Quantcast

Letter: Primary system would let everyone have a say in elections

Published November 16, 2013 1:01 am

This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2013, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

I've heard a lot of caucus-system supporters say that the delegate process is important because they are elected by their neighbors. Well, then why not just let the neighbors themselves choose candidates (in a primary)?

I've taken part in the last three caucuses and, trust me, it is nothing like the Norman Rockwell nostalgia it is made out to be. Imagine that weirdo political hobbyist you know with a fanny pack or too many cellphones on belt clips choosing your candidates. That's what the caucus system is.

These people love their hobby and their petty power.

I was involved in 2012 when many libertarians like myself were trying to oust Hatch. What seemed to have worked in 2010 with Lee burned us in 2012 once the incumbent was not asleep at the switch. Those meetings were very easy for the "big money" candidate to control, which is exactly what happened.

The fringe of the GOP, like any highly motivated activist group, might like the caucus system because they think they can use it to wield a disproportionate influence. Ultimately, however, it can also be more easily controlled by the "big money" conspirators they fear than a primary.

Spencer Morgan

Eagle Mountain