Just remember, it's conspiracy theory when it happens here:
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1224812632445767681"]
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1224812632445767681"]
The Democratic Primary is Upon Us! - Biden is the Presumptive Nominee
- Thread starter Tireseas_v1legacy
- Start date
It's the nature of caucuses (and representative democracy in general): state delegates are distributed by population to the precincts, and the caucus determines the delegates to the state convention, where the national delegates are formally assigned. If you win by 10 in one district and lose by 1 in another, each candidate gets 1 delegate. That's how you can get more delegates without having the popular vote totalOverhead said:
Did I mention I fucking hate caucuses? They're inefficient and create unreasonable barriers to entry for the majority of voters, particularly poor and minority voters, and that's assuming they work property. I was a delegate for my state caucuses in 2016 and the intermediate caucus was pretty much just sitting while we waited to confirm the registrations were accurate. I got home at nearly midnight after going to that high School at 10a.
Well, this is interesting.
If the race is still competitive by the time my state rolls around, I might just have to declare myself a democrat to vote in the primary (my state's rules allow that)
If the race is still competitive by the time my state rolls around, I might just have to declare myself a democrat to vote in the primary (my state's rules allow that)
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1224831009532805121"]
Still only partial results. This is fuckery.
Still only partial results. This is fuckery.
Yup -- and I'll note, awfully funny how little a problem those who have been screeching about the electoral college for three years running seem to have no problem with this. Especially after the state party specifically changed their rules to weight rural, conservative, districts which Hillary won in 2016, over urban and (more) liberal districts which Sanders won in 2016 and like won again this year.Tireseas said:
Ah well, just another unfortunate circumstance, coincidence, mistake, and/or minor flub that don't apparently mean anything and certainly aren't indicative of a concerted effort to stop progressives by any means necessary, to add to the stack. Like campaign committees disbursing funds to the creators of apps responsible for caucus tabulation and submission which weren't allowed to be examined by outside sources, the apps' creators being former Hillary staffers and Democratic operatives, the company that made the app being a subsidiary of a Democratic spooky, that Democratic spooky being created and administrated by former Hillary staffers and Democratic operatives, the Democratic spooky actually being funded by right-wing organizations and individuals, precinct captains who conveniently don't know how to flip a fucking coin, the DNC literally holding meetings about how to contain and minimize progressive influence on the nomination, the DNC stacking convention committees with lobbyists and corporate spokespeople...
I mean, to an impartial observer who follows the money and actually looks into the professional profiles of involved individuals, it looks a whole lot like the Democratic party has been quietly and rather effortlessly tea partied from within while keeping Democratic voters distracted by TDS, but I'm sure it's nothing to worry about.
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/germanrlopez/status/1224876345773252608"]
How are they still not done counting? This would be hilarious if it weren't so transparently designed to give Buttigieg positive media.
How are they still not done counting? This would be hilarious if it weren't so transparently designed to give Buttigieg positive media.
I was a bit surprised Pete did as well as he did. I don't think Bernie bros need to worry about him too much since he apparently polls abysmally with black people which will actually become relevant outside of Iowa. I think the moderates have a lot more to worry about. The early concern was the far left was going to be split between Bernie and Warren, spoiling it for both. Now it looks like the moderates are going to be the ones spoiler split. Pete doing well and Biden doing poorly early on risks splitting the moderate vote as it is not as clear who to rally behind, especially since Biden is expected to do much better with non-white voters which will likely muddy who is the moderate frontrunner. All this is a problem for moderates even before factoring in Bloomberg who could split them even further
The incumbent only got there by being able to fire people up more than suits starched heavily enough to stand on their own (read: the other GOP candidates) and running against probably the least popular Democrat to ever be the nominee.Silvanus said:
It's a wildly unlikely scenario, and not one you should use as Plan A.
It's shouldn't, though recent experience is far more likely to make it "couldn't" in future contests.Silvanus said:
I feel like it would do Americans some good to be part of a functional election in some other country that at least attempts to make their democracy function. I don't know to which degree the current Iowa clusterfuck is malice and to which degree incompetence, but it's not acceptable. Do this shit on paper, do it right, don't allow private organisations to effectively organize the first round for presidential voting, don't involve shady companies that call themselves 'shadow' if for nothing else then at least for the optics, don't delay the results, then release parts of them, without saying anything about why these parts first, make it easy to register to vote instead of hard or better yet, automatically enroll people, don't allow gerrymandering, etc. As the intercept pointed out two years ago, if Brazil can make elections work, the US has no excuse.
https://theintercept.com/2018/11/07/the-remarkable-participation-and-efficiency-of-brazils-elections-proves-how-shameful-and-deliberate-is-the-chaos-and-suppression-in-the-u-s/
https://theintercept.com/2018/11/07/the-remarkable-participation-and-efficiency-of-brazils-elections-proves-how-shameful-and-deliberate-is-the-chaos-and-suppression-in-the-u-s/
Shit like this is what makes me think people arguing the DNC is willing to throw the election to Trump if they can't stop Bernie, might be onto something.Seanchaidh said:
I wasn't, to be honest. Mayo Pete pretty much came out on top of the retail politics game, his service record plays out well to the "down home" audience provided you don't really look into it, and in terms of milquetoast Republican Lites you don't get much blander and inoffensive than he is. Not to be an ass about it, but Iowa's about as whitebread DINO city as it gets, so it's little surprise in retrospect he overperformed especially once you account for the Kentucky fried ratf*ckery the state party pulled weighting districts Hillary won over those Sanders won in 2016.
Sanders supporters, as far as I can tell, aren't pissed about the entirely-predictable outcome so much as they are how it's been come to, and the level of media astroturfing that's happened in the past two days. Hell, I'm surprised mainstream outlets are even covering the Shadow, Inc. story at all.
There's been people who said they'd vote for Trump over Bernie, one prominent example being a dude on morning Joe, who was instantly chastised for saying publicly what lots of folks only say privately.Eacaraxe said:
On the same token, the types of people who'd be down for Pete's service would be the types to be against his being gay, so I guess we can say we're making progress on that end if he's actually the winner when 100% and not 62% or 71% of the votes are tallied. That or the homophobes are all already republicans lol.
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1225176133450244096"]
How are they this bad at this?
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/drmistercody/status/1225187709464891392"]
How are they this bad at this?
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/drmistercody/status/1225187709464891392"]
I'm all for counting this as incompetence, as long as we treat the incompetents as incompetents moving forward and remove their power to make decisions due to that incompetence. You can't claim you're incompetent and then complain about consequences, after all. (unless you're also incompetent at logic I guess)
Update on Iowa: The reporting table I'm primarily using to keep an eye on the results (Washington Post [https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/iowa/?itid=hp_hp-top-table-low_iowa-label-over-both%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans]) has been updated to 82% of precincts reporting. No site I've used for calls have made a call on the race, though most are putting the state delegate percentages at:
Buttigieg 26.7%
Sanders 25.4%
Warren: 18.3%
Biden 15.9%
Klobuchar: 12.1%
Sanders has a slight lead on popular vote, though because delegates are distributed by precincts, that doesn't necessarily translate to more delegates. A large number of counties have not been called for either candidate.
Buttigieg 26.7%
Sanders 25.4%
Warren: 18.3%
Biden 15.9%
Klobuchar: 12.1%
Sanders has a slight lead on popular vote, though because delegates are distributed by precincts, that doesn't necessarily translate to more delegates. A large number of counties have not been called for either candidate.