2007-02-06 09:18:33 · 3 answers · asked by Moscow 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
This sounds amazingly like a social studies question. What a coincidence!
Primaries: They are easy to participate in; they don't take much time as all you do is cast your vote and you're free to go.
Caucuses: They take quite a bit of time. You have to meet at a specific time. The upside of caucuses is that they are fun and you get to debate with your neighbors and try to get them to switch their votes. You can also get yourself elected by your neighbors to go vote for your candidate at the county convention later on. Over all, caucuses are loads of fun and (if you're a Democrat anyway) you can pick up on hot babes there too.
2007-02-06 13:56:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Theoretically, it weeds out the losers, narrowing the field for the voters to decide between the two best candidates.
The disadvantage is that almost no one votes in primaries. As a result, the lunatic fringe of each party can motivate enough of their loyal followers to nominate candidates from the lunatic fringe. Having felt primaries aren't important, the average voters wind left with two bad candidates to choose between.
2007-02-06 21:08:54 · answer #2 · answered by Bob G 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is all about finding the best candidates so that the partys can run the strongest one, with the hope of winning the general election.
2007-02-06 17:23:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋