The Dems are with Trump like that jilted girlfriend who knows the best thing for her is to get on with her life but she is so obsessed with him that all she does is eat, sleep and breathe him at her own detriment.
Yes. And a favored strategy to get campaign money is to run a sort of pilot program of your campaign in Iowa or New Hampshire. That would have to change. You'd need to figure out some other way to get money. Donors wouldn't be able to tell candidates, 'lets see how you do in Iowa first,' so they'll need new mechanisms to identify which candidates they want to fund too. The whole landscape would change. It wouldn't be just like today except that everyone votes at the same time. All participants would interact differently.
You'd get money out of the process. Actually i agree with you. Its part of the vetting process. Iowa doesn't have a defined Democrat demographic. Like progressive or moderate. Its worked, Obama is a great example
By breaking them up, while keeping them secret, candidates would still have incentive to visit smaller states, it just wouldn't as heavily favor Iowa & NH. Doing it all at once leads to candidates mostly campaigning where the most delegates are.
New Hampshire votes on the 11th , that's 6 days from now .... assuming they get all the accounting done today / tomorrow , that's plenty of time .... What are the historical norms for reporting the results - prior to the internet ? If they are within that .... not a whole lot to complain about. Really , it seems to be much ado about nothing .... for the moment. Just did some digging .... the 1972 caucus was held on Jan 24 and the results were issued on the 26th. A little tidbit from wikipedia - Assuming Buttigieg was the actual winner - did they get it right ? So far 85% reporting and he has a 2.3% lead.
Would it though? Iowa, for example, has 40 delegates. California has 420 or something like that. Even winning 50% of the Iowa instead of 30% (which would require a large amount of time and effort) would only be worth an extra 8 delegates. You'd still be incentivized to spend all your time in big states rather than trying to win a few extra delegates in Iowa. The *only* reason to spend time there is the outsized media coverage - no one cares about the actual delegates.
The modern historical norm is announcing the winner on the night of the caucus and having a ton of media publicity, a victory speech that tons of people watch, and newspaper headlines the next day when that is the focus of the political world. If he wins today, the headlines tomorrow will be about impeachment. The opportunity is lost for the wall-to-wall coverage of winning that night. No one cares about comparing to 1972 when the entire nature of media coverage was different. Good article from 538 discussing the bounce from winning different states: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/iowa-might-have-screwed-up-the-whole-nomination-process/
Best thing Bernie did was have his own app. Did the IDP not think people would tweet out the results they sent in? lol this is pretty hilarious. How do you accidentally give Bernie's support to Steyer or Deval Patrick?
Looks like they fixed it...? Blackhawk is back to a 10pt lead for Bernie, Bernie is back to leading the popular vote by 1k AFTER they previously updated it to him being down by about 1k to Pete... "There will be a minor correction to the last batch of results and we will be pushing an update momentarily," the IDP said in a tweet. https://www.kcci.com/article/more-results-of-the-iowa-caucus-to-be-released-this-afternoon/30781642 This REALLY saps out any trust I had left. A "minor error" that completely flipped a large county by 10% and has a 2k swing in the popular vote. Un ****ing real.
Not sure if has been corrected, but careful with your damn conspiracy theories you lunatic. What if this Blackhawk County dude never tweeted out his results out of confusion?
"Texas Dems Fear Iowa Repeat: Primary Results to Be Delayed Due to Changes in Reporting Mechanism": https://www.nationalreview.com/news...elayed-due-to-changes-in-reporting-mechanism/ excerpt: Texas Democratic Party officials are worried the results of the state primary will be delayed due to changes in the state’s mechanism for reporting results, the Texas Tribune reported on Wednesday. The Texas Secretary of State’s office told the Democratic officials on January 23 that the mechanism by which elections are reported in the state may delay the results due to complex calculations that determine how many delegates each candidate receives. The state recently upgraded its reporting mechanism to take those calculations into account. “They basically said that’s not built out yet,” Glen Maxey, director of special projects for the Party, told the Tribune. Manny Garcia, executive director of the Texas Democratic Party, said a delay by the Secretary of State’s office in reporting the results of the primary would be a “violation of the public trust.” “The public deserves to see the vote and the delegate results on election night, and we urge the Texas Secretary of State’s office not to leave Texas voters and our nation in the dark,” Garcia said in a statement on Wednesday.
This is a point I made earlier. With a caucus its hard for a mistake to go unnoticed. There are representatives for each candidate at the precincts who know the vote count in that precinct. When a count is wrong, it gets noticed. It does make you wonder how bad other election totals are mangled where everything is done in secret.
So much for blaming the Russians when we can't even do our own counting properly. Farking incompetence.
This is a good example of why your conspiracy theories are so dumb. With a primary, this kind of mistake CAN go unnoticed. With a caucus, it can't - because multiple parties know all the results. It's also why Pete knew he won on Monday. This is a perfect example of why you can't rig a caucus and why your conspiracy theory posts are so extraordinarily stupid.
Bernie Sanders camp gave their internal numbers and said he won with his own numbers, man. Pete gave no numbers and said he was the winner. You believe Pete over Bernie? What are you even talking about? The IDP just gave votes to two people that had 0 standing from Bernie Sanders and had to pull the results only because someone tweeted their results in the county. At this point you are just being a contrarian to gaslight people. You arent a conspiracy theorist if you acknowledge what is going on in front of your face.
Bernie released results from 40% of precincts while Pete declared victory after reviewing internal data from 77% of precincts. And as more data has come in, it’s clear that Pete is winning the most SDE. Speaks to the level of organization of his team that Pete could declare victory days before the IDP did.
Dude, Bernie released even more data that was 60 percent complete that showed him 5 points and leading the poplar vote. So Twice Bernie came with his numbers while Pete has done nothing but declare victory with 0 results then have to walk it back .
