So instead you’re supporting the party who are once again actively sabotaging America’s democratic processes. Good to know.
I realize this is OT, but count me astounded at that “fact”. Are yo astounded to learn that if a game is tied after 9 innings they continue. They play on just as in the US Major Leagues. It is only a tie after 12 innings are completed.
How hard should this be for a poll worker? You count once, right? Then you allow the less than 15%ers to reallocate (Hey, Bernie guy! You can’t switch now, new rule!) and then you count again? Put those numbers in and have Excel do the rest.
Is it any harder than that?
What if one of Bernie’s supporters walks out the door after the first round? Does that vote still count? If so, then how do you determine the new count? Let’s say that there were 58 Bernie supporters standing in the right spot after the first vote. There are 38 after the second vote. How do you know if all 58 original voters went home and these are 38 new votes, or if 20 original voters went home and there are zero new votes?
Does everyone file past the clerks each time and flash their voter registration card?
This would be like me posting my debit card number complete with CVC and billing zip online and when a poster tells me that it is my own stupid fault for now not having any money in the bank you tell that poster that it is “good to know” he supports credit card thieves. Really absurd post.
This was not an organized effort by the Republican party.
I’ve never understood why turnout is so low in the Iowa caucus. 170k sounds about right, but in the general election about 650-800k democrats will vote along with a similar number of republicans. You’ve got all these candidates trying to meet you personally but turnout is still about 1/4 of what it is on election day.
Yes, the new rules should have been simple to apply. With 1700 different precincts and 1700 precinct captains, you’re guaranteed to have some screwups.
If your candidate is viable, and you turn in your card, you’re done. You can walk out the door, your vote is counted. (Different than past years) The card you turned in holds your vote place.
For verifying the count in each group, the campaign spokesperson for the precinct would count the people (or have them number off) and report the total to the precinct captain. The groups’ totals are all added up on the spreadsheet and if the total matches the first total count (we numbered off initially, before splitting into groups) then the groups’ count is accepted. We had a humorous moment at our precinct where we came up 2 short of the total and couldn’t find the missing votes for a minute. Then realized it was the tech guy and the girl working the spreadsheet, both caucusing for Warren, but not standing in the clump because they had stuff to do.
One more thing, for the second count, they relied on the cards turned in, not the people standing around, since many left. I’m not sure if every precinct did it this way, but it made sense. People from non-viable groups turned in their cards to the campaign spokespeople with the second preference side marked, then left. So the final count was based on the number of cards each group ended up with.
To caucus you have to be there right at 7pm. Not sometime in a 4 hour window, but you have to arrive before 7 to get checked in, then you have to sit and listen to a speech, some local party votes like who is going to be the local chair and secretary and some local resolutions that they want to add to the party platform. Then all the splitting and counting and realigning. It all takes 1-2 hours, at least. It is not a system that is easy to participate in for people who work evenings, or have young children, or are elderly or disabled.
Is the caucus agenda and schedule fixed throughout the state, or does each county (precinct?) have some autonomy? Is it really grass-roots democracy in action, or a pathetic imitation?
My wife attends village meetings here. Sometimes there’s a show of hands to decide whether limited funds from the central government should be spent on repairs to the water system, or dredging storm drains, or whatever. The “means testing” for some government hand-outs is done right there at the village meeting! (“Raise your hand if you think Mrs. So-and-so is a needy person.”)
Governance here is hugely flawed. But sometimes I think Thailand’s governance is not as flawed as American governance has become.
If it’s like ours were (huge assumption), it isn’t poll workers - it’s a precinct chairperson and maybe some volunteers. Some of them didn’t show up at all, so there’s no one “official” to run things. Some promised to go to training - and didn’t, so they’re not really clear on the process themselves. It’s very probable that no one in the group has an idea of what to do. While there are instructions available, you have to be the type of person who can read instructions and follow them (can you put together IKEA furniture? If not, there will be problems). There are a bunch of people who are impatient and just want to bully their way to talking about their candidate ad nauseum.
So, while it’s not technically much harder than that, herding 10-100 people (depending on the attendance of your caucus) who don’t fully understand what’s going on (and a small percentage who are intent on causing chaos), is somewhat harder than that.
This makes the Electoral College seem completely fair and straightforward in comparison.
(The Electoral College that a lot of Democrats would like to abolish.)
176,000 is the figure I recall hearing. About the same as 2016.
Nope. I’m easily astounded, but this doesn’t do it. I thought there might be some Gotcha like that, but didn’t waste a Google. What difference does it make? 9 innings, 12 innings, the underlying point is the same.
Anyway, Congrats or condolences on being astounded, whichever applies.
A lot of Democrats want to abolish the Iowa Caucuses too.
I agree. And screwups are part of any human process and error checking is as well. Again, it would seem like you could find 1,700 sixth graders in Iowa who could do this job well.
Further, it is almost like a “this is why we can’t have nice things” argument to eliminate the caucus system. Sure, a primary would be easier, but I think it is excellent in a democracy that any citizen has a public platform to stand up and attempt to persuade his fellow citizens to vote for his/her preferred candidate.
Now, it wouldn’t be feasible nationwide, but I like having this one little slice of it still existing. Just because you cannot find enough people to count it right is not a reason to get rid of caucuses but a reason to improve our education system.
Regarding the Buttigieg coin flip posted earlier. If I was Warren’s representative, I would have been raising holy hell. How come nobody said anything?
Besides people who have a really good reason not to go to that effort, like last few categories, it’s pretty unsurprising to me that many people without really good excuses like that wouldn’t show up either. 
I mean politically activist people can fault them, but most people don’t care enough about politics to go to much trouble (spouting off on the internet from the comfort of home isn’t trouble). One might interpret political apathy in the US generally in a good or a bad way I suppose.
I think you could as easily be surprised how high general IA turnout is as how low it is. But, the Democrats just approximately matching 2016 IA turnout, somewhat less than 2008 level, is hard to interpret as good for them.
Nevada’s caucus is similar in the broad outlines, although different in some of the details. We’ll see how it goes.
I think the two main differences are:
One, after the first round of voting, if your candidate doesn’t have at least 15%, you have to switch to one that does, or leave that caucus;
Two, the national convention delegates will be based on “head count” instead of “state delegate equivalents” (for district-level delegates, “the national convention delegates elected at the district level shall be allocated in proportion to the percentage of the caucus vote won in that district by each preference at the first determining step, except that preferences falling below a 15% threshold shall not be awarded any delegates or alternates”; a similar rule applies to the statewide-level delegates).
Couldn’t people who support non-viable candidates combine behind one or two candidates to make them viable?
Remember:
If Trump winning
Russia is rigging
If Pete is behind
Results go offline!!!