Iowa Caucuses (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    JimEverett

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Sep 30, 2019
    Messages
    1,831
    Reaction score
    1,422
    Location
    Nashville
    Offline
    Anyone have any predictions?

    If I had to put money on it, I would pick Sanders as winning.


    But there will be more stories than just who wins. IMO - For Warren, Mayor Pete, and Klobuchar it could be feast or famine. A distant 5th or even 4th could effectively end a campaign. Obviously a strong 3rd, and certainly anything higher will provide a huge boost.
    I think Warren might be best positioned to withstand a bad night given she has NH coming up next.
     
    I agree Bernie voters will feel it is a slight against them and energize them for NH. Bill Maher was talking about Trump and Bernie have armies of followers. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

    I think Bernie vs Trump is by far the most interesting and unpredictable race.


    There are a lot of similarities in that neither party wants them but the public seems to have a different view.
     
    I think Bernie vs Trump is by far the most interesting and unpredictable race.


    There are a lot of similarities in that neither party wants them but the public seems to have a different view.
    His campaign is the most energetic by far.
    Without thinking about it too much, though, it seems he would dilute the strength that won 2018 for the Democrats: the fact that moderate suburban women are very uncomfortable with Trump. I think they are very uncomfortable with Bernie as well.
     
    Bernie and Buttigeg are tied in delegates with a tenth of percent advantage to Buttigeg. Sanders won the popular vote.
    How does a recanvas make it seem they are out to get Bernie? The impact of the Iowa caucus is over. Buttigeg and Sanders will both get a bump. Biden is on a death spiral. Warren is just hanging around.

    A transparent review isn't out of line. IDP has shirt the bed on this one. They have created three methods of counting and should be able to provide ample evidence to make sure everything is on the up and up.

    You know this isn't the first time Iowa has screwed up results. They announced Romney the winner and took two weeks to correct it to Santorum and essentially sank his campaign.

    It's being reported that the "uncounted" 3 percent (which were publicly available from these precincts three days ago!) are Sanders wins which erase that .1% "lead" for Pete. Which places the timing of the DNC announcement at roughly the same time that the election was going to finally and mercifully be called. It leads to many questions. Why were the results released in this order when, it cannot be stressed enough, all of these numbers could have been obtained with phone calls, e-mails, or text messages three days ago? Why was this call not made yesterday? Why on earth is this simple relaying on information being delayed for days on end at the same moment when it is almost over and everyone can move on? All this stupidity and Iowa counts for like 1% of the delegates at the Democratic national convention.
     
    I am not following this story very closely. I have checked in on cnn.com every day to get totals, and it seemed really fishy that the totals presented are of "state delegate" percentage. What the hell? You hve to find a separate link to get raw vote total.
    Who decides to publish THAT figure as the main figure? Is it the Iowa Democratic Party? The DNC? Or the individual networks? I would think the latter, but the few places I have looked all publish the same number first - state delegate percentage.
    It is sort of like the Electoral College. Precincts are capped at the delegate count. Even though Bernie received more votes in the larger precincts, Buttigeg cleaned up in the rural areas where not as many votes were needed. Caucus's need to go away is all.
     
    It is sort of like the Electoral College. Precincts are capped at the delegate count. Even though Bernie received more votes in the larger precincts, Buttigeg cleaned up in the rural areas where not as many votes were needed. Caucus's need to go away is all.
    Yeah, I get that. But I have been watching caucuses and primaries for decades and I don't recall it being reported this way - at least not "exclusively"

    Perhaps this year there has been a rule change where no delegates to the national convention are given on the basis of the caucuses? Rather they are all chosen through the state convention which makes that delegate count the most important?
     
    Last edited:
    Apparently trolls, where a big part of chaos, because of course they where. Does anything of value ever happen on 4chan? I've never even been to that sight, just seems like a bunch of sewer rats there.

    Still on the Iowa Democratic Party for even having a call-in phone number that was easily obtained by the trolls as their back up system for reporting. SMH.

     
    Apparently trolls, where a big part of chaos, because of course they where. Does anything of value ever happen on 4chan? I've never even been to that sight, just seems like a bunch of sewer rats there.

    Still on the Iowa Democratic Party for even having a call-in phone number that was easily obtained by the trolls as their back up system for reporting. SMH.


    Did you read the article? You just made the claim that trolls were a big part of the chaos, but within the article it states, "but in no way affected the integrity of information gathered or the accuracy of data sets reported."

    Also, "CNN was unable to independently verify that the social media users in fact made the phone calls they claimed to have placed."

    Your narrative that these calls were somehow a 'big part' of the chaos is patently false according to the article.

    I think people just like using the troll excuse to hide the fact that they screwed up, or worse yet, trying to hide the fact they didn't want to show Sanders winning.
     
    Did you read the article? You just made the claim that trolls were a big part of the chaos, but within the article it states, "but in no way affected the integrity of information gathered or the accuracy of data sets reported."

    Also, "CNN was unable to independently verify that the social media users in fact made the phone calls they claimed to have placed."

    Your narrative that these calls were somehow a 'big part' of the chaos is patently false according to the article.

    I think people just like using the troll excuse to hide the fact that they screwed up, or worse yet, trying to hide the fact they didn't want to show Sanders winning.

    I read the article entirely. The trolls where a big part of the chaos in the sense that the clogged up the phone lines for reporting the caucus results from the precincts. I made specific reference to that in my post (in case you didn't read my post and just reacted to it). I also still put the onus on the Iowa Democratic party for not having something better than a call in number to report results after the app went down (that last little part was inferred).

    So yes, the trolls where still a big part of the chaos.

    Come off your soap box.
     
    Last edited:
    I read the article entirely. The trolls where a big part of the chaos in the sense that the clogged up the phone lines for reporting the caucus results from the precincts. I made specific reference to that in my post (in case you didn't read my post and just reacted to it). I also still put the onus on the Iowa Democratic party for not having something better than a call in number to report results after the app went that (that last little part was inferred).

    So yes, the trolls where still a big part of the chaos.

    Come off your soap box.

    I'm not sure how pointing out your hyperbole is being on a soap box.
     
    I read the article entirely. The trolls where a big part of the chaos in the sense that the clogged up the phone lines for reporting the caucus results from the precincts. I made specific reference to that in my post (in case you didn't read my post and just reacted to it). I also still put the onus on the Iowa Democratic party for not having something better than a call in number to report results after the app went that (that last little part was inferred).

    So yes, the trolls where still a big part of the chaos.

    Come off your soap box.

    But if the article says that its not verified that the trolls actually made the calls, how can you still say it was a big part of the chaos?
     
    Man... if Iowa was suddenly removed from the U.S., no one would notice, not even Iowans.

    Just move on to the next stop. Geez.
     
    Does anything of value ever happen on 4chan?

    Supposedly they located some Islamic terrorists and in effect call in an airstrike.

    Taylor Swift once had an online vote to select a school for a concert and they ensured that a school for the deaf won.

    Those are pretty good things, IMO.
     
    4Chan got half the Country to believe :perfect: is a racist symbol. So they have that going for them which is nice I guess.
     
    4Chan got half the Country to believe :perfect: is a racist symbol. So they have that going for them which is nice I guess.

    Hah, they had Rachel Maddow freak the hell out about a cartoon frog. That must have been surreal for those guys.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom