21 May 2013
Sunday, 01 January 2012 19:00

The Occupiers’ Plan to Have “Uncommitted” Win at the Iowa Caucus

Written by 

Ben Johnson recently huddled with fellow Occupiers. How, he asked them, could they maximize their impact on the Iowa caucuses?

“I have a lot of friends hurt by the recession, who deserve to go to better colleges than me,” said the American University freshman. “They’re a lot smarter than I am, and have more to offer the world. But they are being held back by their parents’ poor finances.”

“An educational system that privileges people by wealth, but does nothing for talented people whose families are not wealthy is screwing over a lot of good people. I’m not getting the shaft. But my country is.”

Not bad for an 18 year-old Iowan who was doing only the third interview in his life. You could even say that he was learning his major - Journalism - from the bottom up, as a spokesman first, a reporter second.

Still, Johnson and his fellow Occupiers could not find a single Republican candidate who reflected their concerns. So they hit on an unorthodox strategy. They would caucus for the most overlooked candidate on the ballot: Uncommitted.

If “Uncommitted” (alias “No Preference” or “None of the Above”) places in the top three, the Occupiers would have scored.

And they have precedent – on the Democratic side. When President Jimmy Carter ran for election in 1976, “Uncommitted” won 14,508 votes (37%) to Carter's 10,764 votes (27%). A weak one term presidency followed.

So Johnson and 17 fellow Occupiers are spreading themselves among Iowa’s major caucus sites where, like others, they have a chance to express their opinion before anyone indicates his preferred candidate. The Occupiers also set up a website promoting their plan: http://occupyiacaucus.org/

“Caucuses are a very grass roots way of organizing, so this plays into our strengths,” said Johnson. “And if our numbers are high enough, we hope New Hampshire will pick up on the idea.”

“When you disrupt a party’s chance to come into power, that party will listen and react,” he added. “And this is what we need to have them do: react to our concerns.”

In reaction to Occupiers’ concerns, Johnson said that the Republican party initially decided not to count “Uncommitted” but, under public pressure, reversed itself.

So, did this mean they welcomed the Occupiers among them?

A call from this reporter to Iowa’s Republican headquarters was put through to press spokesperson Nicole Sizemore. As I was asking her my first question about Occupy Iowa, the line went dead. When I called back, the receptionist then said Sizemore was out of the building. Told that I had just been speaking to her, the receptionist said that was “odd” and put me through – to voicemail. Neither Sizemore nor anyone else from the Republican party returned calls or an e-mail to their website.

So here’s looking at you, kid!

By Joseph Hanania, Aslan Media Columnist

Add comment

We only welcome and encourage constructive and respectful comments. Please avoid slurs, hate speech, general abuse against other participants, or any incitement of violence.
We reserve the right to delete your comments and block your participation with continued abuse.


Security code
Refresh

Share This Column

About the Columnist: Joseph Hanania

Joseph Hanania has been a regular contributor to the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. He has also written documentaries for CBS-TV and HBO, and taught screenwriting at UCLA Extension.

He is currently completing a non-fiction book about an orphaned Jewish merchant who rescued 1,350 Jews from the Holocaust by sailing them out of Europe on the Danube River.

Contact him via email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Follow Aslan Media