Is what happened last night in Iowa reflective of how the national Democratic party...

[Yavin4]

does not put enough people and resources into the state and local levels? A national party should have strong state chairpeople, esp. in a critical state like Iowa. I live in deep blue NY state, and I have no idea of who my state Dem chair is.

Maybe too much is being invested in campaign consultants and not enough in building out the party on a national level.

[Bettie]

1. I tend to agree with that

EVERY state should have strong support from the national party.

That is how you build support and that is how you win elections. A robust 50 state strategy.

[pwb]

2. Iowa has two red senators and has been red lately so

why should a minority Democratic red state be our jumping off point, ever? . I could care less what happened in Iowa. I would save the money for the General.

[Yavin4]

3. Because you should care about states like Iowa.

Writing off states is what gives McConnell his power.

[sarisataka]

7. Writing off states is what gives us

The current occupant of the White House. Writing off "unwinnable" states essentially spots Republicans a 135 vote lead in the EC.

[El Supremo]

4. Not enough organization, not enough technical expertise.

I live in a Democrat caucus state and every four years they are a disaster. I don't even want to go this year even though I'm an outgoing precinct committee person.

I like the idea of having caucuses where you actually talk with your neighbors. But the leaders have to be prepared for everything.

[W_HAMILTON]

5. You have one of the main Democratic candidates and his followers openly advocating...

...for people to refuse to donate to the DNC or other similar Democratic Party organizations.

[LiberalFighter]

6. The state Democratic Parties are part of the national party but

that doesn't mean that the state parties all do what is needed nor are they all funded sufficiently. That is not the fault of the DNC or Democratic Party. The DNC consists of delegates from all of the states and territories. And all have a say.

[MineralMan]

8. Not really. Campaign stuff is amateur hour on the precinct level.

How amateurish is known to anybody who is active in lower level party activities.

Nobody knows what they're doing anywhere below the state level in the party. It's all played by ear.

[stillcool]

9. Enough. States run their own elections...

however effed up they want them to be. Unfortunately people continue to vote the same kind of people into their state governments, and they will continue having the same elections. After the voting is said and done, they call on outsiders to fix things They think the person they voted for should come into their state and fix it. How many times does it have to happen before people get a clue, that if you want accurate, secure elections, you need to vote people into your own state governments that will do that.

Jay Jacobs is your chair. https://nydems.org/
according to google

[Yavin4]

10. Thanks.

Never heard of him.

[DeminPennswoods]

11. They tried a new, more transparent reporting protocol and it

was buggy. That's it. There's paper back up and the results will be reported - accurately.

The whole thing was blown out of proportion by a media desperate for immediate results so they could launch into the punditry of "who won", "who lost", "who benefits most" and yada, yada, yada. This is the real cause of all the consternation about not getting the results last night. The candidates had observers, precinct captains and staff to bring back the results so the campaigns had a good idea of where they finished. Otherwise, Buttigieg would never have given a victory speech and the other candidates would not be relatively sanguine about the delay.