Who will win Iowa?

[Isgrimnur]

What, was run differential and strength of schedule not available?

[stessier]

I really don't get why this a win little snafu a win for Trump? It's embarrassing, for sure, but nothing is fundamentally broken.

This "little snafu" is all the talking heads have been yapping about for 2 days.
You think that doesn't matter?

I do not. I don't think talking heads matter at all.

[Fireball]

At her caucus, Sanders and Biden tied for second place, prompting a coin toss that Sanders won, putting him next in line behind Pete Buttigieg.

Coin tosses! There was one in neighboring Warren County (Biden beat Amy Klobuchar). There was one in Johnson County (Elizabeth Warren won). In Scott County, a three-way tie resulted in names being pulled from a hat (Biden’s was picked).

(from a WaPo article)

Coin tosses and names in a hat. What... The... Fuck?!?

Every electoral system needs a way to address exact ties. In almost all system use a random chance method to choose a winner. You can’t just rerun the entire election or split the baby.

[pr0ner]

At her caucus, Sanders and Biden tied for second place, prompting a coin toss that Sanders won, putting him next in line behind Pete Buttigieg.

Coin tosses! There was one in neighboring Warren County (Biden beat Amy Klobuchar). There was one in Johnson County (Elizabeth Warren won). In Scott County, a three-way tie resulted in names being pulled from a hat (Biden’s was picked).

(from a WaPo article)

Coin tosses and names in a hat. What... The... Fuck?!?

Every electoral system needs a way to address exact ties. In almost all system use a random chance method to choose a winner. You can’t just rerun the entire election or split the baby.

There was a Virginia House election 2 years ago that was decided in this fashion.

[stessier]

I really don't get why this a win little snafu a win for Trump? It's embarrassing, for sure, but nothing is fundamentally broken.

This wasn't a 'little snafu'. The wide reporting was calling this a disaster. Perception is reality in politics. The perception for some time is that the Democrats are incompetent. They just applied a big helping of confirmation there. Add to it that it was the opening contest of a critical nomination process and managed to rip open old wounds from 2016 and create some new ones. It remains to see how damaging it will be long-term but it was an extremely bad start. I don't think you will find any member of the DNC leadership who thinks this was a minor problem. It'll likely be remembered worse than the 2012 GOP caucus in Iowa which declared the wrong winner. Mostly because this failure was extremely visible in real-time.

Ask 100 people on the street outside of Iowa and I guarantee no one knows what happened there in 2016. Ask 100 people on the street in November and I bet less than half remember this happened this year. Once a candidate comes out of the convention, this won't matter. Thus, it's a little snafu.

[malchior]

I really don't get why this a win little snafu a win for Trump? It's embarrassing, for sure, but nothing is fundamentally broken.

This wasn't a 'little snafu'. The wide reporting was calling this a disaster. Perception is reality in politics. The perception for some time is that the Democrats are incompetent. They just applied a big helping of confirmation there. Add to it that it was the opening contest of a critical nomination process and managed to rip open old wounds from 2016 and create some new ones. It remains to see how damaging it will be long-term but it was an extremely bad start. I don't think you will find any member of the DNC leadership who thinks this was a minor problem. It'll likely be remembered worse than the 2012 GOP caucus in Iowa which declared the wrong winner. Mostly because this failure was extremely visible in real-time.

Ask 100 people on the street outside of Iowa and I guarantee no one knows what happened there in 2016. Ask 100 people on the street in November and I bet less than half remember this happened this year. Once a candidate comes out of the convention, this won't matter. Thus, it's a little snafu.

Well this point of view ignores...pretty much everything that matters. Here is an incomplete list of the major impacts: Iowa likely just lost their place at the start of the line permanently, candidates bet big and put lots of money and effort into Iowa and had there strategy stolen from them, to directly countermand one of your points above - the candidate who gets nominated might be entirely different than it would have been, the legitimacy of the contest is in question, and further unrest and division in the Democratic party. None of those are "small".

[gameoverman]

I really don't get why this a win little snafu a win for Trump? It's embarrassing, for sure, but nothing is fundamentally broken.

This wasn't a 'little snafu'. The wide reporting was calling this a disaster. Perception is reality in politics. The perception for some time is that the Democrats are incompetent. They just applied a big helping of confirmation there. Add to it that it was the opening contest of a critical nomination process and managed to rip open old wounds from 2016 and create some new ones. It remains to see how damaging it will be long-term but it was an extremely bad start. I don't think you will find any member of the DNC leadership who thinks this was a minor problem. It'll likely be remembered worse than the 2012 GOP caucus in Iowa which declared the wrong winner. Mostly because this failure was extremely visible in real-time.

Ask 100 people on the street outside of Iowa and I guarantee no one knows what happened there in 2016. Ask 100 people on the street in November and I bet less than half remember this happened this year. Once a candidate comes out of the convention, this won't matter. Thus, it's a little snafu.

I think I fall in this category. I have a vague idea there was some sort of technical problem in Iowa. More importantly though, no candidate has caught my attention, much less won me over. I'm feeling a little uneasy about this. I'd feel a lot better if there was a standout Democratic candidate that I was eager to vote for.

[malchior]

I really don't get why this a win little snafu a win for Trump? It's embarrassing, for sure, but nothing is fundamentally broken.

This wasn't a 'little snafu'. The wide reporting was calling this a disaster. Perception is reality in politics. The perception for some time is that the Democrats are incompetent. They just applied a big helping of confirmation there. Add to it that it was the opening contest of a critical nomination process and managed to rip open old wounds from 2016 and create some new ones. It remains to see how damaging it will be long-term but it was an extremely bad start. I don't think you will find any member of the DNC leadership who thinks this was a minor problem. It'll likely be remembered worse than the 2012 GOP caucus in Iowa which declared the wrong winner. Mostly because this failure was extremely visible in real-time.

Ask 100 people on the street outside of Iowa and I guarantee no one knows what happened there in 2016. Ask 100 people on the street in November and I bet less than half remember this happened this year. Once a candidate comes out of the convention, this won't matter. Thus, it's a little snafu.

I think I fall in this category. I have a vague idea there was some sort of technical problem in Iowa. More importantly though, no candidate has caught my attention, much less won me over. I'm feeling a little uneasy about this. I'd feel a lot better if there was a standout Democratic candidate that I was eager to vote for.

You recognize though that this is a system. When it fails it affects you even if you don't care now or know the direct effect right?

[Defiant]

[Holman]

First results are out:

Buttigieg with a narrow lead with 62% reporting on SDEs
Buttigieg 26.9
Sanders 25.1
Warren 18
Biden 15
Doubt that's enough for a network projection.
Don't know much about whether it's representative, so be cautious

Buttigieg is winning on delegates, Bernie on vote totals.

Pretty bad for Biden given expectations, but could be worse.

Klobuchar isn't that far behind at 12.6, which is better than projected (I think).

[Holman]

This is less than 2/3 of the total caucus, though. Everyone will spin it, but it isn't finished.

They really should have just waited until tomorrow or whenever the rest of the numbers are ready.

[malchior]

I think this was a distinctly dumb decision. We don't know where the votes came from and the 38% is room for big swings in those totals. They've injected *more uncertainty* into what was already a chaotic discussion.

Edit: FWIW we are already seeing people saying this vindicates Pete's speech. Even if Sanders eventually wins tomorrow he has had his victory stolen from him. In very bad news, the turnout for the caucus seems to be at 2016 levels and about 33% less than 2008. That likely reflects a lack of enthusiasm. Trump's people have to be feeling pretty good right now about all this.

[Holman]

I think this was a distinctly dumb decision. We don't know where the votes came from and the 38% is room for big swings in those totals. They've injected *more uncertainty* into what was already a chaotic discussion.

It might even be worse than that. At the NYT you can see results by county.

To my inexpert eye, it looks like the major cities (where Dems concentrate) are all well under 2/3 reported. That's a lot of delegates and people still out there. Numbers could change significantly.

Edit: FWIW we are already seeing people saying this vindicates Pete's speech. Even if Sanders eventually wins tomorrow he has had his victory stolen from him. In very bad news, the turnout for the caucus seems to be at 2016 levels and about 33% less than 2008. That's bad news and reflects the lack of enthusiasm. Trump's people have to be feeling pretty good right now about all this.

This -might- not be the case. There is an unusually large number of Undecideds out there, and Undecideds are apparently much less likely to attend a caucus than to go to the polls. (Also, of course, Undecideds eventually Decide as the race moves forward.)

In fully optimistic news, the youth vote was a full 1/3 higher than before. That's gotta be good.

[Fireball]

What strikes me as most interesting about the votes released so far is the efficiency differential.

Biden's votes seem to be the most efficiently distributed. With 14,176 votes (13.2%) he's won 210 (15.6%) of the SDEs awarded so far; that's 67.5 votes per SDE.

Warren's is by far the most inefficiently distributed. With 22,254 votes (20.7%) she's won 246 (18.3%) of the SDEs awarded so far; that's 90.5 votes per SDE.

Buttigieg is winning one SDE for every 74.5 votes, and Sanders is getting one for every 83.5 votes.

It looks like the efficiency differential is taking Warren from being in a close third in votes to a more distant third in SDEs.

[malchior]

I think this was a distinctly dumb decision. We don't know where the votes came from and the 38% is room for big swings in those totals. They've injected *more uncertainty* into what was already a chaotic discussion.

It might even be worse than that. At the NYT you can see results by county.

Yeah I just scanned them so at least there is a *rough* chance to figure out how this will move.

To my inexpert eye, it looks like the major cities (where Dems concentrate) are all well under 2/3 reported. That's a lot of delegates and people still out there. Numbers could change significantly.

That looks about right to me too. Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, and Iowa City all seem to be a good chunk of the unreported results. I don't think it'd be a stretch to think that it'll break slightly for Sanders. If this hadn't broken so badly this would have been a straight toss up between Sanders and Pete with Biden suffering a big hit. Biden is still going to be wounded but not as badly as he would have been and Sanders is going to get less pop than he would have. I"m curious if Biden/Pete are going to end up splitting centrists in NH. Biden will get the centrists who care about foreign policy.

This -might- not be the case. There is an unusually large number of Undecideds out there, and Undecideds are apparently much less likely to attend a caucus than to go to the polls. (Also, of course, Undecideds eventually Decide as the race moves forward.)

I'm still skeptical of these undecideds living in the wild but maybe it's true.

In fully optimistic news, the youth vote was a full 1/3 higher than before. That's gotta be good.

I want to believe that this will be the year the youth wake up but in reality It's probably only good if Sanders gets the nod. That said it might end up offsetting people who stay home because SOCIALIST!?!

[Fireball]

Looking at the outlying areas, I think Buttigieg wins this, and takes 12 national delegates to Sanders' 11, Warren's 9 or 8 and Biden's 8, with Klobuchar getting 1 or 2 delegates.

[$iljanus]

At her caucus, Sanders and Biden tied for second place, prompting a coin toss that Sanders won, putting him next in line behind Pete Buttigieg.

Coin tosses! There was one in neighboring Warren County (Biden beat Amy Klobuchar). There was one in Johnson County (Elizabeth Warren won). In Scott County, a three-way tie resulted in names being pulled from a hat (Biden’s was picked).

(from a WaPo article)

Coin tosses and names in a hat. What... The... Fuck?!?

Every electoral system needs a way to address exact ties. In almost all system use a random chance method to choose a winner. You can’t just rerun the entire election or split the baby.

This is true. But since I don't feel too charitable today they should have been made to keep discussing amongst themselves until they come to a consensus or the puppy gets it (precinct captain holds up a puppy)! (yes yes not practical just kidding)

[Kraken]

I really don't get why this a win little snafu a win for Trump? It's embarrassing, for sure, but nothing is fundamentally broken.

This wasn't a 'little snafu'. The wide reporting was calling this a disaster. Perception is reality in politics. The perception for some time is that the Democrats are incompetent. They just applied a big helping of confirmation there. Add to it that it was the opening contest of a critical nomination process and managed to rip open old wounds from 2016 and create some new ones. It remains to see how damaging it will be long-term but it was an extremely bad start. I don't think you will find any member of the DNC leadership who thinks this was a minor problem. It'll likely be remembered worse than the 2012 GOP caucus in Iowa which declared the wrong winner. Mostly because this failure was extremely visible in real-time.

Ask 100 people on the street outside of Iowa and I guarantee no one knows what happened there in 2016. Ask 100 people on the street in November and I bet less than half remember this happened this year. Once a candidate comes out of the convention, this won't matter. Thus, it's a little snafu.

Well this point of view ignores...pretty much everything that matters. Here is an incomplete list of the major impacts: Iowa likely just lost their place at the start of the line permanently, candidates bet big and put lots of money and effort into Iowa and had there strategy stolen from them, to directly countermand one of your points above - the candidate who gets nominated might be entirely different than it would have been, the legitimacy of the contest is in question, and further unrest and division in the Democratic party. None of those are "small".

To me, the biggest impact is that people are watching nervously for any evidence of fraud, tampering, and/or foreign interference. Even if it has an innocent explanation, the chaos surrounding the very first voting is not a good omen. If the objective is to cast doubt on the election process...mission accomplished. Uncertainty and doubt always benefit Trump.

[Fireball]

I made a chart related to the efficiency differential that I mentioned above:

[The Meal]

SDEs over-represent the rural areas, right? And Warren's demographic is the highly-educated. Doesn't seem too surprising. And the existence of the SDE's is what gives Pete (at the 62% point) the ability to claim victory just as much as Bernie (who had the popular lead before and after reallocation).

[malchior]

Meanwhile 2 hours later and they haven't released any more vote counts. These guys are killing it.

[gameoverman]

I think this was a distinctly dumb decision. We don't know where the votes came from and the 38% is room for big swings in those totals. They've injected *more uncertainty* into what was already a chaotic discussion.

Edit: FWIW we are already seeing people saying this vindicates Pete's speech. Even if Sanders eventually wins tomorrow he has had his victory stolen from him. In very bad news, the turnout for the caucus seems to be at 2016 levels and about 33% less than 2008. That likely reflects a lack of enthusiasm. Trump's people have to be feeling pretty good right now about all this.

Trump's people should have been feeling pretty good all along. There is no reason to think he's going to lose the election, based on anything we've seen so far. A lot can happen between now and the election but that's why I feel uneasy. If Democrats have to hope something, anything, happens to turn the tide then losing the election is the probable outcome.

[malchior]

Incompetence Isn’t a Conspiracy, But It Looks Like One

It’s not a secret that party leaders and donors are ill disposed toward Sanders and toward left-wing insurgents in general. But that hostility is not proof by itself that a conspiracy derailed the Iowa caucuses. There are other, more realistic culprits, and only one sensible conclusion to reach: The national party is too incompetent to conspire successfully against any candidate. Its overweening reliance on consultants, lack of a cohesive message, and lackluster investment in its state affiliates render it weak and dysfunctional. If Democratic loyalists are looking for someone to blame for the divisive reaction to Iowa’s failures, they should blame the party itself.

*Emphasis added!

[Holman]

[stimpy]

Wait....what????
Trump is different than Obama????
Who'd a thunk it??? Give that woman a Pulitzer!!!

[Daehawk]

Saw on the news where they talked about how the app is a mess that adds all this up. Then I noticed the name of the company who made that app...Shadow Inc.

What voting group / State actually buys a voting tabulation app from a company called Shadow Inc?!

Anyways They said Denver also paid tens of thousands of dollars for the same app but will not use it come Feb. Just way to spend tax money .Typical government.

[Lagom Lite]

So Sanders is leading the popular vote and is tied for delegates, yet Buttigieg is reported as leading? That's bizarre.

[malchior]

So Sanders is leading the popular vote and is tied for delegates, yet Buttigieg is reported as leading? That's bizarre.

Pete has slightly more SDEs at the moment.

In other news, these clowns were able to count 9% more of the vote since 5 PM yesterday...the total vote was 170000 votes...aka a small city. How is this not done?

[Smoove_B]

Maybe the silver lining here is that it reinforces the irrelevance of the results. I'm guessing media will be focusing on New Hampshire in the next 24 hours and it seems doubtful Iowa will have anything official to report any time soon.

From here:

"One candidate is calling the results into question because he apparently didn't do well. Another is declaring victory without any votes being confirmed," [Deval] Patrick said in a statement. "The way to beat Donald Trump isn't to act like Donald Trump. Our party and our country deserve better."

They do, and you couldn't handle the one single thing your state had 4 years to prepare for.

[malchior]

Perhaps but it feels like Pete got the biggest bounce out this whole mess. He seized the initiative. The downside is he is a real big risk. He is very unpopular with a part of the Democratic big tent that Trump obviously feels he can peel away. It remains to be seen if that is true but Trump has shown that he could steal away their base in battleground states. The Democrats have to take this seriously.

[LawBeefaroni]

Our party and our country deserve better.

Our country is getting what it deserves. This amateur-hour, fake it til you make it approach is perfectly representative. From the Shadow company to the manual counting process.

[malchior]

With a 4-way tie going into a caucus I think the winner is Trump.

Looks like I was accidentally right about this.

Who won the Iowa Democratic caucuses? Republican President Donald Trump.

The absolute fiasco in Iowa -- widespread tech issues and chaos, long delay in results, near-total breakdown of the system -- means that the theme of the Iowa caucuses is not one of an ascendant left-wing candidate or a disappointing showing by the moderate frontrunner. And it means that for many, the Iowa story is not a one-night spectacle but now a multi-day narrative -- taking center stage while the saga of impeachment of the President of the United States fades into the background.

In the meantime, too many are pushing baseless conspiracy theories about what went wrong in Iowa, when the sadder truth is that rank incompetence is likely to blame, not a nefarious plot. But the conspiracies are of course being amplified by trolls and troublemakers, sowing not only discord on the left, but broad distrust with the party's nominating system overall. That helps one person: Trump.

Now I’m fascinated by the Democratic primary process—and Iowa has me worried.

My anxiety stems from two realizations about the Great Iowa Debacle. First, the result shows a Democratic Party whose base still seems to lack the commitment to beat Trump. Second, and just as important, the complete meltdown of the process was a humiliation for a party whose argument is that Trump is too stupid, corrupt, and incompetent to be president.

[Fireball]

So Sanders is leading the popular vote and is tied for delegates, yet Buttigieg is reported as leading? That's bizarre.

Pete has slightly more SDEs at the moment.

In other news, these clowns were able to count 9% more of the vote since 5 PM yesterday...the total vote was 170000 votes...aka a small city. How is this not done?

So the reason the counting is going so slowly is that the results are in the possession of precinct caucus leaders all across the state. Volunteers and staffers for the Iowa Democratic Party are literally driving all over the state to gather the physical documentation for the caucus results which are then being transported to Des Moines for verification and entry.

Caucuses are stupid.

[malchior]

I hear that but I have to assume in the past they phoned them in. Now they have to physically possess them? It doesn't sound right and I'm not even buying into a conspiracy. It just makes me think that they are amazingly incompetent. I guess perhaps they are in the mindset that the damage is done so be extra safe but this looks absolutely ridiculous.

[Smoove_B]

I don't know anything but it sounds like they were assuming the app would do 100% of the work and they weren't prepared in any way to physically tally the paper copies when the app failed. So once they started having problems with the app, they had to scramble and figure out how they could immediately start doing it the way they had been. For whatever reason, my guess is that they weren't expecting the app to fail so they had no process in place to count paper.

For something like this they should have absolutely done both concurrently. What a mess.

[malchior]

They actually claimed the phone system was the back up. Call in the results and email an image of the paper to an email address. Somehow that has turned into a multi-day process. It is unfortunately feeding a massive conspiracy engine in the Bernie camp though which is super awesome.

[Smoove_B]

No idea who approved this launch or project, but they should be pilloried. Want to use the app? Fantastic - revolutionary. Use the app *and* tally the paper vote at the same time. If the protocol is to take a picture of regional results and phone in picture, add that to the data verification. Spoiler - they should all match. What a great way to verify the app outperformed the paper tally (speed) but still maintain validity of the process.

Not sure about the private sector, but this is public sector program launch 101. Pilot test, phase in. I'm not getting a sense that was done - just a "We have no idea what happened; the code failed, etc..."

Regarding whether or not this was some type of intentional disruption? Doesn't matter. The idea that it could be and that our voting process has been called into question since 2016 (or earlier) is all that's needed. Can't wait to see what happens in November. Prediction: chaos.

EDIT: How many hundreds of thousands of dollars was Shadow paid to make this? Candidates also paid subscription fees? I can't get a consultant job for public sector process improvement or CQI and these clowns likely made millions in failure. Amazing.

[Fireball]

No idea who approved this launch or project, but they should be pilloried. Want to use the app? Fantastic - revolutionary. Use the app *and* tally the paper vote at the same time. If the protocol is to take a picture of regional results and phone in picture, add that to the data verification. Spoiler - they should all match. What a great way to verify the app outperformed the paper tally (speed) but still maintain validity of the process.

So, every caucus was supposed to do the results on paper first, then plug the numbers into the app, make sure they matched, recalculate any differences, and then once everything was confirmed, submit the results using the app.

The expectation was that 85% of precincts would be able to report using the app, so the IDP had about a dozen staff members on hand in a call center to take results by phone when people couldn't get the app to work. Instead, only 2% of precincts were able to get the app to work, leading to 90+ minute holds and general chaos.

In order to ensure that reported numbers are accurate, the IDP is now getting the physical records from each precinct caucus captain. It's a giant fucking mess.

Adding to the confusion: in the past, caucuses only had to call in the number of SDEs won by each candidate. Now they had to call in the first vote, the post-reallocation vote, and the SDE number. The rules around reallocation also changed a bit to make the process quicker, leading to more confusion. Further, proponents of a certain candidate got into multiple arguments about SDE allocation math with the precinct captains because that campaign told them incorrect information about how the math works.

EDIT: How many hundreds of thousands of dollars was Shadow paid to make this? Candidates also paid subscription fees? I can't get a consultant job for public sector process improvement or CQI and these clowns likely made millions in failure. Amazing.

The Iowa Democratic Party spent $60,000 on the app. They didn't even get the final application until Friday, and had problems distributing it to precinct caucus captains because limitations in the software used to distribute the app outside of the Android and iOS app stores.

The candidates who have contracts with Shadow are paying to use its actually very good text messaging system. None of that is connected to the app fiasco with the caucuses.

[Smoove_B]

Oy. Thanks for all that extra information. Everyone is so focused on the results, I'm not actually seeing too much detail yet on the 'what went wrong". Much appreciated. $60K seems kinda low to me, though having never developed an app maybe I'm wrong. The FDA gave a $40K prize to a developer that made a Naloxone training/info app for general use back in 2016/17. Wider use, but not a data collection/transmission app.

Though I will say the fact that they didn't get the app until Friday should have likely been a huge red flag.

[Fireball]

Oy. Thanks for all that extra information. Everyone is so focused on the results, I'm not actually seeing too much detail yet on the 'what went wrong". Much appreciated. $60K seems kinda low to me, though having never developed an app maybe I'm wrong. The FDA gave a $40K prize to a developer that made a Naloxone training/info app for general use back in 2016/17. Wider use, but not a data collection/transmission app.

Though I will say the fact that they didn't get the app until Friday should have likely been a huge red flag.

Yeah, you'd think that, right? I can't believe they went ahead with using it.