Election-Campaign Law

Guest blogger: Morgan Llewellyn, "Iowa Caucus: Projecting viability"

By Michael Alvarez

Iowa Caucus: Projecting viability

Morgan Llewellyn

On January 3rd I observed members of Coralville?s 6th precinct caucus for the Democratic Party. A total of 762 Democrats caucused at a local school gymnasium with Obama, Clinton, and Edwards receiving all of the delegates. However, both Biden and Richardson received over 50 votes on the first ballot and I spoke with several individuals who caucused for Obama and Edwards on the first ballot but indicated that their first preference was for either Biden or Richardson. The reason these voters gave for not casting their first ballot for their most preferred candidate was that in their opinion neither Biden nor Richardson were viable in this particular precinct. While I find it unlikely that either Biden or Richardson could have obtained the 115 votes necessary to be viable in Coralville?s 6th precinct, I do believe that additional effort and organization from the supporters of Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel, and Richardson may have garnered larger vote shares for these candidates in the first round. If either Biden or Richardson could have increased their vote shares in the first round, then given the crowded room, proximity of the Biden, Dodd, and Richardson campaigns and unorganized manner in which caucus goers moved around during the second ballot who knows what mischief may have resulted during the second ballot. I proceed to contrast the organization and efforts of the Clinton, Edwards, and Obama supporters with the efforts of those who supported candidates who failed to garner delegates in this particular precinct in an attempt to highlight efforts which may serve as a signal to caucus goers of a candidate?s viability.

Upon entering the school where the caucus was held, I was accosted by a group of young women shouting their endorsements for Obama. Additionally, Obama, Edwards, and Clinton supporters repeatedly asked me if I would like to show my support for their candidate by wearing a campaign sticker. Upon entering the gymnasium where the caucus was being held I was immediately impressed by the buffet of food put out by the Clinton supporters directly in-front of where the Clinton supporters were congregating. While those who supported other candidates brought various desserts and water to caucus goers, the Clinton supporters in this precinct filled several tables with food which seemed to me a signal of strength, coordination and communication among Clinton supporters. Over an hour before the start of the caucus a large number of Clinton, Edwards, and Obama supporters had already arrived. In discussion with some of the Edwards and Obama supporters, early arrival was coordinated so as to exhibit the candidates? strength as individuals arrive at the caucus. Additionally, Obama, Edwards, and Clinton supporters placed signs and other campaign paraphernalia high up on the walls so that as the gymnasium filled and it was no longer possible to see across the gym one could still clearly identify where the Clinton, Edwards and Obama camps were located.

In talking with the precinct captain for the Clinton campaign I was told he and his wife had signed up a year ago to work for the Clinton campaign. Many of the younger Obama supporters came wearing t-shirts with Obama written in big block letters on the front. Additionally, many Obama and Edwards supporters brought their children with them which increased the size and apparent strength of the Obama and Edwards groups without increasing the votes going to either Obama or Edwards. Finally, during the voting when individuals were asked to place a ticket in various candidates? buckets and boxes, supporters for the Edwards, Clinton, and Obama campaigns walked through large portions of the gym in particular near the Dodd, Richardson, and Biden groups so as to attract as many votes as possible.

Contrary to the well organized supporters of the candidates who ended up obtaining delegates, no supporters from the Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel, or Richardson campaigns greeted me upon walking through the door. The Gravel and Kucinich campaigns had not organized precinct captains for this particular precinct and thus, no sign informed potential supporters where to congregate in order to express support for either one of these candidates. As neither Gravel nor Kucinich had precinct captains, when supporters for these candidates were given the opportunity to speak on behalf of the candidate no one stepped forward to speak for either of these candidates. Dodd?s precinct captain did not arrive until after 6:00 pm by which time several hundred caucus goers had already arrived and taken a seat in the various candidate sections. I later overheard Dodd?s precinct captain tell one man that she had not been contacted to act as precinct captain until January 2nd; thus in at least one precinct the Dodd campaign lined up their precinct captain on the eve of the caucus. As the gym filled up and it became difficult to see and move across the room there were not any signs located high enough above the crowd to guide Dodd, Richardson, or Biden supporters to their designated areas. Biden?s precinct captain did handout Biden stickers but only to individuals who had made it to the back of the gymnasium where the Biden table was located.

Following the first round of voting only Clinton, Edwards, and Obama were viable neither Kucinich nor Gravel received any votes with Dodd receiving 19 votes, Biden 53 votes, and Richardson 57 votes. The final results from Coralville?s 6th precinct gave Obama five delegates, Clinton three delegates, and Edwards two delegates. While I cannot attest to the exact number of votes Biden and Richardson forfeited in the first round due to images of non-viability, I do know through speaking with caucus goers that there were additional votes to be had for both Biden and Richardson if an image of viability was established prior to the first vote. In the Iowa Democratic caucus voters make public choices among their neighbors and non-viable candidates do not receive any delegates. Thus, candidate supporters should exert effort at the caucus site to project an image of candidate viability so that caucus goers will not be concerned with either a social stigma attached with supporting a non-viable candidate or a view that their first round vote as wasted.

I believe I have identified some specific and not particularly costly actions which can be taken so as to project an image of a strong and viable candidate. First, votes are not manifested and thus organizing a precinct captain early in the campaign to collect and solicit votes is necessary. Having supporters arrive early presents an image of a strong candidate and may prevent weak supporters from jumping ship while potentially attracting uncommitted caucus goers or caucus goers who support a candidate who is perceived as nonviable. Additionally, supporters for potentially non-viable candidates should be encouraged to bring children as non-viable candidates may be able to project an image of strength by increasing the perceived strength of their group through children. Greeting people as they come into the building and posting a plethora of signs within the caucusing area to identify the candidate?s section are two simple and inexpensive ways to portray strength. If greeters cannot be arranged before the caucus, the precinct captain can ask early arrivals or teenage children. If a line forms in front of the registration table, have one or two supporters go and talk to those waiting in line. Precinct captains and candidate supporters should seek out individuals who are wandering around the room or located on the fringe of a candidate?s section or not yet committed to a corner. Finally, wearing campaign t-shirts (perhaps passing out t-shirts to new found supporters), and organizing tables of home baked refreshments are additional items that may not cost a lot but may help project an image of strength and viability.

Full post as published by Election Updates on February 12, 2008 (boomark / email).