Or better yet, why not just name a hereditary monarch and we can avoid this distraction entirely!
Just think — no more campaign ads or robocalls, no more dirty money in politics, and all the money saved could be channeled into, er…the monarch’s Arabian horse collection.
In your mind, does your graphic show they aren’t giving her as much money this year because they don’t need to (i.e. she’s staying bought) — or because she’s not the Wall Street favorite at all this time around?
Sander’s camp is whining bitterly about Bernie getting bernt with a 02 loss. What I find really weird in a campaign which claims its share of former Obama campaigners is the claim that they did not know that they needed to have people at each caucus to help run it.
The ‘arcane’ formula rests on basically the same rationale as do legislative districts with two twists. The legislative districts are set up so that they contain an equal number of people but once that is done it’s whoever turns out which determines who gets that seat. In the caucus system it’s based on the number of people who voted Democratic (first twist) but they use the existing legislative districts and weight the delegates so that each Democratic voter has an equal weight (second twist.). So if you live in a Republican district, your district having very few Democratic voters will be given very few delegates. If you live in a district which votes heavily Democratic, you will get a lot of delegates. And, again, those who turn out in a district are held to represent the wishes of that district.
I agree, however, I find it very hard to believe that no one recorded the vote count at each site and that no one forwarded those figures to Dim Party HQ as the story indicates. It would not in the least surprise me that numbers were fixed. For many years I was a poll watcher, for both REPUGS and DIMS, and saw more than once a party official say that so and so was scheduled to win at this site and switch counts to make it so during primary season. Never saw the same during the general elections.
Bernie’s supporters are berning a lot of bridges.
Hey, if they want to waste everyone’s time rechecking the math on the precinct tally sheets, I suppose so. But this is less than a nothing burger and only coddles those agitating to cry foul because their preferred candidate didn’t get the result they liked.
The “L” you say! Thanx.
Little Opie is still alive, isn’t he? He’ll do! (emoji here!)
They did. And I hope that your use of the word “dim” is simply an autocorrect induced error or an honest typo.
Of course not. This is a Republican newspaper, all they are doing is trying to muddy the waters surrounding the Dem primaries. It’s called “concern trolling”.
Given the ethnic heritage of Iowans, the bowlers should be prepared for duck-pins.
There were no paper ballots. It can’t be recounted. Yes, it’s a ridiculous way to run a primary, but it didn’t start with this election or with these Democratic officials. Hopefully, they’ll make some changes next time around.
Kinda glad I missed this story and this thread until just now.
Here’s my 2 cents: Probably no “there” there. But the party is not doing itself any favors by “digging in it’s heels.” The DMR called for an audit. The party says it’s impossible to do a recount. But that is not what was asked of them, which makes the response look like a dodge.
And of course they should release the raw vote totals. There is no justifiable reason not to (at least none that I have heard articulated, though I’ll stipulate that I did not read most of this thread).
Question – didn’t the DMR endorse Hillary?
Edit: Thank you @Ken_T for providing the context that would explain why a paper that endorsed Hillary (on the Dem side) might still be interested in calling her victory into question:
Okay, I’m going to revise “probably no ‘there’ there” to “almost surely no ‘there’ there.”
Man, Lehman Brothers are really holding out this year.
I’m glad Team Hillary explained that at 3:25AM when they declared victory instead of relying on the obvious .2% gap in “voter” support that might mislead the American public.
P.S. What’s the mathematical formula of the twists? It must be more arcane than simple arithmetic.
This “nothing burger” has already garnered 190 posts at TPM, the site where “reasonable” people congregate! If you don’t think that knee-jerk calls of “foul” and “counter-foul” poisons Democratic chances in the fall election, you must be one of the 80% of TPMers who believe that Dems will win, no matter what. However, I am of the 10% “Don’t Know” persuasion; therefore, I fear the effect on GOTV from intemperate smack and smuggery from the supporters of both sides throughout this long process.
Yes, frenzied blind beserkers are out in force today as well.
Given the topic, not surprising.
In the few precincts that have been sampled so far, Hillary also gained numbers. There is no guarantee that that either Bernie or Hillary would benefit from an open audit of all the available data. A prolonged “coverup” by IDP officials will fuel conspiracy theorys regarding both campaigns; in fact, it already has, as our dialog shows. Political coverups are usually more damaging than the initiating acts. I fear the lingering effects will harm either Democratic nominee in the general election.
If it’s naive to believe that public display of all the data will satisfy most supporters of either candidate, then I’m a cock-eyed optimist!
And the actors.