Iowa Caucuses (1 Viewer)

[JimEverett]

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.

 

[Beach Friends]

Anyone remember when the autists at 4chan put the "he will not divide us" campaign in their sights? That was incredible.

If those guys target you then you would probably be better off joining a tribe in the Amazon.

 

[Beach Friends]

Anyone else hearing that the DNC chair is calling for a do over? How do you begin to fix this mess now?

 

[Nebaghead]

Anyone else hearing that the DNC chair is calling for a do over? How do you begin to fix this mess now?

Do you have a link to where you heard this? Unless you rub elbows with leaders in either party, this isn't something you would hear. Even if it is a twitter feed, I'm just curious where the rumors are coming from. Not trying to be dismissive or condescending.

Nevermind, I see the tweet below from EmBeeFiveOhFour.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

So, three days after Mayo Pete declared victory, and three days after the Iowa Democratic Party has let results trickle out showing that Pete led in "state delegate equivalents" despite Sanders winning the most actual votes, the IDP finally releases data showing that, with 97% of the votes calculated, Sanders will also win that state delegate metric. Which officially confirms that Pete did not win by any possible calculation and that Sanders won the Iowa caucuses by every measure. Which then immediately results in this from the DNC chair:



Again, I don't really want to join our conservative comrades in conspiracy theories, but it's becoming really difficult to understand how all of this happens the way it did. Was Perez just hoping that they could declare Pete the winner and let it go?

 

[Nebaghead]

So, three days after Mayo Pete declared victory, and three days after the Iowa Democratic Party has let results trickle out showing that Pete led in "state delegate equivalents" despite Sanders winning the most actual votes, they finally release date showing that with 97% of the votes calculated Sanders will also win that state delegate metric. Which officially confirms that Pete did not win by any possible calculation and that Sanders won the Iowa caucuses. Which then immediately results in this from the DNC chair:



Again, I don't really want to join our conservative comrades in conspiracy theories, but it's becoming really difficult to understand how all of this happens the way it did. Was Perez just hoping that they could declare Pete the winner and let it go?

Is he asking for a new election or re-count? Not familiar with the term re-canvas.

 

[TheRealTruth]

So, three days after Mayo Pete declared victory, and three days after the Iowa Democratic Party has let results trickle out showing that Pete led in "state delegate equivalents" despite Sanders winning the most actual votes, the IDP finally releasse data showing that, with 97% of the votes calculated, Sanders will also win that state delegate metric. Which officially confirms that Pete did not win by any possible calculation and that Sanders won the Iowa caucuses. Which then immediately results in this from the DNC chair:



Again, I don't really want to join our conservative comrades in conspiracy theories, but it's becoming really difficult to understand how all of this happens the way it did. Was Perez just hoping that they could declare Pete the winner and let it go?

It's really starting to look like the DNC is actively trying to steal the election(caucus) from Sanders.

 

[JimEverett]

Is he asking for a new election or re-count? Not familiar with the term re-canvas.

re-count

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

Is he asking for a new election or re-count? Not familiar with the term re-canvas.

Apparently a recount is different. Here is the first explainer I could find in another election:

What is the definition of a recanvass? How is it different from a recount?

A recount and a recanvass are not the same thing

www.courier-journal.com

I think this means they would go back to each county official to get the vote totals and presumably re-calculate those totals again. But they're not going to count or review individual ballots again.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

re-count

The tweet says re-canvass.

 

[Dadsdream]

New issue: Opposition party voters flooded the caucus phone line.

Yep. It's Trump's fault the Dems Iowa Caucus system failed.

According to two participants on the call, Ken Sagar, a state Democratic central committee member, was among those answering the hotline on caucus night and said people called in and expressed support for Trump. The phone number became public after people posted photos of caucus paperwork that included the hotline number, one of the people on the call said.

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[JimEverett]

Does someone know why there was a desire to have first-vote totals?

I wouldn't think it would be that hard to get the two totals, but why was having the first vote total important at all? If you think it is that important, then hold a primary. Instead, the only number that counts is the vote after non-viable candidates are eliminated.

Anyways, I don't know how that could really be the source of the problem, but I am sure it does not help.

 

[JimEverett]

The tweet says re-canvass.

I meant it in the either/or scenario in the question: a new election or a recount.

I take it a recanvass is less formal than a recount? Either way - calling for a recanvass does not equal calling for a new vote.

 

[Beach Friends]

I think all of this could be HUGE for Bernie.

People love anti establishment.

People already think the DNC screwed Bernie last time and it looked like they were preparing to do so again.

Hillary has been mouthing off against Bernie.

Whether it's corruption or incompetence may not matter.

The perception is there.

 

[Nebaghead]

So, three days after Mayo Pete declared victory, and three days after the Iowa Democratic Party has let results trickle out showing that Pete led in "state delegate equivalents" despite Sanders winning the most actual votes, the IDP finally releasse data showing that, with 97% of the votes calculated, Sanders will also win that state delegate metric. Which officially confirms that Pete did not win by any possible calculation and that Sanders won the Iowa caucuses by every measure.

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.

 

[Nebaghead]

I think all of this could be HUGE for Bernie.

People love anti establishment.

People already think the DNC screwed Bernie last time and it looked like they were preparing to do so again.

Hillary has been mouthing off against Bernie.

Whether it's corruption or incompetence may not matter.

The perception is there.

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.

 

[JimEverett]

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.

 

[superchuck500]

Anyone else hearing that the DNC chair is calling for a do over? How do you begin to fix this mess now?

Don't they just have to move on? It's all such a weird event anyway - this idea that it's so meaningful is goofy.

 

[JimEverett]

Don't they just have to move on? It's all such a weird event anyway - this idea that it's so meaningful is goofy.

I agree. It is important only if you get the results out THAT NIGHT. Waiting to get any result out after all the participants have headed out of state defeats the entire importance of Iowa. At this point, who cares? But I guess given all the money people spent and all the time so many -candidates, staff, and volunteers, - spent working then you want some degree of accuracy, I guess.