Texas is a red state. Believe me, i live here. And i'm sure you've been introduced to our young prodigy George W. Bush and his mentor Richard "Dick" Cheney.
But us liberal Texans finally got our shot at the big time. And we delivered.
Hillary won the popular vote barely scratching ahead. Barack won the convention (what our caucus was called) by significant margins, and let me tell you why that is more important.
I guarantee you, Texas will be red in the general election. Hillary's popular vote win means nothing in the long run, and Texas will stay Republican for the near future. It doesn't matter if George Bush literally nuked the entire middle east and started up concentration camps, Texas will be a red state.
But the caucus numbers can give us some hope.
The Texas Democratic Party is almost non-existent. I say almost because I'm sure there are some idealistic baby boomer-dems that have no idea how to organize still running the TDP, and that barely counts.
People have often complained about the whole "caucus" thing, but if you do your missing the point. A caucus is not designed to be a pure vote like a primary vote. That's not its goal. The goal is to get you people off your asses for two hours and meeting like-minded democrats to organize for the future. Caucuses are party building exercises. And let me tell you, underneath it all, the Obama Campaign successfully built a new party structure in less than 3 weeks while the Clinton camp depended on the old Texas Dems.
That new party structure built by the Obama Campaign is what's important about the caucuses and is why you should look at those numbers and say "wow." Contrary to what some of the media have been reporting, most caucuses, although crowded and long, ran pretty well and everyone who wanted to vote got to vote.
If your in the Dean camp and look at the country and say "I want a 50-state strategy," the caucus numbers should be really important to you. Those numbers show the new Dems that are coming into the process, organizing each other with a specific goal and executing. Obama won the Texas caucus by being able to build an organization in a state that had almost a non-existent party structure.
That should be good news for any Democrats that believe that things can change in places like Texas. Hell, maybe in 8 or 12 years a Democrat can actually win here.
EDIT I thought I should add this debate since it gets to the heart of the matter.
The caucus is undemocratic And it is anti elderly and handicapped. Many elderly don't see well at night and also have difficulty driving at night. The Party should do away with the caucus. And why should a few votes count over everyones vote?
by Owllwoman
It's not supposed to be
The caucus isn't a democratic process. It's a party building exercise. If you want more say in who is the nominee you have to get involved.
That's why this is a political party. We have real members who decide who represents their views the best.
Just becuase you vote democratic party doesn't mean you have a total say in who the nominee is. You have to give back to the party to have more say.
by LiberatedClown
Right, and...
people who crticize caucases as being undemocratic miss a very important point:
Without cadres of young (under age 75 who can move around or at lest make calls) active party members who have networked and can work the streets, parties don't matter any more.
Criticizing caucases is giving up on democracy since it is a passive approach to democracy that turns power over to the media which is controlled by un-democratic forces.
The young have the greatest stake in teh future anyway, so if one is too old and infirmed to participate actively in grassroots politics then too bad, do your best to pay attention and vote, but don't knock others who want to organize to fight the un-deserving power wealth gives to the upper classes.
by casamurphy