Yes it is worth 10 million. Why? Because it allows more people to the party and keeps the formation of the political good ol' boy clubs at a minimum. With the issues and problems that are on the plate today, I want to see a panoramic view of everyone who might have an idea as to how to get us out of a few of the messes that we seem to have got ourselves into recently. Let everyone in.

Yes, it's worth $10 million. Part of the "fun" of politics is being involved, even if it is on the periphery. Involvement now may mean involvement come the race between the parties. To not have it means it isn't important and diminishes its value; with the race so wide open, we need as many people as possible involved.

The fact that the Democrats don't tie their delegates to the presdiential primary election is in itself irrelevant. My fear is that because they feel they won't have to vote, they will end up ighnoring all the OTHER issues on the same ballot - such as funding measures for education, fire and EMT services. Please, before you turn your backs, take the time to learn if your vote counts in other ways besides the beauty contest for President.

Mitt Romney is the best candidate. Period. Why? All of the other nationally-viable candidates (Huck is regional, at best) are senators. None (including Huckabee) have ever run a corner business, let alone multi-billion dollar companies.

Mitt has spend his whole life coming in to situations that everyone else said is hopeless, or is a failure, and he has made them successes, from the Olympics that were projected to be a $400,000,000 failure...when he left, it was a $70,000,000 surplus/success.

John McCain thinks that only illegal aliens will work hard, that Americans won't work in construction/etc. Hogwash! McCain also has a former Mexican cabinet member (Juan Hernandez) "volunteering" for him. John, you are a US Senator, not a Mexican senator. (google him!)

The economy is the #1 issue, John McCain has been in Washington DC so long, he does not have a clue about how to fix it. Mitt Romney can look at the big picture and solve our problems for decades to come.

Obama and Clinton both will turn us into the socialist state that even France has rejected.

As for McCain v. Obama the race would be Clinton v. Dole all over again. Old, crotchety, mean, ugly, pessimism versus young, hip, happy, optimism.

On TV (the deciding voters) McCain will lose, just like Nixon v. JFK and Bill v. Dole.

Mitt Romney has the smarts, the education, training, and he is from "Outside" Washington DC. Only and outsider can fix DC.

Fix it, Mitt!

It is time we do away with the precinct caucuses. We need to have a national primary day. This should be a holiday, with the polling places open for 24 hours giving everyone a chance to vote. It is a waste of money to have the caucuses and a primary. hillary clinton is the best candidate to represent women and minorities.

I can not believe that Chris Vance would sell out to McCain, an unelectable old, ugly guy over a very electable, presidential, smart, successful businessman who did not abandon his wife and kids for his millionaire mistress--like John McCain did.

Mitt Romney, like Apollo said, can fix the economy. We need his experience and expertise as an executive running the largest agency in the world, the executive branch of the federal government.

Mitt Romney is the exact person we need as our president to set us up economically for decades to come.

Mitt Romney is the only choice for President!

My choice, Clinton and Obama & a secretary of state Powell do-over. But that won't happen, we are in a "war".
Therefore--
McCain beats Clinton in California, Florida, New York and Arizona. Age won't matter; war and McCain's heroes will. Guliani is your VP.

Morman CEOs would fair far worse. Any god fearing republican is aware of this. (the base)

You had someone on your show today representing the Republican party and someone campaigning for Clinton. This seemed unbalanced and unfair. Will you give equal time to Obama before the caucus?

Anti-mormon bigot Jeff Bridges... call it like I see it.

McCain can't beat Obama anywhere. Bob Dole v. Clinton all over again.

Any God fearing Republican would not vote for a John McCain with all of his mistresses (he dumped his wife and kids for a woman 17 years younger and $50,000,000 richer). How about those family values?

McCain war heroes (sp?). Yes, he and Bob Dole both have quite a bit of superb war accolades. Well-earned. McCain will lose just like Bob did.

This election is about change. McCain is Washington DC. He has special interest groups and pork barrel projects, but he likes them, so he looks at them as "essential" John McCain's only experience in the economy is by marriage--he married an heiress worth $50,000,000 He has no clue about how to create an economic engine for the next 2 months, let alone over the next 20-50 years.

McCain = amnesty, Mexico-first.

In a TV world, McCain is unelectable.

as for the bigoted comments, get past yourself. I look for results. Mitt Romney gets things done-and succeeds when everyone else expects failure.

Mitt Romney is by far the candidate that brings the most as a Republican Presidential Candidate. He's a problem solver and has the background to bring a fresh look to the issues facing this nation. McCain is a war hero and that's where it ends except to have the backing of the party's old school moderate Republican political "friends". Go Mitt!!

Rob....I want a democrat to win. I think Mormons are honest. The country doesn't -- They also, like heroes however manufactured. This is what has happened. You have to remember people in Florida won't trust Obama, or Hillary. I wish they would. Latest, developments with Maria Shriver might. But probably not, the Country is more conservative than Washington. Me, I'm voting Democrat,
[r]ecognizing the cost. Prediction: Others will follow a war hero, tv or in real life, as they have in the past.

Yes, I agree with Jeff Bridges. A war heroes will be chosen over a Mormon -in-Our country these days.

Most people look for heroes however bamfoozeled they are.

First of all Every one form needs to stop bickering about voting for one party or another. America was not founded by Republics or Democrats or any other party. It was founded by people that were for all party's involved. Most of our first five presidents ware Democratic Republics and cared more about this country then any other
presidents I have seen in my life time although I have seen more Republican scandals then Democrat. Gorge Washington seed it best declaring that he was just a selfless public servant which is more then I can say for any modern president or most elected politicizations thees days. Brock Obama has some of the best and brightest politicizations to come out of Washington in years. Everyone git ride of your hate. Get ride of your private and political views stop being selfish and start doing what is best for the country; not your self your any one political party.

I'm personally for the caucus to vote for Presidential candidate and to pass resolutions that will reach the party nationally. This is grassroots at its finest.
If the republicans would rather not see each other, I don't blame them. They are too busy golfing and vacationing on weekends to come and vote and each party should be allowed to decide how to ultimately pick its party's candidate. And therefore the state has to foot the bill.
ONE QUESTION: Can a Democrat show up for the Demo caucus and become a delegate for Clinton and then vote as Republican on the primary Feb 19th ballot? Just wondering.

To participate in either the Primary election or the Caucus system, would be to declare an oath to one of the two dominateing political parties. As an Independant Voter whom does not want to be affiliated with either party, I will abstain from participateing. Later this year, I will vote for a candidate not on the basis of race or gender, but on the issues of the economy, immigration, and Iraq in that order. I believe that our country has to return to Smoot-Hawley trade policies, I do not believe amnesty should be given to the illegal alien in our country, and we cannot afford to be in Iraq any longer. I am what you may call a Lou Dobbs Voter, a person whom seems to share the same values that I do. It is a complete waste of taxdollars to hold primaries that have no significants, and is more expensive than holding the caucus system. I am totally against the Primary elections.

To me it really doesn't matter. Because of the Costitution of the United States, I really don't elect the President. So yes the canadates can waste their money, I will ignore the ads, and still put in my favorite write in in November!

Chava: You can't caucus for one and vote for another in the primary. You are required (under Oath) to stick w/ one party. BUT...you can caucus and vote the primary w/one party and vote for DIFFERENT party in the November 4, 2008 general election.

This is a waste of 10 million dollars. The "public" does not have any say nor any right to tell the parties how to select their nominies, they are private organizations, much like the boy scouts, and they should be able to restrict the voting to their own membership and whatever that membership requires. Why even print out these ballots, the democrats are going to ignore the primary results, so unless you go to the caucus, you'll have no say, you'll be wasting your stamp.

Get educated about the process you idiots, and then get to your caucus! We could use the 10 million maybe to provide a few people with healthcare? I dunno, just a thought.

There were two questions -- the subject line, "Who's your presidential pick?" and the last line in the body, "So is it worth spending $10 million dollars on a primary?" Most responders seemed to answer the first but not the more important second question. My answers are:
1) Since both major parties devote less than half of their delegates based on the primary election returns (Republican = 48% and Democrat = 0%), and the primaries are spread out over several weeks and Washington State's primary is one of the last few -- our votes DON'T MATTER.
2) See above -- the answer is obvious.

Thus, I'm in favor of:

1) Abolishing caucuses. A few heavily-involved individuals should not decide who we can vote for.

2) A national primary day. NO returns would be available until the last voting station closed. NO results from mail-in ballots would be available to the public (and media) until after the last voting station closed. The general election happens on the same day -- there's no reason the primary election has to be spread out.

3) Doing away with having to declare allegiance to one party or the other in a primary election. Washington State's previously open primary allowed me to vote for who I believed was the best-qualified candidate for a particular office. Now, I must decide which party has (on average) the better candidates. In fact, even better than an open primary would be a top two primary -- if the two top vote-getters have the same letter after their name, so be it.

4) Abolishing the electoral college. Not unlike caucuses, it removes the democratic election process from those who are supposed to make that decision.

Bryan
Everett, WA

No it is not worth having a $10 million dollar primary! The parties are private institutions that get to choose where the delegates are selected from. If they want that to come from a caucus than so be it - don't bother with a primary just because the state wants to have one! Think of how nice having that money go towards the viaduct would be? Find your caucus center on Saturday and VOTE OBAMA! YES WE CAN!

I'm voting for Obama--when I heard his speach he hit every issue correctly. He is in touch with the populus and knows what we want. He is honest and not jaded as those who have spent much time in the House or Senate can tend to be because they compromise and compromise until their personal integrity is gone.

I want the troops home and the mind-set that sent them there in the first place removed. I want the lobbyists OUT...

I trust that Obama can do this because his heart is in the right place.

Rock, Barrock, Rock.

Do away w/caucus - not fair to those who are not able to attend. Much easier to vote in primary.

Bryan in Everett said it exactly as I would have - ditto Bryan!
I am very dismayed that my vote for my chosen candidate in both previous and current primaries counted for nothing! If I don't go to a caucus this Saturday between 1 and 3pm, I have no say in this process. When I called the Democratic Caucus Hotline I was told that the main reason the deligates/candidates are chosen 100% via the caucus process is because we don't want Republicans to be able to vote via the ballot for a Democratic candidate and "skew" our desired results! Brilliant!
Our votes don't count. That skews it in my book!
Heaven forbid we have a system that lets us choose the candidate based on who we believe is best - be it a Democrat, Republian or a candidate who might represent the best of both!

I disagree with the caucus system. It limits participation in a number of ways. Two hours on a Saturday afternoon is not available to everyone; mail in ballots are. My personal issue is that for those of us that may have disabilities, caucuses disenfranchise us.I am legally blind and hearing impaired. Transportation and participating in a discussion in a room full of people is beyond the scope of my abilities. There is supposed to be freedom in America and I don't feel that a closed door causcus is really freedom.