Fraction is a potent faction

Claire Petersky had about the best day imaginable at Saturday's caucuses.

She gave a rousing speech to a jammed school cafeteria, and her candidate, Barack Obama, swept her Bellevue precinct and the state.So I was surprised to hear what she thought of this odd, town-hall format we use for choosing presidential nominees.

"I think the caucus system sucks," she said. "It disenfranchises people. It's confusing. It's the party's little club, and so they set the rules. But this turns a lot people off to politics."

In the media coverage of the caucuses, it will be said there was "record turnout" and "lines around the block." Someone will say they've never seen such robust civic participation.

All that is true — for a caucus. But the reality is the percentage of voters who weighed in Saturday to pick a president was far lower than is typical even for off-year votes for things like school levies.

An estimated 10 percent of registered voters took part — obliterating the old record for a caucus. Still, that is about a million fewer voters than cast ballots in the 2000 presidential primary (which was a normal election, not a gathering in school gyms and churches).

I went to the Democratic gathering at Highland Middle School, in the Overlake part of Bellevue. It was standing-room-only. They ran out of ballots and had to register some votes on scraps of paper.

Practically everyone refused to fill out the part of the ballot that asked whether they were gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. Why a political party needs to know who you're sleeping with, I have no idea.

Then came the best part. After an initial round of voting, the Hillary camps and the Obama camps started arguing. Clinton was getting trounced, so her supporters vigorously tried to change some minds.

The gist of it was that Obama is an illusion, a fairy tale, lighter than air. While Hillary has gravitas, plans, solutions and experience.

It didn't work. Nobody changed their votes, and Obama won that precinct by 3 to 1.

Afterward, Clinton backer and first-time caucuser Ivan Vulovic, 22, said the entire caucus system should be scrapped.

"This is horrible," he said. "It's not democratic. I think we should hold a regular election instead of this."

Well, we tried. But the parties — especially the Democratic Party — didn't like it. When choosing their nominees, they want to limit who participates — no independents or crossover voters — as well as get your names and addresses so they can telemarket you and grow their organizations.

I ran into Lacy Steele, the president emeritus of the Seattle-King County NAACP. He was amazed by the crowds.

"We used to hold our caucus in a phone booth, and still not use all four corners," he said.

"I know some people find it undemocratic, but I like it for the face-to-face give and take," Steele said. "We gather and make our choices together. If you don't join in, you're only hurting yourself."

He's got a point. It's insular. Intrusive. Certainly confusing. But it worked.

Still, I wonder: Who do the other 90 percent of Washingtonians want to be president?

Danny Westneat's column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com.