This is the first time the Iowa caucuses have a paper trail. What does that mean for previous years?

[HerbChestnut]

I just had this thought. If this is the first year that the Iowa caucuses have had a paper trail, and there's all this drama about reporting results and irregularities, does that throw into question the legitimacy of previous caucus results? It shouldn't take this long to report results if they have paper ballots. It's really not hard to report three numbers instead of one. What we've heard is that accuracy is paramount, which is why the IDP and now the DNC are checking and rechecking the numbers. So what if there's been irregularities in the past that just gotten swept under the rug because there was no paper trail?

[Uncle Joe]

1. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread HerbChestnut.

[HerbChestnut]

2. Thanks, Uncle Joe.

Think I'm starting to go a little stir crazy waiting for the full results and paranoia is setting in!

[OneMoreCupOfCoffee]

3. That Bernie wuz robbed?

[HerbChestnut]

4. Um, no.

[OneMoreCupOfCoffee]

5. Oh.

[hedda_foil]

6. No. That there likely were a lot of mistakes that good through every caucus.

And snarky comments and floor rolling emojis reflect badly on your candidate. Think about it.

[JudyM]

7. Particularly when they're so frequent and divisive.

[hedda_foil]

8. Exactly. It takes a great deal of effort not to identify the nastiness with the candidate's photo.