Texas Two-Step or Mosh Pit?
The Texas Primary has come and gone. The analysis leaves us asking whether it was the Texas Two-Step or the Texas Mosh Pit!
The two-step tends to be a fairly organized dance. Western dancers are courteous to other dancers and everyone moves around the floor in the same direction. Mosh pits are crowded and anything can happen. Intended or not, emotions run hot and feelings of aggression can turn to anger. Smashing up against others, being pushed deeper into the pit, or being squeezed out are common occurrences.
At the recent Texas Caucuses, reports from across the state do not reveal the organized, civil movement of a two-step. Rather, rooms were crowded with some people squeezed out and in some places, emotions ran hot. Order was absent. Precinct chairs and locations were not prepared for the crowds of animated voters. There were not enough sign-in sheets. Many caucuses went on for hours, causing some to have to make their way out of the pit in order to go home. Now we are left with many questions about what really happened in these caucuses and how just they were.
No one can deny that this is an exciting Democratic primary! We have two excellent delegates who are working hard to communicate their positions and garner votes. The fact that this is a close race indicates just how good both of these candidates are, rather than indicating a split in the party. Given this intense campaign, the Texas Primary finally had a potential role in determining the outcome. In a number of the previous years, the candidate had been determined before the date of the Texas Primary. Therefore, this two-step system had not truly been tested. In this election, it was tested and, in my opinion, failed.
Why do we have people vote in the primary if that vote does not really count? What was the wisdom that thought people needed to return for a second vote in order to determine delegates, which is the mechanism that determines the selection of the presidential candidate? For those who introduced this two-step system: What do you think of it now that it has been put to the test?
From a faith perspective, this system raises all kinds of justice questions for me. Polling stations are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., which provides access to people on night shifts or day shifts alike. Even parents can get to the polls while their children are in school. The caucus process leaves people out. It does not provide equal and just access. If someone works a night shift, evening job, or has young children who need to be put to bed, she or he simply cannot participate! With all the crowds and chaos, just how physically accessible were these caucuses? Could everyone hear what was being talked about? While many people reported that the causes were exciting, many also described them as crazy, disorganized, crowded, and intense. I heard from some congregants who said they could not stay until the end because of the crowds, the chaotic energy, and/or the time span.
So we are left with a day of voting in which those who went to the polls indicated their desires, whereas those who were able to attend the evening caucus and able to get into the room got to have the final say. This is not about which candidate had the advantage in which part of the process, although the fact that the same candidate did not prevail in both parts of this dance in itself ought to raise questions. This is about the justice of this process. For a moment, put aside your personnel preferences concerning the candidates and ask yourself: Is this a just process?
What do you think? On Tuesday, March 4th, did we hold a Texas Two-Step or an election Mosh Pit?