Annenberg Classroom - Speak Outs - The Two-Party System: What do you think of how elections are handled in your area?

Speak Outs

Speak Out

The Two-Party System: What do you think of how elections are handled in your area?

The parade of speeches, television appearances, rallies and candidate photo ops can mean only one thing: its primary season in American politics. This is an extraordinary time every four years that puts the major political party system in the United States on center stage.

Despite the non-stop coverage on virtually every news channel, there is more to presidential primaries than meets the eye. The presidential primary is a complex system of elections and caucuses held at the state level, and each state conducts its own based on local state laws.

This year’s presidential race raises interesting questions about how the primaries are conducted. With no clear winner in the Democratic Party between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama, issues of “superdelegate” support and the counting of the Florida and Michigan elections are casting light on the system that will determine who will be on the presidential ballot with likely Republican nominee John McCain on November 4.

POLITICAL PARTIES AND THEIR PRIMARIES

In order to understand how the primary process works, you must first understand political parties. In short, they are organizations of citizens, banding together around shared beliefs and seeking power in numbers.

Political parties exist not only at the national level during presidential and congressional elections, but, in most cases, at the state (governor, state legislatures) and local (mayors, council, boards, etc.) levels. Today, almost every level of government from coast to coast has a committee for each of the two major political parties, Republican and Democrat. Citizens can register to become a member of the party that is most aligned with their beliefs, and are then able to attend its local committee meetings and decide who represents that party in local, state and federal elections. Citizens can also choose to be “independent,” meaning that they have no party preference.

A brief history of political parties

While the United States is run on a party system today, it was not always the case. Historians suggest that many Founding Fathers believed that parties led to corruption, and wanted the citizens of the United States to cast their votes based on a candidate’s policies and ideas, not his or her party allegiance.

This, however, did not last long. George Washington was the nation’s only president not affiliated with a particular party, and by the time his successor, John Adams, was elected in 1796, the leaders of the country aligned themselves with either the Federalist or the Democratic-Republican Party. In the following years, the party system also went through a number of changes involving splinter groups and the emergence of what have become today’s established minor (or “third”) parties (Libertarian Party, Green Party, Constitution Party, etc.).

By the mid-1800s the Federalist Party faded, and the short-lived Whig Party (which gave us Presidents William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor) lost power as well, settling U.S. politics into a party system similar to what we see now, almost two centuries later. The Democratic-Republicans became simply the Democratic Party, and the various opposing groups joined the newly formed Republican Party right around the time of the Civil War. (Read more about the party system evolution.)

Primary elections: Choosing for the parties

The process by which parties select candidates who will represent them in general elections is called a primary election. This is where people of the same party run against one other, and the winner becomes the only person from that party to appear on the general election ballot. Primaries take place for Democrats and Republicans on all levels of government, from city councils to the White House.

The rules of the primary elections differ from state to state and party to party. Each state’s political party, in coordination with the state government and national party, determines when primaries will occur. Additionally the state parties and the state government determine the type of election, be it a caucus or an election, and who can vote in the primary (whether it is open or closed).

A closed primary election means only those who are registered to a party can vote in the party election; registered Democrats only can vote in the Democratic primary, registered Republicans only can vote in the Republican primary. In an open primary election, voters do not have to be registered with a particular party to vote in that party’s primary. This means that anyone - even those who are “independent” or registered with the opposing party - can vote in either the Republican or Democratic primary. However, you can cast a vote in just one of the primaries, not both.

In addition to determining who can vote in primaries, the state parties also determine the type of election. Primary elections are either elections or caucuses. Elections are the kind you are used to seeing, where voters file into polling stations and cast their ballots in private for whichever candidate they support.

Caucuses, on the other hand, are a bit different. First, voters registered with a party meet on Election Day in local meetings, called “caucuses,” where they determine who the group supports. Local caucuses take place at the precinct level and can vote in any number of ways: a show of hands, breaking into groups or casting either public or private ballots. In a national election, the precinct caucus then chooses people from among its members to cast votes at the next level (county or district). The process repeats itself until members are chosen from the level at which the election takes place.

Confused? You are not alone.

The process gets even more complex when it comes to the actual voting for a president. If you’ve voted in one of the primaries for president, you’re casting a vote for the candidate you want to represent your party, right?

Kind of.

What’s a delegate? What’s a superdelegate?

Primary voting alone does not determine who will represent the Republicans and the Democrats in the general election. After the ballots have been cast, the primaries have concluded and the votes counted, the baton is taken up by the delegates.

Delegates serve a similar role in primary elections to the Electoral College in the general election. They are electors who attend their political party’s nominating convention, usually held the summer before a presidential election. Each state has a certain number of delegates, usually based on congressional districts. At the convention, delegates cast the votes that actually decide who will run on their party’s ticket, either Republican or Democrat.

That vote you cast in your local presidential primary or caucus? It was to decide which delegates, depending on which candidate they have agreed to support, will be sent to the convention.

However, there are also two kinds of delegates. Most delegates are pledged, meaning they agreed to cast their nominating vote based on the outcome of the primary election in their state. Different states may approach this differently. Some states, such as New York and the Republican primaries in Michigan and Florida, operate on a “winner take all” basis where the candidate who gets the majority of votes in the state’s primary will receive the votes of all of that state’s delegates. Others, such as Pennsylvania and the Democratic primaries in Michigan and Florida, divide their delegates up to more evenly reflect the popular vote. So if, for example, a state had 100 delegates, and candidate A received 56 percent of the vote to candidate B’s 44 percent, candidate A would earn the votes of 56 of the delegates, while candidate B would earn the other 44.

However, experts call it a “common misconception” that pledged delegates are required to vote in agreement with the results of their primary, says The Boston Globe in its primary coverage. While pledged delegates do sign a “pledge of support” to vote for their constituency’s chosen candidate, they are not bound by any law to do this. Pledged delegates can change their mind and endorse a candidate their district didn’t vote for, but this rarely occurs.

The other kind of delegate, unpledged, is sometimes referred to as a “superdelegate” by the Democratic Party (they are simply called “unpledged delegates” by the Republican Party). These are delegates who can vote for whomever they choose, rather than voting based on the outcome of their state’s primary. These unpledged delegates are often high-ranking members of their state and national political parties, such as former heads of state, members of Congress and party officials (See a list of the Democratic superdelegates).

Both parties set a magic number of delegates that a candidate must receive in order to be declared the party nominee. If a candidate amasses more than half of the delegates before the end of the primaries, that candidate is considered the winner. That is what happened with Sen. John McCain, who is presumed to become the Republican nominee. During the state primary election, he has won support of more than the 1,191 pledged delegates needed to be declared the nominee.

If a candidate drops out of a race, the fate of delegates pledged to support that candidate will differ depending on the candidate’s party. If a Republican candidate drops out, his or her delegates are “free agents” who may support another candidate depending on individual state laws about how this may occur. Democratic candidates who drop out of the race take their delegates with them, unless the candidate was only pledged informally.

For even more detailed information about delegates, the candidates and the primary, check out the Washington Post’s Election Center and information about national delegates from the Boston Globe.

CURRENT ELECTION ISSUES FACING THE MAJOR PARTIES

When Primaries Don’t Determine a Nominee

At the end of the primary campaigns, there is a possibility that no candidate will have emerged with enough committed delegates to earn the nomination from his or her party. This is the situation facing the Democratic hopefuls for president this year, as observers suggest there is no way for either Sen. Obama or Sen. Clinton to earn enough delegates from the remaining states to cast primary election ballots. In this case, the only way for a nominee to be decided prior to the national party convention is for one of the candidates to concede the race. Observers also suggest that this is unlikely to happen for the Democrats, as both campaigns have invested so heavily in their pursuit of the presidency.

In this rare case, the nomination for the party remains undecided and goes to the convention, where delegates sent from the state level gather and cast the final vote for their nominee. This happens for both parties. Since Sen. McCain has won enough pledged delegates to win the nomination, the outcome of the Republican National Convention is already known.

This is not the case for the Democrats. Observers suggest that during the convention superdelegates will help determine which candidate will be named the party’s presidential nominee.

Many party insiders consider it a bad thing when the nomination decision “goes to convention.” This gives the other party, if the nominee is already decided, more time to campaign against the opposing party unchallenged. You can see this happening this year, as Sen. McCain has begun his general election campaign while Democratic hopefuls are still locked in ongoing primary campaigns.

When Some Votes Don’t Count

There is an even more extraordinary phenomenon happening this year. Last summer, in an effort to give their states more clout and attention in the primary campaign season, several states’ party organizations – both Republican and Democrat – chose to move their primary elections earlier on the calendar. Such moves were thought to bring more local attention from the would-be president, but others argued that it hurt lesser-known candidates and states with primaries later in the year. And in some cases, moving primaries was against party rules established at the national level. (Read the Speak Out on states moving their primary election dates.) Traditionally, Iowa and New Hampshire started the primary election season.

“There’s just no possible justification for one or two states that are not particularly representative to have a dominant role in this process. It’s not fair to other states,” said Michigan Sen. Carl Levin to the Washington Post, in support of moving up his state’s primary.

When Michigan party officials and the Florida legislature voted to move their states’ primaries to Jan. 15 and Jan. 29 respectively, Democratic party officials indeed used their authority to punish the action. The Democratic National Committee decided that because of the move to dates so early, Democratic delegates from Michigan and Florida would not be counted at the national convention. Essentially, then, votes in the Democratic primary in those two states would not count. In response, several Democratic hopefuls, including Sen. Obama, removed their names from the Michigan primary ballot in January because of the party’s rules violations.

The Republican National Committee also sanctioned states that voted before “Super Tuesday” on Feb. 5, cutting in half the delegates allotted to New Hampshire, Florida, South Carolina, Michigan and Wyoming. However, since Sen. McCain has already secured enough delegates to win his party’s nomination, the fallout has not been nearly as dramatic for the Republican Party.

With such a close race for the Democratic presidential nomination, the fact that Michigan and Florida’s delegates would not count has upset not only voters in those states but the party itself. The total number of delegates at stake is 313 pledged and 55 superdelegates, which would give Senators Obama or Clinton a considerable boost prior to the convention. However, in Michigan, only Sen. Clinton and other Democrats who have since dropped out of the race were on the Michigan primary ballot; many, including Sen. Obama, removed themselves from the ballot there in order to comply with Democratic party rules.

In recent weeks, many have called for a reconsideration of the Democratic party’s ruling, a revote, a mail-in revote, or a partial counting of delegates based on those states’ elections. Some political observers have suggested that a revote of any kind would be unrealistic and costly; instead, the debate over how to make sure Florida and Michigan’s voters are heard has recently centered on allotting a partial number of delegates based on the January primary. However, since Sen. Clinton appeared on the ballot in Michigan and not Sen. Obama, this has not been seen as a solution either.

Debate within the party continues as to how to handle the dilemma, and Florida is at the center of the discussion. DNC Chairman Howard Dean said, “It is my commitment, working with the Florida delegation and the campaigns, to find a fair solution.”

The Democratic National Convention will be held in Denver from Aug. 25 to Aug. 28. The party has set a June 10 deadline for the delegate dispute to be resolved. The Republican National Convention will be held in Minneapolis from Sept. 1 to Sept. 4.

What Do You Think?

What are your thoughts on the primary process? Do you favor open primaries or closed primaries? Do you think caucuses or elections better dictate the will of the people voting? Do you think the roles of party delegates and superdelegates are fair or would you change them? How do you think the Democratic Party should handle the elections in Florida and Michigan? Should there be a revote? Would it be fair if those states’ delegations were not counted at the Democratic National Convention? Do you agree with how the major parties handled the sanctions on states that moved their primaries before Feb. 5? How do you think the party system in America will continue to evolve?

Related Links:

Directory of American Political Parties – Politics1
History of Political Parties – MSN Encarta
Speak Out | Voting: How should states deal with federal primary elections? – Student Voices
Some Superdelegates More Super Than Rest – Associated Press, April 5, 2008
Michigan Lawmakers Won’t Back a New Primary – New York Times, March 31, 2008
Court Dismisses Florida Primary Lawsuit – Associated Press, March 21, 2008
Democrats Try to End Impasse Over Delegates – New York Times, March 7, 2008
DNC Punishes Michigan For Early Primary Date – Washington Post, Dec. 2, 2007
Early primary gives Florida a big say in '08 vote – Associated Press, May 21, 2007
The Green Papers – A comprehensive look at the primary process
Delegate types explained – The Boston Globe
Everything you've ever wanted to know about delegates and superdelegates – Huffington Post
The Washington Post’s Election Coverage Center, updated daily

Join the Discussion

Your First Name:
Your Teacher/School:
Your City/State:
Your Comment: limited to 2000 characters including spaces

Thank you for commenting.
Your comment is awaiting approval.
Click here to view all Speak Outs

Comments

5/26/2009

Brian H.
Trinity HS, PA
I think that elections are handled very well in my area. In the times of elections people are able to vote quickly and easily and this helps get people out to the polls.

2/19/2009

dylan
warren area high school, warren, pa
I think that the system of elections in my home town runs efficiently and effectively. I think that it would benefit the students if they were taught about the local governments' election system in earlier years of education. I think this could excite ambition for knowledge about the government and history at in earlier age in a productive way.

10/22/2008

Katie B
Central Gwinnett, Lawrenceville, GA
I think it is ridiculous that we have grown to a simple two party system. People now simply vote based on whether they are “red” or “blue”, and not the issue, and this is a major problem. Although most people in my area know who they are voting for, it is simply because of the two party system, instead of what the candidates stand for, and I really think that we should look into other parties and idea when voting instead of voting one party “all the way down the line”

10/13/2008

Hanna
St. Jean Vianney, Baton Rouge
The people in my area know who they are voting for, what their party is, and they will not change their mind.

10/3/2008

Amos
Trinity HighSchool, Washington/PA
in my personal opinion of this topic, i feel that elections aren't as important as they appear to the community. As much as its advertised about the election, they need to focus on the points. I feel if people had a better understanding on the situation, it would go over more smoothly throughout all the age groups in the community.

9/22/2008

Meagan
Seattle, HRC Seattle
It seems that an election is more fair than caucuses. If every person eligible to vote has just as much say as any other voter, then shouldn’t the elections be structured that way? Also, I see voters today becoming increasingly more disillusioned with our two-party system. They care more about individual issues then straight allegiance to one party or another. As such issues as the environment, the war in Iraq, or the economy become a focus, more voters are hesitating between parties if they feel the other candidate and will better represent their concerns. This overwhelming number of new “swing voters” is challenging the tradition of two parties and causing renewed debate about whether a two party system is really conducive to the best representation of voters.

6/3/2008

Emily
Nimitz/Irving
I personally like how the elections are held in my area. In dealing with Florida and Michigan, there primaries would have helped with the nomination of the Democratic nominee, however when they chose to move their primaries before Feb. 5, they gave up their right for their votes to be counted in the race.

6/2/2008

Dalton R
Nimitz High School
I believe that the elections are handled properly and right. It usually works without problems.

5/29/2008

Jennifer T.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
Honestly, I like how the primary process is now. They involve the people and that is what's important. The process is also a good way for the candidates to see what the people are thinking or feeling about certain topics.

5/28/2008

Elizabeth W.
Nimitz Irving, Texas
I think the entire process of national elections has gotten way out of hand. The process has become so complex that more and more people are falling behind and refusing to vote because they do not understand. To an extent I like the idea of primaries, but it seems that caucuses go too far. I also like the process of “open primaries”, but can see why many states do not allow them, it can lead to many citizens voting for who they think is the weaker candidate, to run against the opposing candidate that they like best. As or dealings in Michigan and Florida, with the continuous campaigning between the two Democrats, I believe it would be easier if the states simply voted again, with Obama and Clinton on the ticket, perhaps closing the Democrat running.

5/19/2008

Ruefus
Warren Hills (Washington, NJ)
I think the primary process is a good way to hold presidential nomination elections. the party should have full control of how they choose to pick their presidential nominees. I believe that Florida and Michigan should lose their delegates because they knew that they were breaking the primary rules that the democratic party has set up, and they should be punished accordingly.

5/18/2008

Whittney A.
Pd. 6 Northeast High School
I think the primary process os a good way to hold elections, however, in a way it is not perfect. By reading up on the primary process it seems that the decions aren't just made by the people. Of course we lay a major role in how delgates recieve their votes, but in term we don't choose our president. I'm not saying we don't have a say, but the process is not fully by the people. In order to handle the primary elections in Florida and Michagan, the democratic party should continue on with their style of percentage of votes and delagates. Honestly, I don't think there will be any changes in the party system because it has been this way for a long time.

5/15/2008

Tyriek R.
Northeast HS
The primary process are a great way to handle elective elimination because your leaving it up to the people, and the people are the ones who the candidates are running for. This causes more participation from the people and makes them care more. It's amazing to know that your vote will have a hand in determing how the city is run. And since you don't want just anybody in office, more people will vote. Caucauses, I believe aren't as effective as the primary because it's the people's will that wins. The votes from Florida I think should count as well. I think that America will continue to evolve even though our government is a little rocky, we will smooth things out.

5/8/2008

Matthew Y.
Trinity High School / Washington
With the elections in full blast right now the candidate and their issues have been heard all over the nation via the media, the radio, and just plain old talking. As an 18 year old I have had my first chance to vote in my primaries and I feel that my party, the Republicans, will win the white house in November because of their stance on all of the issues. By voting for John McCain, this country will have a good leader in him, rather than Obama or Clinton.

4/29/2008

Gianna J Prd 4
Northeast High School (Philadelphia, PA)
I just want to start off with saying that we are very fortunate to have the two democratic candidates that we do; a women and a African- American man both running for president. That to me is unbelievable. Primary and Caucasus are both important but I think that the primary elections are way more important because the people them selves get a say. That kind of feeling, knowing that every little vote counts (your vote) I think makes the people care a little bit more about voting, especially at a time like this. Not to mention that exciting felling new voters can get when they step in to the booth knowing that your vote ,your voice will determine the next president or the next candidate who will represent you and speak for what you want with the up and coming year. No matter what the candidate chosen is going to be the best person chosen to represent the people. Caucasus are not as great to me as primary because the caucuses consist of a group of people and what that group decides may not be what the people all agree on. To go by what groups of people decide as a pose to all of the people will be a cruel thing to do because everyone just wants to be heard, as the votes in Florida and Michigan goes those votes should be counted because them trying to dismiss them is stupid. The votes were counted so they should just except them and stop trying to rig everything. The party system in America is up and down, side to side it’s hard to be really sure of where everything is going but yes I do think that it will continue to evolve.

4/21/2008

Sujith I.
Nimitz HS, Irving, TX
I believe the way that Democrats hold their primaries and caucuses are inefficient and cumbersome. The idea of proportional voting has left the Dems without a candidate and has produced intra-party fighting; while the Reps already have a candidate due to having winner-take-all elections. If the Dems just had a winner-take-all primary system they would already have a candidate (probably Hillary Clinton because she won almost all the big states), however; things are still up in the air for Dems because of their complicated and unnecessary system of primaries/caucuses, superdelegates, and proportional voting. Primaries are surely better than caucuses in representing the will of the people; caucuses just skew the delegate count and are an unnecessary facet of the nomination process. The votes from Florida and Michigan should count; the heads of the Democratic Party have made their point, now just count the votes. The party system in America is ever evolving and it is impossible to tell how the future will turn out.

4/19/2008

Regina T
Nimitz HS (Irving, TX)
The primary process is a good way for the candidates to get an idea of the public opinion and allows the general public to get to know the candidates better. During primary season, candidates are able to publicly express their views because of the media's extensive involvement. Holding elections is the simplest way to gather the will of the people voting because it doesn’t have the restriction that a Caucasus has. I feel like this system will continue to change because some states like Michigan and Florida are already trying to change their system. This is a very interesting election year and I look forward to seeing how it unfolds.

4/17/2008

Joey W.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The primaries and caucuses are needed to get voters riled up over the final election. I do not think that voters should be confined by party loyalty. If someone wants to vote for Hillary in the primary, and then vote for McCain in the general election that should be their choice. We have been lenient with the parties, and the two party system has gained too much power.

4/17/2008

Michael
Nimitz High School (Irving)
I believe that the primaries and caucuses are a good thing. They help include the voters in on what is going on in the race for president. Things may not be perfect but then again nothing is perfect. The states are doing a good job of conducting the primaries and caucuses and cluing people in on the elections.

4/16/2008

Sarah C.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I like how the primary elections involve the general public unlike other countries, and it enables a leader to be chosen in a political party. I believe that caucuses are beneficial because a voter has support from similar people, and together can accomplish goals. With a close tie in the democratic party, I believe that the nominees will take the Michigan and Florida elections very serious and must come up with different and appealing ideas or strategies.

4/16/2008

Beau P.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I believe that states should be allowed to conduct how they go about their primary election process. Also, I think that the elections themselves show the will of the people voting more than that of caucuses because a lot of people in caucuses are undecided on a certain candidate and it is the election and voting that counts.

4/16/2008

Riane
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The primary process as it is currently run is not perfect, but I see no major issues with the process. I think the elections, not caucuses, better dictate the will of the people because voting allows each voter to say who they support.

4/16/2008

Naomi M.
Nimitz High Scool (Irving,TX)
I think that the primaries are a very effective means of dictating what the people want. They are important because they allow the candidates to know where they stand among the people. They also allow the people to see before hand how candidates will do in the upcoming election. I do not necessarily think that caucuses are accurate because only people who have voted in the primaries can participate.

4/16/2008

Rachel P.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I think that the primaries are good way for the delegates to see where they stand in the public’s eye. The primaries are also a good way to see how the delegates perform in certain situations, before making the choice of who you want to see as president. Primaries give voters the chance to analyze the decisions made by delegates and to possibly change their mind. I believe the party system will continue to change; with new parties showing up, but the primaries are still the best way to see who is in the lead and where voters stand on national issues.

4/16/2008

Ethan K
Nimitz High School (Iriving, TX)
This year's primaries have been very close and dramatic for the democratic party. Don't get me wrong, I like how the primaries reflect the opinions of the candidates, but i don't enjoy watching television that analyzes every aspect of the candidate's lives, not only publicly but privately as well. I don't believe that Michigan and Florida's delegates should count in the primary, as they stand now. They broke party rules. Plus, Michigan's delegates are not a fair count due to the fact that Obama took his name off the ballot there. So if the democratic party does choose to let Florida and Michigan off, then they need to have another vote.

4/16/2008

Harrison
Nimitz High School (Irving TX)
In the question of whether either primaries or caucuses best dictate the will of the people voting, primaries win hands down- that can’t be disputed. What can however is whether direct democracy should be what we’re aiming for. The founders of our nation created our form of government based around representative democracy. In that light, caucuses best characterize the views of the founding fathers. I support caucuses because they reflect the ideology of our first noble statesmen and because I think they reflect the true views of the people. At a caucus I attended a few weeks ago, we were able to choose our own delegates, which were basically regular people that just decided to volunteer. Because of the caucus’s unique way of appointing delegates, I could see that these people representing me were no different. I realized that if my views were going to be upheld in an election, it would be through average people that I could relate to in the caucus system. Also I think that the way the Democratic Party took away the delegates of Michigan and Florida just because they tried to move there primaries up, is an unnecessary action and not even an appropriate one. Denying total representation of two states because they wanted to vote sooner is not justified and should be reversed.

4/16/2008

Kayla
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I think the primaries are a god indicator of the actual elections. Caucuses seem like a great idea, but I think they should be easier to be involved in; one shouldn't have to vote in the primaries in order to participate. I think elections better dictate the will of the people voting, since it is more direct.

4/16/2008

Timothy
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The primaries are useful in determining how the public feels about whose running. It allows everyone involved in the race, to get a feel for how they are doing, where they can improve, which states are not even worth visiting and which states do you need to schedule an extra rally, just to get that extra advantage over your competition. I think both primaries are caucuses are important, but they each have their own strengths and weaknesses, nothing is ever perfect. The Democratic Party should definitely reconsider how much weight Michigan and Florida carry. It’s not right, that one state, like Florida, can be the deciding factor in a presidential campaign. Problems are just waiting to happen with that, like last presidential election with Florida having to do recounts. As for the party system, we’ve had some form of party system for the past two hundred years, I have no doubt in my mind, that it will continue on for the next two hundred years, going through its subtle changes when necessary.

4/16/2008

Emarric
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
Because a caucus allows more chance to change your vote, for your mind to be changed by others, I believe that primaries, which are a definite choice, are the better form of selection. A delegate is supposed to do what his constituents want. The primaries allow the voters to vote without being swayed by public opinion. This allows a more stable representation, much like how the Senate is swayed much less by shifting political views than the House is in Congress.

4/16/2008

Su
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I agree with the other students in that the primaries allow the candidates and voters where the candidates are standing. This also helps the candidates figure out how much more effort they put int the next state. The caucuses are better in the sense that the people can have their initial input, then they are allowed to be persuade to join or get a better understanding of the other candidate. This way the polls and be compared and can be compared to how voter’s favoritism has shifted. Hopefully, the party system will evolve to a more effective state to where there are less complications over time.

4/16/2008

Tanner
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
Primaries are effective in that they allow the candidates to really show their platforms and personalities. The nature of the primary brings on debates and speeches, with each candidate trying to gain a lead. Without primaries the exposure of each candidate would be lessened and the voters less educated. On the other hand, primaries reinforce the divide between the parties. With each candidate competing for nomination, the bipartisanship of our government is never more apparent. The votes cast in the primary are more direct and representative of how people are feeling about the candidates than in the general election. I think the primary system is an important part of the election process and political parties are here to stay.

4/16/2008

Micah J
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The elections in my area are pretty well handled based on the fact of elections around here are very well publicized. Around here you know when elections are coming up and informed about what is up for election and who is running by the millions of signs.

4/16/2008

Chad
Nimitz HS (Irving, TX)
I believe that elections do not always reflect the opinions of the people. Some people might not bother to go to the polls. Although, I know that there is hardly anything that can be done about that. Caucuses are a whole other animal. Elections I can handle, but caucuses, I believe, are a waste of time and effort. Many people did not get to participate in the caucuses in Texas a few months ago because of long lines and flared tempers. It was not well organized and the results will almost certainly not reflect the entire will of the people. To summarize, I conclude that elections are a viable way of expressing our political opinion, but caucuses are not.

4/16/2008

Justin
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The thing about primaries in our Country is that their is a numerous amount of voters who do not vote in the primaries of their state; Even though, this year has been an outstanding voter turn out over the democratic nomination for presidency. Here in Irving, Texas we have a, "Council/Manager" type of city government. We have causes in Irving, but to me they are nothing but a big joke in the first place.

4/16/2008

Ana B.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I believe that the primary elections are a great way to reflect the people’s voice, and show candidates where they stand at each state. At a caucus you can see both sides and then be able to settle and finalize your vote if you feel the need to. Caucuses are just another way of trying to change people’s mind and change the vote unlike primaries which are final.

4/16/2008

Anthony H.
Nimitz HS (Irving TX)
I believe that the way the elections are run now is working just fine; having the primaries allows the candidates running a chance to see where they stand in the political race. Having the primaries also allows the voters to decide earlier which candidates they would like to vote for in the 2008 elections depending on the candidate’s action during the primaries. I think that having the primaries gives a good look of who the strong candidates are and will help wean out weaker candidates making the voting process simpler.

4/16/2008

Olivia F.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
This recent election has involved much more campaigning and coverage than previously. I believe the primary process, as it stands, is definitely flawed. The caucus system is too archaic a process to be a fair method of representation. However I also believe that each state should continue with elections how it sees fit.

4/16/2008

Victoria K.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
Honestly, I have never really paid much attention to politics. I guess you can add me to the percentage of teens that are not well informed. This year with be my first year to vote and I'm kind of lost as far as all the caucuses and elections go. As far as primaries go I don't see the point in having to be first. I think the more that states continue to try to be first the date of primaries will get as far back as the year before the election entirely. Seems kind of unrealistic, but as far as I can tell with elections this year, anything is possible.

4/15/2008

Helen
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The primary system is a good way to filter out the competition and show where candidates stand with the public. Elections and caucuses allow people to voice their opinions and know what other people think as well. The Democratic Party should let Florida and Michigan conclude as they will. I really don't agree with the delegate system but I don't fully understand how we came to this system but people should just vote for who they think and have it directly added to the ballots. I believe eventually the parties will either become more alike or radicals will move to change the system for the future.

4/15/2008

Jennifer T
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I think that the primaries are very useful for both of the political parties. It really does show the people's opinions and how it reflects their views. I feel that caucuses let people see issues from both view points. They can switch views if they feel like they needed to.

4/15/2008

Kaitlyn
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I think primaries help people decide on who they are going to vote for in the final election and gives them more time to narrow them down. The case between Obama and Clinton is a tough decision at this point with many people because they are so close in the votes. Florida and Michigan should handle the primaries just like they normally do. They shouldn't change the ways they vote since its been working in the past. I believe people should be able to join caucuses even if they haven't voted in the primaries so they can get more of an opinion and be more involved in the election.

4/15/2008

Jared S.
Nimitz High School, Irving, Texas
I believe that elections better represent the will of the people voting. The individual who is elected into office directly reflects the will of the majority. The remaining primaries in Michigan and Florida are obviously critical to the Democratic candidates, and how efficiently each respective candidate centralizes their campaign efforts toward those two states will determine the Democratic nominee.

4/15/2008

Lindsey D.
Nimitz HS (Irving, TX)
Primaries are important in the reflection of the public’s opinion of each candidate. Caucuses are defined as “an association of members of Congress, created to advocate a political ideology on a regional or economic interest”. No where does it say that one must vote in the primary first in order to participate in a caucus. This only limits the participation and opinion of the people. The Democratic Party needs to focus on campaigning both in Michigan and Florida, for these states are being underestimated in their effect in this race. I do not see much evolution occurring anytime soon, however I wouldn’t really mind of it didn’t, because I like how these elections are being held.

4/15/2008

Taylor F.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I believe that the primary process is an important part of the elections. Many people believe that the caucuses can determine as much as the primaries can, but I do not think so. I also believe that each state should not be able to conduct their own style of voting; it tends to make the situation more difficult than it needs to be.

4/14/2008

Kati M.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I think the primaries are a very good strategy in the political system. It not only allows the candidates to see where they stand in the election, but it also allows people to have the opportunity to think about who they are going to vote for. I personally don’t like the way caucuses are held here. If people want to participate in the caucuses they have to have already voted in the primaries. I think that puts a limit on the participation in all the caucuses. I don’t think the Democratic Party is fully aware of the strengths of Florida and Michigan. Each outcome will have a major deciding factor in the election. I think the party system will remain the same in the near futures to come. I personally like the path the party system is on currently.

4/14/2008

Austin C.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The issue boils down to whether America should have a direct or representative democracy. In terms of the will of the people, primaries are excellent. However, for those who would prefer "trustees" instead of "delegates," caucuses are more appealing. Due to the way the presidential election is run, the Democratic Party needs to give the highest importance the results of the primaries in the key states of Michigan and Florida. With the clearly growing impact of the primaries, it would seem that the party system in America is heading from representative democracy, as the Founders intended, to a direct democracy imbued with shades of the old Grecian city-states.

4/14/2008

Janeth G.
Nimitz HS (Irving,TX)
I think the primary process is very useful when narrowing down the candidates for each party. This allows the people have a say in the election and also allows the parties see where they stand. Caucuses are handled differently in each state. For example here in Texas if you don't vote in the primaries you can't participate in the caucuses so it doesn't really show the accuracy of the race and standings. I believe that Michigan and Florida should be taken seriously because for the Democratic Party this could help decide a nominee for the presidential election.

4/14/2008

Megan
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The primary system is a great way for candidates to see where they stand with each state. I believe the primaries to be more important than caucuses because all that they really do in the first place is try to get people to change their views. The Democratic Party should definitely take the Michigan and Florida primaries seriously. I think that our party system will most likely stay on the same track that it’s been on. Nothing has changed in quite awhile, so I don’t see much need for it.

4/13/2008

Min-Young
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
For the most part, the primaries are very useful in reflecting the public’s opinion on each candidate. In the case between Obama and Clinton, things aren’t so clear cut as we’d like them to be. I definitely think the primaries are more valuable because caucuses buy people more time to switch views and their support for a certain candidate or party. The Democratic Party should reconsider the weight that Michigan and Florida carry. I think the party system will carry on for quite some time to the same degree.

4/13/2008

Robert
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I believe that the primary process is a very strategic way for politicians to exercise their political beliefs. I think that it gives America the opportunity to further participate in their civil duties. It also give party nominations the chance to see where they stand in their political race.

4/11/2008

Stephanie
Nimitz High School/ Irving,TX
I think that the primary system is a good way to narrow down the candidates and for people to decide whom they will vote for. I don't think that caucuses better determine who will win because all that caucuses do is convince people to change their minds. I actually think that caucuses are ridiculous because in Texas, you have to have voted in the primaries to be able to go to the caucus and participate. I think that the Democratic party should take the Florida and Michigan primaries very seriously because more often than not, Florida has been the "deciding factor" for determining the next president. Also, they, along with California, are the final states with the larger amounts of delegates to win. Everyone handled the sanctions very gracefully and tactfully, in my opinion. Some probably handled it better than others, but that's human nature. The party system in America will probably keep traveling on the same track that it has been on. The two major parties haven't changed in quite some time, so I don't forsee that much will change. The minor parties, maybe, but they're the minor parties and never carry more than one state anyhow.

4/11/2008

Brittany
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
The primary process is a little confusing to me. Every state has its own method casting there votes. I think it would clear up a lot of confusion if each state had the same voting system and would make it a lot easier and faster.

4/11/2008

Jackie E.
Nimitz High School (Irving, TX)
I do not see why it matters for primaries to be after February 5th. I think how the primaries have been working, is working. Do not try to fix something that is not broken. Voting is a smart way to see who the people want to run for certain parties, it is democratic. If we just have the leaders of those parties pick who they want, it might not reflect who the people want.