Iowa Dems say they plan to release caucus results 'as soon as possible today'

[brooklynite]

Politico

The Iowa Democratic Party said on Tuesday morning that it plans to release caucus results “as soon as possible today,” and that its ultimate goal is to ensure the “integrity and accuracy of the process.”

The party also said a “coding issue” in its reporting app was to blame for the delay in the results, but that the issue “did not impact the ability of precinct chairs to report data accurately.”

[left-of-center2012]

1. okie dokie smokie

[getagrip_already]

2. no, the caucus ITSELF impacted the ability to report data accurately

It is an insane and undemocratic process and has been from the start.

[Skidmore]

3. Wrong.

[denem]

4. The Biden campaign is gearing up for a Berniesque 'we wuz robbed'

There is a verifiable paper & video record. Won't cut the mustard.

[getagrip_already]

5. not robbed.. who said that?

I said the process prevents an accurate count, but nott in any particular direction. You have to show up to a physical location, at a specific time, on a work night, and spend hours there while the process drags on.

People with transportation problems, or childcare/parentcare issues can't vote. In some cases, multiple precincts caucus in the same location, creating confusion and disarray.

The process disenfranchises voters and leaves it to activists and knuckleheads.

That can hurt some candidates morte than others, but in the end, it hurts them all.

Biden was never going to do well in Iowa. It doesn't matter. (you can find dozens of posts where I said just that). But Iowa needs a democratic primary. Not a joke caucus meant more for entertainment than choosing a candidate.

[denem]

7. The process does not prevent an accurate count.

Last edited Tue Feb 4, 2020, 11:33 AM - Edit history (1)

There is a video record of the second round in almost every precinct ...

[getagrip_already]

8. Never said it wouldn't be....

I said the caucus process prevents a fair count of voters, because it actively excludes people who would otherwise vote.

So you count an activist based subset, which is never representative of the voters intentions. It's an intentional undercount.

It isn't valid. But again, it isn't aimed at any particular candidate.

Either way, it doesn't matter. Iowa and nh are not relevant in the end. It's only fuel for the entertainment industry. Enjoy the show, just don't be upset when it changes.

[denem]

9. OK. Yes I agree with that 100%.

Secret paper ballots. Closed primaries.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. As opposed to not releasing them as soon as possible? Be thankful for small favors n/t