences between primary and general campaigns What works in a general election may not work in a primary Different voters, workers, and media attention Must mobilize activists with money and motivation to win nomination Must play to the politics of activists Iowa caucuses Held in February of general election year

This paper will talk about the presidential primaries in the United States of America. It will explain what a primary election is, and where it comes from historically, also how it fits into today’s society. Another topic it will cover is how the primary process has played out so far this year, how some of the contenders are currently faring in the race for presidency. It will also cover the strong suits of the primaries and some of the major flaws of the primaries. The last topic this paper will cover is whether or not the people of the United States should understand and care about the presidential Primaries.

The Republican incumbent Senator Patrick Toomey of Pennsylvania was placed in a difficult position throughout his Senatorial campaign. With an unstable, hectic presidential campaign in progress, the citizens of Pennsylvania were curious as to whether the two senatorial candidates were in support or opposed to their party’s respective presidential candidates. While Katie McGinty, the democratic candidate for the Pennsylvania Senate, clearly endorsed Hillary Clinton, Toomey refrained from expressing clear support for Donald Trump. Although McGinty attacked Toomey’s lack of decisiveness and called him weak, Toomey took this stance strategically. Toomey resulted in winning the Pennsylvania Senatorial election through his status as an incumbent, and his strategic decision to refrain from fully endorsing Donald Trump.

Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz on Friday crisscrossed Iowa on a five-stop campaign event swing through the state as he continues to built a strong support amongst Republican voters with just 100 days left into the Iowa caucus. The latest Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register poll released on Friday has Cruz in third place with 10% in Iowa. Ben Carson is in first place in Iowa with 28% while Donald Trump is now in second with 19%. Even though Cruz is positioned to earn one of the ‘three tickets out of Iowa,’ he still needs to snatch up more voters from the other Republican candidates who are vying for the same fraction of evangelicals conservative that are taking away votes from Cruz.

On decision day, when voters in every state go to the surveys, every one throws a tally for the slate of presidential voters who are promised to bolster the hopeful the voter lean towards. These slates host been chosen by political gatherings, through traditions, boards of trustees or primaries. At the point when an applicant

Author Dave Price couldn’t have come up with a more fitting title for his book. Caucus Chaos delves right into the multitude of campaign stops, fundraising events, town hall meetings, meet and greet breakfasts, backroom dealings, straw polls, state fair appearances, questionable victory announcements, party infighting, heated phone calls, etcetera that culminated into the chaotic event that was the 2012 Republican Iowa Caucus. The thesis of Price’s text appears to be that the Iowa Republican Party was too indecisive in deciding who it wanted to represent the party in the 2012 Presidential election. And as mentioned in the text, “their indecision on picking the “best” candidate to beat President Barack Obama mirrored the country. While Republicans

Iowa caucuses: Ted Cruz wins; Clinton declares victory Every four years the beginning of the Presidential election begins with one of the most important events of the election, the Iowa Caucus. It is an electoral event where residents of the U.S. state of Iowa meet in precinct caucuses in all of Iowa's 1,681 precincts. Since 1972 the first major electoral event for nominating the President of the United States has been the Iowa Caucus. How does a state such as Iowa without much diversity and small population have so much power over the presidential election?

What factors are most accurate in predicting the outcome of a presidential election? In the book The Gamble, by John Sides and Lynn Vavreck, the factors of choice and chance answer this question through analysis of the 2012 presidential election. The term choice refers to the factors that the candidate has no control over, such as what the media chooses to cover and what the campaign chooses to make stances on. Adversely, chance is what the candidate has no control over, such as the state of the economy and partisanship. Sides and Vavreck refer to chance factors as fundamentals. I will argue that the economy plays the greatest role in deciding presidential elections. Campaigns and media are secondary to the economy and underlying voter partisanship, due to their inconsequential effect on voters. I will argue that chance is more important than choice from the evidence provided in the The Gamble, by John Sides and Lynn Vavreck, and Partisan Biases in Economic Accountability, by Larry Bartels. Political scientists evaluate and debate the role of choice versus the role of chance in predicting presidential elections. The economy and partisanship are superior at predicting presidential elections because the fleeting effects of media, the tug-of-war campaigns, strong voter partisanship, and myopic voters.

The 2004 and 2012 Presidential Elections demonstrated the voter’s commitment to incumbent Presidents during tough times and major crises. In 2004, voters were interested in foreign policy, terrorism and the current wars. In 2012 the national focus was the economy, following the financial crisis that began in 2008. Consequently, the challenging nominees had backgrounds appropriate for the issues, but had the inability to stand out as a better option. Perhaps because, typically incumbents have the advantage of better name recognition, experience and their agenda has had longer time to be defined.

The two main primaries are closed and open and the least used is the blanket primary. Voters can participate in a closed primary when they are affiliated with a certain party. In an open primary any registered voter can participate, in a blanket primary registered voters can participate in all primaries. This method allows voters to actively participate in choosing their presidential candidate. It is not only delegates that are chosen such as in a caucus, voters can see how their vote is making a difference. In some states independents can play a role in choosing the presidential candidate and other states allow to switch their party affiliation before an election (The U.S. Presidential). Voters being able to attend a primary show that the system to select a presidential candidate is fair and democratic. Every voter gets a fair chance to show their opinion and their votes weigh in

Before the general election, most of the candidates for president passes through a series of states primaries and caucuses. To Illustrate, primaries are private voting all day long, and caucuses are public voting at a specific time. Primaries and caucuses runs different, but both have the same purpose that is help the states to choose the political parties’ nominees for the general election.

At the conclusion of President Barack Obama’s historical consecutive terms in office there is going to be a large number of candidates that are vying for the nominations of the respective parties. Due to the constitutional term limits imposed on the President, Obama is barred to seek re-election in 2016. While there are about 10 candidates running for the republicans, there are only two still in the running for the Democratic Party. The way candidates are recognized by their respective parties to become a candidate for the United States Presidency is first by receiving an invitation to compete in the primaries, then being included in the nationwide polls, as well as being on the ballot for at least 75% of all states. At the conclusion of the February 1st caucus there were 3 Democrats and 10 republicans who were still in the Presidential race, since then one Democratic candidate had dropped out.