Doug Kerr
Well-known member
Many of my colleagues living outside the United States know far more about American civics than many Americans. But for the benefit of all, I thought I would clarify a few things about the process by which the President of the United States (POTUS) is elected. I will couch my description as if addressing a non-U.S. reader.
The general election
The president for the term 2013-2017 (and it is rarely stated that way) will be elected by a national general election to be held on Tuesday, November 6, 2012 CE. The process of this election is a curious one indeed, and I will discuss it later in the year.
The primary process
Of immediate interest is the matter of what persons will be candidates for president in that election - the "primary process".
There is no nationwide system of primary elections that select those candidates. Rather, the candidates must in general be put forth in the name of a recognized political party, and the candidates of the parties are chosen by "floor votes" in national conventions held by those parties in the summer before the general election.
The number of delegates from each state to a party's national convention is based on a formula adopted by the party, usually involving the size of the state (as reflected by the number of senators and representatives it has in the national legislature), but modified based on how that state voted in the last presidential election.
Each state has, for each recognized political party, a process for selecting the members of that state's delegation to the national convention. These processes are covered to some extent by state law, but many of the details are reserved to the state leadership of the respective political party. Thus the process of selecting members of the Texas delegation to the national convention of the Republican Party is dramatically different than the process for the Democratic Party.
In some states this is done through a system of primary elections; in some states by a system of caucuses. In one form, in effect, people in favor of Smith gather in one group, those in favor of Jones in another group). In another form, those who attend the caucus cast secret ballots. In Texas, for the Democratic party, there is a bizarre concatenation of a primary election and then (after the polls have closed) a scheme of caucuses. The resultant are combined in a curious way.
In many cases, for one of both parties, the results of the process is only to select delegates to a state party convention, which actually selects the delegates to the national party convention. Sometimes the process has more stages, including a county and district convention, with some delegates to the national convention being selected at lower stages and some at higher stages.
It is nightmarish. Almost no one understands how it works.
Primary elections and equivalents
Typically, any qualified voter may vote in the primary election (or other equivalent process) for any one of the recognized political parties (but not more than one). This of course means that a voter who favors the re-election of the incumbent president may choose to vote in the primary election of the opposing party, voting for the least-viable contender in hopes that he would become that party's nominee and thus give the weakest opposition to the incumbent.
In some states, to make sure that a voter does not vote in more than one party's primary election, the voters must first register as a supporter of a specific party. That of course has no effect on how the voter may vote in the general election.
In at least one state, a person intending to vote in a certain party's primary election must sign a pledge to "support" in the general election (that presumably means "vote for") that party's ultimate candidate. There is of course no way that this can be enforced, and it is based on a questionable legal premise; my guess is that this provision will be annulled by the courts.
In general, all or some of the delegates chosen for a party in a certain state are committed to a certain contender for the nomination. In some states, either under state law or under the rules of the particular party, all delegates are actually free to vote for any of the contenders at the national convention. In other cases, under state law or under the rules of the particular party, the delegates are obligated to vote for the contender to which they are committed in the first round of voting ("first ballot") at the convention (unless that contender had earlier withdrawn or for some other reasons "released" his delegates). But if no contender receives a majority in the first ballot (needed for selection), in the ensuing second ballot the delegates are free to vote as they wish.
But in some states, or under the rules of a particular party in some states, the delegates committed to certain contenders must also vote for that contender on the second ballot if the contender received at least a certain fraction of the votes (maybe 15%) at the first ballot.
And so forth. It is of course a mesh of nightmares.
The role of Iowa
The U.S. state of Iowa is located in the northeastern portion of the central U.S. (just northwest of Illinois). It is considered representative of traditional American society. It has been a major agricultural state, and agriculture is still prominent there (the growing of corn being a major aspect). It only is allocated 28 delegates to the Republican convention, one of the smallest state delegations
Iowa uses the caucus scheme for both parties to select the delegates to the party national conventions (but through a multi-level system of intermediate conventions, a different scheme between the two parties). The Iowa caucuses are these days held just after the start of the year in which the general election will be held (this year on 2012.01.03), the earliest "primary election or equivalent event" in the country.
For this reason, undue (actually unnatural) emphasis is placed on the result of the Iowa caucuses. But of course the result of the caucuses is not the final word even for the Iowa delegation to the party's national convention, owing to the role of the intermediate county, distinct and state conventions.
Best regards,
Doug
The general election
The president for the term 2013-2017 (and it is rarely stated that way) will be elected by a national general election to be held on Tuesday, November 6, 2012 CE. The process of this election is a curious one indeed, and I will discuss it later in the year.
The primary process
Of immediate interest is the matter of what persons will be candidates for president in that election - the "primary process".
There is no nationwide system of primary elections that select those candidates. Rather, the candidates must in general be put forth in the name of a recognized political party, and the candidates of the parties are chosen by "floor votes" in national conventions held by those parties in the summer before the general election.
The number of delegates from each state to a party's national convention is based on a formula adopted by the party, usually involving the size of the state (as reflected by the number of senators and representatives it has in the national legislature), but modified based on how that state voted in the last presidential election.
Each state has, for each recognized political party, a process for selecting the members of that state's delegation to the national convention. These processes are covered to some extent by state law, but many of the details are reserved to the state leadership of the respective political party. Thus the process of selecting members of the Texas delegation to the national convention of the Republican Party is dramatically different than the process for the Democratic Party.
In some states this is done through a system of primary elections; in some states by a system of caucuses. In one form, in effect, people in favor of Smith gather in one group, those in favor of Jones in another group). In another form, those who attend the caucus cast secret ballots. In Texas, for the Democratic party, there is a bizarre concatenation of a primary election and then (after the polls have closed) a scheme of caucuses. The resultant are combined in a curious way.
In many cases, for one of both parties, the results of the process is only to select delegates to a state party convention, which actually selects the delegates to the national party convention. Sometimes the process has more stages, including a county and district convention, with some delegates to the national convention being selected at lower stages and some at higher stages.
It is nightmarish. Almost no one understands how it works.
Primary elections and equivalents
Typically, any qualified voter may vote in the primary election (or other equivalent process) for any one of the recognized political parties (but not more than one). This of course means that a voter who favors the re-election of the incumbent president may choose to vote in the primary election of the opposing party, voting for the least-viable contender in hopes that he would become that party's nominee and thus give the weakest opposition to the incumbent.
In some states, to make sure that a voter does not vote in more than one party's primary election, the voters must first register as a supporter of a specific party. That of course has no effect on how the voter may vote in the general election.
In at least one state, a person intending to vote in a certain party's primary election must sign a pledge to "support" in the general election (that presumably means "vote for") that party's ultimate candidate. There is of course no way that this can be enforced, and it is based on a questionable legal premise; my guess is that this provision will be annulled by the courts.
In general, all or some of the delegates chosen for a party in a certain state are committed to a certain contender for the nomination. In some states, either under state law or under the rules of the particular party, all delegates are actually free to vote for any of the contenders at the national convention. In other cases, under state law or under the rules of the particular party, the delegates are obligated to vote for the contender to which they are committed in the first round of voting ("first ballot") at the convention (unless that contender had earlier withdrawn or for some other reasons "released" his delegates). But if no contender receives a majority in the first ballot (needed for selection), in the ensuing second ballot the delegates are free to vote as they wish.
But in some states, or under the rules of a particular party in some states, the delegates committed to certain contenders must also vote for that contender on the second ballot if the contender received at least a certain fraction of the votes (maybe 15%) at the first ballot.
And so forth. It is of course a mesh of nightmares.
The role of Iowa
The U.S. state of Iowa is located in the northeastern portion of the central U.S. (just northwest of Illinois). It is considered representative of traditional American society. It has been a major agricultural state, and agriculture is still prominent there (the growing of corn being a major aspect). It only is allocated 28 delegates to the Republican convention, one of the smallest state delegations
Iowa uses the caucus scheme for both parties to select the delegates to the party national conventions (but through a multi-level system of intermediate conventions, a different scheme between the two parties). The Iowa caucuses are these days held just after the start of the year in which the general election will be held (this year on 2012.01.03), the earliest "primary election or equivalent event" in the country.
For this reason, undue (actually unnatural) emphasis is placed on the result of the Iowa caucuses. But of course the result of the caucuses is not the final word even for the Iowa delegation to the party's national convention, owing to the role of the intermediate county, distinct and state conventions.
Best regards,
Doug
