CNN just called it for Hillary.

[pnwmom]

And 5 minutes later, said they weren't officially calling it. Whatever.

Based on the official state figures, she will have 24 delegates and Bernie will have 21.

PLUS her super-delegates.

There is still one precinct in Polk county that hasn't reported, but even if Bernie got every vote there it wouldn't be enough to put him over the top.

. . . But CNN just now added that their prediction is unofficial, because they're going to wait for that last precinct to finish.

ON EDIT:

This is the statement from the Democratic Party's official website that they felt supported their initial idea that Hillary has won.

http://iowademocrats.org/statement-from-idp-chair-on-tonights-historically-close-caucus-results/#more-14967

“The results tonight are the closest in Iowa Democratic caucus history. Hillary Clinton has been awarded 699.57 state delegate equivalents, Bernie Sanders has been awarded 695.49 state delegate equivalents, Martin O’Malley has been awarded 7.68 state delegate equivalents and uncommitted has been awarded .46 state delegate equivalents. We still have outstanding results in one precinct (Des Moines—42), which is worth 2.28 state delegate equivalents. We will report that final precinct when we have confirmed those results with the chair.

So the difference between Hillary's and Bernie's SDE's -- about 4 SDE's -- is more than the 2.28 total SDE's from the remaining unreported precinct.

[Cali_Democrat]

1. Victory!

[pnwmom]

2. Yay!

[Fawke Em]

20. We all lose. Gag.

[pnwmom]

30. You do. Lots of people are very happy. n.t

[pnwmom]

44. According to polls, more than half of national voters support her.

That means there are many happy people tonight, even if most of them aren't on DU.

[Fawke Em]

48. Hon... say Hello to President Cruz or Trump.

You're supporting a lost cause.

[pnwmom]

60. Conservative super-pacs spent almost $4 million trying to help Bernie out

because they'd loving nothing better than to face him in the general.

[stonecutter357]

90. .

[stonecutter357]

91. Are you a true Bernie supporter ?

[Fawke Em]

29. What a fake.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

57. Uh...

...ever notice how her left tooth needs whitening?

[tecelote]

78. You call this a win?

Technically, Hillary may have eked by.

But, Bernie proved he is a force to be dealt with and he will get more exposure for it. Especially after winning NH.

Finally, Bernie will get air time and you know what happens when people hear him speak... he surges.

Bernie won a much larger victory tonight.

[riversedge]

80. VICTORY

[JI7]

3. in terms of perception it's a tie which is what matters more in Iowa

as the number of delegates are small.

South Carolina will really tell how much Sanders is cutting into her support base . but i don't see her gaining much in new hampshire where sanders has a huge lead.

[SunSeeker]

6. How is Hillary's 24 delegates to Bernie's 21 a tie?

[JI7]

12. the numbers are small , iowa matters more in how people who vote

later view things and how much it would affect their votes.

and in terms of that it's mostly a tie.

[SunSeeker]

14. "Small" is still not a tie.

Hillary won Iowa.

[JI7]

18. Sanders losing South Carolina by 5 points would be more impressive than a huge win in New Hampshire

Iowa was a tie

[SunSeeker]

25. We'll see what happens in NH.

Iowa was a tie before 100% of the precincts reported. Now all have reported. It is a Hillary win.

[JI7]

31. technically Hillary won but everyone will see it as a tie

[SunSeeker]

38. Not the folks counting the delegates. nt

[passiveporcupine]

49. If it's within .5%, I believe it's considered an official tie.

At least that is what I read somewhere tonight. Or heard.

But even if that's not correct,

Multiple ties reported in Polk, Jasper, Cedar and Johnson Counties were solved with a flippant coin toss as allowed by the Iowa Democratic Party. In each instance, the coins favored Clinton as the victor.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/coin-toss-decides-clinton-sanders-tie-iowa-precinct-article-1.2517022

Must make you feel really righteous when your candidate wins because of some random coin tosses!

[SunSeeker]

51. You can believe whatever you want, but Hillary won Iowa. nt

[passiveporcupine]

56. It's not a matter of faith or belief

it's a matter of facts and rules, and because of the rules, it may be an official tie, or Hillary may be declared the winner.

We probably won't know till tomorrow.

And if tomorrow they claim it a win for Hillary, because the rules allow coin tosses to assign delegates in a tie, and all the coin tosses favor one candidate...then according to the rules, she wins, but I think we all know that's just a gamble and not based on actual votes or justice. This isn't a game. Games can be decided by coin tosses. This is about human lives. The last time I saw a coin toss that was about human lives, was in the Movie "No Country For Old Men". Still just fantasy.

Go with pride if that is the kind of victory you want.

[pnwmom]

84. Not true. There is no such thing, unless you think Bush and Gore would have had

an official tie if Gore was 100 votes ahead of Bush.

[passiveporcupine]

87. I don't know anything about this stuff...I'm just repeating what others have said

But I guess we will see...

Sanders threw little light on an unfolding controversy over certain Iowa precincts that did not have enough Democratic party volunteers to report delegate totals for each candidate, but called on officials to take the unusual step of revealing underlying voter totals too.

“I honestly don’t know what happened. I know there are some precincts that have still not reported. I can only hope and expect that the count will be honest,” he said.

“I have no idea, did we win the popular vote? I don’t know, but as much information as possible should be made available.”

Sanders’ campaign director, Jeff Weaver, told reporters he did not “anticipate we are going to contest” specific results but hoped there would be an investigation into what happened.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/feb/01/iowa-caucus-vote-live-donald-trump-ted-cruz-bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-2016

One thing I do know, if I were making the rules and some precincts tied and required a coin toss to assign delegates? The first coin toss is fair, but if it's more than one tie, the delegates should be divided up equally between the two candidates after all precincts are in. In other words, if there is one tie between Hillary and Bernie, the coin toss decides...but if there are six ties, they split the delegates evenly. That is only fair in my world. After all, the votes were tied...so to be fair the process should not give more weight to one candidate than another. If it is an uneven count, the extra one is decided by a coin toss.

But then I always liked to play fair.

[pnwmom]

95. Another non-highlight of the Iowa caucuses is they never announce actual votes.

And since 1 delegate could mean 10 voters in one precinct, or 30 in another, there's no real way to figure it out.

There is nothing fair about the caucus set up. It is not designed to produce one-person-one-vote results, and it doesn't.

The whole thing is about luck. If you're lucky enough to vote in certain precincts, which vary from year to year, then your vote can count a lot more than someone else's.

[passiveporcupine]

97. I agree there is a lot about it that doesn't add up

but luck by rolling a die or flipping a coin should not be part of a caucus for President of our United States.

This time the vote count was so close in so many precincts, a revote might actually be necessary to give the fairest shot possible in these circumstances. Again, I don't know because this is my first time even learning how these caucuses work (or don't).

I just don't like irregularity in a system as important as this one.

[pnwmom]

98. There is no such thing as a recount or a revote in the Iowa system.

And irregularity is built in to any caucus system. People who don't like this should join me in trying to get rid or caucuses and switch to primaries everywhere.

[w4rma]

15. There are only 44 delegates at stake. 24 + 21 = more than 44. (nt)

[pnwmom]

21. I read somewhere that it was "approximately 44." I don't know how they decide

the number of delegates, but it's some combination of turnout this year and turnout in previous years.

[Matariki]

54. No. It's 44. Not "approximately 44"

[hopemountain]

53. correct

earlier tonight wolf blitzer stated that hillary would end up with 23 and sanders with 21. i don't know why so many are reporting different delegate totals.

but, in reality, bernie and hillary tied in this state and the number of delegates is moot until the convention in august.

[Matariki]

55. It's 22 to 21. Where are you getting those numbers from?

[SunSeeker]

58. The OP. nt

[Matariki]

59. The OP is making up her own facts.

CNN didn't call a winner either.

The delegates are 22 for Clinton, 21 for Sanders, 1 left to be decided.

[SunSeeker]

62. No, CNN reports 24 to 21, with 100% reporting.

http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/states/ia/Dem

[Matariki]

64. *Sigh* Iowa has 44 delegate plus 8 'super delegates'

CNN is either in error, trying to count super delegates, or you are misunderstanding.

This is a hard fact, not an opinion thing. 44 delegates.

[SunSeeker]

70. No, it is "approximately 44."

See post 21.

[Matariki]

71. You really should quit using the OP as your source

she doesn't know what she's talking about. It is NOT 'approximately' 44. That doesn't even make sense. Do your homework.

[SunSeeker]

74. If you disagree with the OP why don't you provide a link?

[Matariki]

76. I did. See below.

Or here, if you are lazy: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=44+democratic+delegates+Iowa

[Matariki]

73. Here. This might help

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/bernie-sanders-just-changed-the-democratic-party

Strictly speaking, the Democratic caucus finished in a dead heat. In the early hours of Tuesday morning, with ninety-nine per cent of the precincts having reported, the delegate count was six hundred and sixty-five for Clinton, and six hundred and sixty-two for Sanders. (For some reason, the Democrats release only their delegate counts, not the number of votes cast for each candidate.) In terms of percentages, it was 49.8 per cent to 49.6 per cent, which rounds up to fifty-fifty. Barring something unforeseen, Iowa’s forty-four delegates to the Democratic National Convention will be equally divided.

[SunSeeker]

75. That was when it was at 99%. CNN numbers are at 100% reporting.

But, regardless, that paragraph you cite does not explain the delegate number formula, and it certainly does not say it is a hard and fast number. Indeed, it suggests it is subject to change.

[Cobalt Violet]

94. she got the by a coin toss.

[SunSeeker]

99. No, Hillary won because she got more votes.

As has been repeatedly noted by other DUers, the coin flips were for county level delegates to the state convention, which are a fraction of the 1405 delegate count, so your coin toss claim is bogus.

The final delegate count was 701-697. Each coin toss decided a precinct delegate, which was a fraction of each ONE of those. How small of a fraction? Not clear, but not enough to swing it, even if all 8 went a single way. So, the math bernie people are doing is like this:

701-6 = 695
697+6 = 703

Bernie should have won!

But each coin toss was a small fraction of ONE of those delegates, so IN REALITY it would look more like this, even if Clinton lost ALL the coin tosses:

701-.125 = 700.875
697+.125 = 697.125

(Or something substantially equivalent - it's difficult to tell what the actual fractions would be). In any case, the 1-1 identification of coin tosses with the 1405 is completely incorrect and uninformed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511122196#post6

[SunSeeker]

4. Woohoo!

[jfern]

5. It may have been decided by the coin tosses

Also, there are only 44 pledged delegates. Hillary must have a superdelegate, which could change at any time, and a 23-21 delegate lead.

[pnwmom]

13. We will never know, because the number of delegates isn't proportionate

to the number of voters -- which they don't announce.

In a race with with more than 2 candidates , there is a 15% threshold for getting a threshold. So someone with 15% of the vote can get 1 delegate, and another person with 29% might also get only one delegate -- depending on how many votes other people got.

Etc.

There is an awful lot of squishiness in ALL of these counts.

[BlueCaliDem]

7. Just as we predicted! Yay!

[Fawke Em]

22. Gee. Thanks for making women feel even less with that fake shit.

[Cali_Democrat]

28. How does that post make women feel less?

[Hekate]

45. Some people are bitter, is all. Some people should just rejoice that this is a virtual tie....

...and that hacks like Andrea Mitchell are still trying to spin the results as terrible news for Hillary.

[JohnnyRingo]

50. Results of jury

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is just abusive and insulting and needs to stop.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:17 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry, but I don't see why you would be that insulted. Grow some skin or stay away from GDP.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Anime, if that's the reason for alert, is not an assault on women everywhere. It's legitimate art.

I'm not telling how I voted.... wait a minute.

[Starry Messenger]

86. Not this woman--I feel awesome. :)

[B Calm]

52. Looks like you were alerted on, results.

On Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:05 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Gee. Thanks for making women feel even less with that fake shit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1118295

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is just abusive and insulting and needs to stop.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Feb 2, 2016, 04:17 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry, but I don't see why you would be that insulted. Grow some skin or stay away from GDP.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Anime, if that's the reason for alert, is not an assault on women everywhere. It's legitimate art.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[stonecutter357]

92. I feel awesome.

[toshiba783]

8. Turnout?

Have there been any numbers regarding turnout for democrats?

[pnwmom]

36. I think I read that it was 42% -- so a bit more than Gelzer's poll predicted

but less than Obama's 57%.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. cnn you say?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/02/politics/iowa-caucuses-democrats-2016/index.html

And yet Clinton found herself once again struggling to prove what is supposed to be the selling point of her campaign: dominance and electability.

Instead, even if she eeks out a win late tonight by a fraction of a percentage point, the Iowa caucuses looked like a defeat for the former Secretary of State. Once again, she has been knocked back on her heels by a challenger who her campaign did not take seriously until late in the race.

[Cali_Democrat]

11. That's an op-ed posted 3 hours ago. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

17. Well, bravo for you.

Im all out of buttons and the other good prizes, but i might have a wacky wall walker or some candy corn left.

[Cali_Democrat]

23. I hate candy corn

Give me a brownie sundae with hot fudge and crushed peanuts....

.....and a frickin' cherry on top.

[Warren DeMontague]

35. On that, my friend, we are in 100% agreement.

if candy was airports, candy corn would be newark.

[joshcryer]

10. What would be the difference in total state delegates if the coin tosses went the other way?

That is the main stickler.

[pnwmom]

19. No one can know because the delegates aren't awarded proportionately.

So 1 delegate might be representing 15% of the voters at a precinct, or 25%, or 50-- depending on how many delegates are assigned to the precinct -- which is based on PAST election turnout.

In a small county with only 2 delegates, one might go to a candidate who got 25% of the vote and the other to someone who got 75%.

And they don't publicize actual voter numbers.

So we'll never know how close it was in terms of voters -- just in terms of delegates. The coin tosses are an obvious bit of craziness, but they are outweighed by all the rest of the messiness in the system.

[Hekate]

16. Thanks for keeping up informed, pnwmom. I for one am glad that's over....

....now, on to the next hard slog.

Pfeh! And to think some keep nattering on about a "coronation" and "inevitability." The only ones who talk like that are not working on behalf of Hillary. She and her supporters know damn well what hard work this campaign is and will be.

[Fawke Em]

27. I will not vote for her ever.

And I'm a 46 year old female.

You're giving me death.

Thank you..




NOT.

[pnwmom]

32. When she wins the nomination, we shall miss you then. nt

[Fawke Em]

34. I'm sure you will. She won't win.

[BlueCaliDem]

96. BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Hekate]

39. Don't let the door hit you on the way out, if she gets the nomination

JURY: This is response to the poster's declaration that she will not vote for Hillary if Hillary is the nominee.

[azurnoir]

88. :) jury in

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:08 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I will not vote for her ever.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1118303

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Over the top--claims voting for a Dem is "giving me death." Vow to not vote for the Dem nominee is a TOS violation on the Democratic site.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Feb 2, 2016, 05:17 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: and she's not the nominee yet, so no ToS violation
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The vow to not vote for a Dem nominee is a violation of TOS as I understand them and thus I have to vote for a hide. Disclosure: I am a Sanders supporter and have a certain sympathy for the poster's viewpoint. But I do not feel this is an appropriate way to express that viewpoint.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[loyalsister]

24. I wonder how many superdelegates pledged their love based on the inevitability fallacy?

This race was a tie, and the rest of it is not going to be as easy as Hillary's fantasy world where she faces no opposition because she and only she "can get things done." That talking point along with many others are burned.

My hope is that she will move left and maybe will have gained a little respect for voters who are not loyalists and fundraisers.

This is very much a close race and a lot of supporters will be re-evaluating their assumption that the socialist can't possibly win.

[JaneyVee]

26. K AND R!

[madfloridian]

33. Just saw CNN, they have not called it for Hillary.

They chuckled and said Hillary declared victory for herself.

[pnwmom]

41. First they showed all the state numbers on the screen, did the addition and

subtraction, showed all the numbers again, and proved that even if Bernie won every single remaining vote, he still couldn't overcome her lead.

Five minutes later, the commentators said CNN called to tell them that it wouldn't be officially called till the last precinct's official results came in . . . even though those results couldn't change the overall result.

So whatever.

They did declare it before they undeclared it.

[GoneFishin]

77. Which is precisely her reason for doing so, in hopes that the disinformation would grow legs.

She never stops running the scam.

[longship]

37. When a news source really, really, really has to call a winner, in spite of a tie.

Oh boy! What's the use?

[madfloridian]

40. They didn't call it for Hillary.

[pnwmom]

42. If you believe in math they did. They showed that the votes that separated

Hillary and Bernie were greater than the number that hadn't been counted yet.

[Matariki]

61. No they didn't. You are making stuff up!

[pnwmom]

65. Can you add and subtract? This is the Democratic Party's official statement:

http://iowademocrats.org/statement-from-idp-chair-on-tonights-historically-close-caucus-results/#more-14967

“The results tonight are the closest in Iowa Democratic caucus history. Hillary Clinton has been awarded 699.57 state delegate equivalents, Bernie Sanders has been awarded 695.49 state delegate equivalents, Martin O’Malley has been awarded 7.68 state delegate equivalents and uncommitted has been awarded .46 state delegate equivalents. We still have outstanding results in one precinct (Des Moines—42), which is worth 2.28 state delegate equivalents. We will report that final precinct when we have confirmed those results with the chair.

So the difference between Hillary's and Bernie's SDE's -- 4.08 SDE's -- is more than the 2.28 total SDE's from the remaining unreported precinct.

[Matariki]

67. Your OP is misleading. CNN didn't 'call it' for Hillary

you made that up.

[pnwmom]

68. I watched them do it. Then 5 minutes later, they announced

that the network told them it wasn't an official "call."

Then they went through all the math AGAIN and demonstrated that the gap was too big for Bernie to win . . . even if the remaining votes all went his way.

So they are officially not calling yet, while at the same time proving that the math shows Hillary has won.

But you can do the math, based on the State Party's official numbers. Of, at least, I assume you can.

[Matariki]

69. This part: they announced that the network told them it wasn't an official "call."

your OP is misleading

[pnwmom]

72. You still haven't addressed the numbers they said showed Hillary had won

before they backtracked and said they weren't supposed to make an official call.

How can you look at the State Party's official statement and not agree that Hillary has won?

[SunSeeker]

63. Yay math!

http://www.cnn.com/election/primaries/states/ia/Dem

[DCBob]

46. Welll one thing accomplished... 2016 will not be a repeat of 2008.

Cheers!

[Rybak187]

47. No alert on phone from any of the services that I use for news including cnn so I I am not so sure

[pnwmom]

66. This is the official statement on the Iowa Democratic website:

http://iowademocrats.org/statement-from-idp-chair-on-tonights-historically-close-caucus-results/#more-14967

“The results tonight are the closest in Iowa Democratic caucus history. Hillary Clinton has been awarded 699.57 state delegate equivalents, Bernie Sanders has been awarded 695.49 state delegate equivalents, Martin O’Malley has been awarded 7.68 state delegate equivalents and uncommitted has been awarded .46 state delegate equivalents. We still have outstanding results in one precinct (Des Moines—42), which is worth 2.28 state delegate equivalents. We will report that final precinct when we have confirmed those results with the chair.

So the difference between Hillary's and Bernie's SDE's -- 4.08 SDE's -- is more than the 2.28 total SDE's from the remaining unreported precinct.

[CBGLuthier]

79. Considering she gave her "victory" speech hours before it was decided. I wonder if

she will be giving her New Hampshire "victory" speech tomorrow or Wednesday.

[pnwmom]

83. The numbers have been known for hours but CNN has still not reported it officially.

[Iliyah]

81. K & R

[djean111]

82. Whatevah!, really.

IMO, the minuscule margin of victory tells voters in the next states that voting for Bernie is not some sort of gallant but lonely act or statement - Bernie has legs, Bernie has solid support.

[Feeling the Bern]

85. Pyrrhic victories are always enjoyable.

[stonecutter357]

89. K&R!

[Flying Squirrel]

93. You go ahead and count those superdelegates...

But they'll switch just like they did in 2008 if Bernie ends up winning the pledged delegate race. If they don't, then woe be unto the Democratic Party and our country. Superdelegates are undemocratic and need to be done away with, it was a very bad idea to begin with. Better for us to nominate a loser once in awhile (and I'm not talking about Bernie) than to have a small number of party insiders overturn the will of the people.