I am not good at keeping up with politics. I picked up the New York Times today and learned more about Johnny Greenwood’s classical composition for strings than the results of Michigan’s primary. I like to watch results but know little about what’s going on behind it all. If you want to read a review of the Democratic race that is considerably well researched I recommend this from Ben and Katy.
One of the first questions I have about the whole political game is what is the difference between the primary and a caucus and why do we have them. I guess that a caucus is a meeting that you are invited to by the party at which you choose who you want to support, while a primary is an actual election. But why do we let the people of Iowa and New Hampshire make early decisions that have important effects for us all? I am not so sure that the populations of the two are representative of the rest of the country. In terms of race/ethnicity they certainly are different from the US composition. They are both far more white and less everything else, especially Latino. This also includes foreign born persons and immigration is an issue of the day. New Hampshire also seems significantly better educated and wealthier than most of the US. However even if they were right on the averages of the US, that is not a reason to have them choose which candidates we’ll ultimately have a choice on.
I would do some more research but like I said I am not good at (interested in) all things political. I AM American enough to state that this is exactly what’s wrong with this country.