Jump to content

Talk:New Hampshire presidential primary

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How is a caucus not an election?

[edit]

This article claims to be the first "in a series of nationwide party primary elections held in the United States every four years", even though it is held after the Iowa Caucuses. I appreciate that caucuses follow a different format to the ballot held in New Hampshire how are they not an election? — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 22:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One big difference: after people have "voted" you can try to convince them to switch, and they can change. It's not secret ballot, and not automatically open to any registered voter of the party. They're really weird, in an interesting way. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't mean that it's not an election. It is still a way in which a group of individuals elect someone. Both the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries elect delegates to each parties' national conventions. They are both primary elections, they are just run in different ways. That there's no secret ballot or even that you can change your mind doesn't make any difference. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 13:16, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It does mean it's not an election, in the way the term is used in the American political system - that's why it's called something else. It can be considered an election in the very general sense of choosing a leader based on people's stated preferences, but not in the sense used here. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 16:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This must be why the Iowa caucuses are described as an electoral event. (Which is different to an election, how?) I have yet to find a definition of election that is specific to the United States. The Collins American dictionary[1] defines election as:
  • a choosing or choice
  • a choosing or being chosen for office by vote
  • a voting, as in a municipality, on some proposition, issue, etc.
Wikipedia defines it as
  • An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office.
Can you find even one source which says that a caucus is not an election? I can't find any on the article. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 01:26, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Read the Iowa caucuses article closely. Caucuses are long meetings that party members sit through before voting. The format in effect limits participation to the most dedicated party supporters. Primary elections, like New Hampshire's, follow the same procedures as general elections and simply require that the party voter show up and cast their ballot. --Ken Gallager (talk) 13:33, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note the third paragraph of the primary election article: "Other methods of selecting candidates include caucuses, conventions, and nomination meetings." A caucus is a meeting, more like a convention; a primary election is an election.--Ken Gallager (talk) 13:39, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
None of the above justifies removing a {{fact}} tag without adding a reliable source, no matter how convincing you find your own opinions on the matter. The primary election article contradicts itself and forgets that people can be elected at a meeting or at a convention. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 00:14, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You sound dissatisfied with the way primary elections and caucuses are handled in general on Wikipedia. Why not take it up at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States presidential elections? --Ken Gallager (talk) 13:20, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, citizens of Iowa vote after NH, but caucus before NH votes. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 13:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History Section

[edit]

It seems to me that the History section should be arranged chronologically (that is, from earliest to latest) like almost all history is set forth. And the charts in the history subsections, based as they are on unofficial sources which contradict the numbers in the Results chart below (which are or soon will be all based on official references from the Secretary of State's office), should be eliminated (retaining the delegates won, which are not contained in the Results chart). The history then will be mainly prose accounts of notable events that happened during the primaries past. If there is no objection to this suggestion, I will (deo volente) begin undertaking the editing soon. AnthroMimus (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on New Hampshire primary. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on New Hampshire primary. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 June 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved per consensus. There might be a new precedence coming. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:30, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


– Same as the Minnesota presidential primary article and previous RM discussions: adding "presidential" to these article titles would provide more clarification and precision because the various U.S. states and territories also conduct primary elections. Note that I have NOT included Iowa caucuses because it has content regarding them also being held during the midterm election seasons. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


1920 Democrats

[edit]

Are you sure the Hoover in 1920 was Herbert Hoover — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.59.83.209 (talk) 19:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_Hampshire_presidential_primary&oldid=1204260903"