Is it just me, or here on caucus eve, does anybody else find the juxtaposition of these distinct analyses on the caucus system ironic?
On the one hand, we have complaints about the caucus system being used here in the United States (two examples here are the
News-Journal and
USAToday):
The Iowa caucus will be held on Jan. 19 and the New Hampshire primary on Jan. 27. Super Tuesday (seven states) will be Feb. 3. Nineteen other states will hold primaries or caucuses before Florida's primary on March 9.
The aim of the primary system is good -- to force candidates to go before voters to prove their worth and to increase discussion of issues. But it has evolved into a process that is undemocratic at the core. News-Journal
-----
The entire primary/caucus system, not just in Iowa and New Hampshire, is hopelessly unrepresentative of the nation. USA Today
Apparently, however, this much-maligned system is just fine and dandy for Iraq, according to Paul Bremer (cited in AFP):
Bremer said "we believe that the caucus method that we've been talking about will bring about an effective and representative government."
I guess we get to pick and choose which election systems we like, based on how they are likely to turn out, eh?