What happened in Iowa is just the logical extension of the negativity of the ill-conceived (and even worse-undertaken) Resistance. Negativity doesn't get Democrats out to vote (the numbers were abysmal in Iowa). And it doesn't win over the independents. My advice is for the Dems to abandon their hopes for the White House and to do their best to try to save their majority in the House. Hint: begin by ditching Nancy. Then get as far away as possible from AOC. And don't let Adam Schiff anywhere near a TV camera until after the election.
12
@Ulysses
Roger that on 'Scriptwriter Schiff'. He missed his calling.
And Nancy ever so deliberately ripping up the SOTU speech, behind Trump's back, knowing the cameras were on her, might have played well to her fans but it certainly was not going to win over any 'on the fencers', or even some moderate Democrats. It was catty in the extreme.
2
@Ulysses Nancy & Adam proved on the world stage they are bright and patriots.
8
Who needs “The Russians” when we have the DNC?
9
Bret you made me laugh - needed after last night's State of the Union. Meth lab in the oval office! Ha Ha.
2
I’m sick of hearing Democrats, such as as Adam Schiff, speaking about how history will judge Republicans. Who cares? That’s not even cold comfort, and I also think it makes Democrats look pathetic. We need to write history!!!
Of course, easier said than done....
3
Bernie will triumph despite Hillary's shrieking, CIA-Pete's billionaire handlers, and a mendacious DNC party machine.
Buttigieg is a politician without a soul, a construct of focus groups and opinion polling. He has no path forward past NH.
And last night blew Biden's "electability" argument out of the water.
The country that used to send Jimmy Carter everywhere to check up on whether elections were run properly gave itself Iowa last night.
Our beloved banana republic can't even run a crooked election efficiently. Where is a first world country when you need it?
It’s hilarious! The Democrats can't even rig their own elections any more. Where's Hillary when you need her? She can help.
If not, there’s always the “The Russians did it !” option.
Unfortunately, Russiagaters are busy saying it's a “conspiracy theory” to be mildly curious about why the Iowa caucuses failed to produce results for the 1st time ever with a socialist leading in polls and due to an app from a company whose CEO is a Pete supporter and whose board is packed with Dem establishment figures, after which PeteTheCheat gives a speech declaring victory with zero precincts reported and another declaring victory with 62% reported.
People have legitimate questions, and the questions are growing, for good reason.
Why is no one asking why the DNC outsourced calculating the vote to a private corporation, one with deep ties to the Clinton and Obama campaigns?
This should be a front page scandal in every newspaper.
9
Democrats should take Gail’s closing remarks and run on them.
1
Bret's "Imagine, Gail, if Trump turned the Oval Office into a meth lab." shtick reminded me why I read these columns.
1
Gail,
We all well know you don't prefer Pete, but Warren, seriously at this point? Lied for over 3 decades about her ethnicity? I am a 2nd generation Mexican American, born in the barrio, whose mother picked cotton in South Texas in the 40's.
Betsy Warren was and is white, white, white. Free everything? I had a full scholarship to college. That's what they call it. Earned and merited scholarship... not handouts. Yet you are still pining for a deceitful (modestly deceitful... wine caves.. etc.) candidate who cannot beat the most deceitful candidate of our time. Grow up or retire Gail. Pete is the real thing Read his book woman!
1
This: 'Bret: Imagine, Gail, if Trump turned the Oval Office into a meth lab. First, the president would call it fake news. Next, Mick Mulvaney would admit it is a meth lab, but that was O.K. because he hadn’t yet cooked up any meth, that his real intention was to teach chemistry to indigent 9th graders, and that Democrats are “anti-science.” Finally, his lawyers would insist that it’s unimpeachable because, if the president does it, it’s legal.'
That is trumpian logic these days. And a nice comforting blanket of sycophantic votes in the friendly Senate made it all go away for trumpie.
Is it possible the republicans won't even vote to censure? Like, not even a wrist slap after all his odious misdeeds? They'd still get to keep their dearleader, and they could cover their butts at home by saying they 'punished' him with censure.
But he'd get mad, like the world's biggest toddler, and threaten to have Hannity say a bad about them, so they hunker down and whistle something something Bill Clinton who?
The word CRAVEN was invented for the republican party, now that their king is in command of America.
What happened?
A total disaster for the DNC, that's what. Dems turned down a trial run of the app. Which was created by Hillary people. Another disaster.
Iowa= DNC disaster
SOTU speech=DNC disaster
Nancy's rip up=DNC disaster
Impeachment=DNC disaster
Trump 2020
6
Optimists, or whatever you call yourselves, the number of 2016 Trump voters who are going to vote for a Democrat, any Democrat, in 2020 is statistically insignificant. Getting non- or sometimes voters to get out and vote in 2020 is probably the only strategy that's going to have any decent ROI.
5
Bloomberg will beat Trump. His financial clout can assure a Democratic Senate. He is not corrupt. His programs are progressive. It will take a billionaire with Bloomberg’s experience to beat Trump also a billionaire supported by dark money. No one else can win. If Trump is re-elected, this may be the last election.
4
Q: is this irregularity the rigging of the system against Sanders?
The day before the caucus the DesMoines Register didn't publish its poll because Buttigieg asked them not to. The next day the caucus results aren't published for the 1st time. Blame placed on an app by a firm w/ ties to Buttigieg. Then they publish only votes of an arbitrarily set of precincts favoring Buttigieg.
Is the system rigged? Well what does the context suggests?
Consider what's at stake: tens of trillions of dollars that annually flow to the <1%.
See graph#2 at bit.ly/EPI-study
From 1945 to 72 GNP grew 100% & the median (meaning everyone's) wage in lock step w/ it. Since 72 GNP has gone up another 150% but the median wage has been flat. 90% of those gains flowed to the <1%.
It's worse than it looks: as some wages have gone up (health/tech) & some in unions have floated (7%) it means the vast majority of US's 160 million work force (& their families) have endured 48+ years of declining expectations in an economy thats grown 150%. This has lead to the ruin of 10s of millions of lives & families.
A 48 year trend is not possible w/out complicity of elites in both parties.
It's not reasonable to think that an oligopoly/syndicate (formal or informal) that exist to concentrate wealth&power w/ tens of trillions of dollars @ stake would surrender easily to democratic means. You heard Kerry's panic.
That's the context. To the extent they can, the game is rigged. Strap in. Iowa's just the beginning.
4
I always liked Pelosi but after her ripping up of Trump's "speech," I love her. Love her. Love her.
12
"... history will judge him... " but remember that history is written by the victors.
1
Sort of odd that nobody seems to wonder here what Republicans do for their caucuses in Iowa?
Could it be that WE are more corrupt than they are, in this regard? Republicans don't fabricate any "State Delegate Equivalents". They simply count up the written, confidential vote tallies. There are no calculations, no secret multipliers (here county-level, based on party politics), no arm-twisting, no confusion and ambiguity, no apps, etc..
This time around we can actually see the REAL vote numbers (where Bernie leads here - and probably won by a significant margin in 2016). Now we can SEE one of the tricks the party uses to "deliver" a win to preferred candidates. Here's a good overview (though incomplete) of how these SDE's are derived:
https://www.vox.com/2020/1/30/21083701/iowa-caucuses-results-delegates-math
2
Who did they hire to count votes? The Count from Sesame Street?
"One. One vote for Yang. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha."
"Two! Two votes for Yang...."
3
Where are the rest of the results? At this point, we can't blame conspiracy theorists anymore. It doesn't take two days to do the math. Is the DNC rigging it in Des Moines?
2
Excellent exchange of thoughts! Never, ever under-estimate the wee-narrow observational abilities of Gail Collins.
1
Gail, my vote also goes to Warren (or Sanders if Warren doesn't make it). I'm really concerned with the Buttigieg(sp?) promoters who don't seem to understand what he is, which is an empty suit, bought and paid for with corporate PAC money.
If he was genuinely interested in everyday people and their concerns, he would have stuck to his pledge to accept only small donations from everyday Americans. But, he knew he wouldn't lose on that score. Especially to seasoned grass roots campaigners like Sanders and Warren.
I watched the hearing he had with his mostly Black constituents in South Bend, and afterward I was convinced he is merely seeking power for power's sake. He cared nothing about his constituents in South Bend, and he will care nothing about those who are wasting their votes on him now. He will do absolutely nothing for Middle Class Americans, and those who need government support the most, the working poor and homeless and uninsured. But, hey, he's an articulate, over educated, white gay man, and that is so appealing to the "Thirsty Firstie" crowd who love nothing more than to claim "FIRST!" No doubt if he gets the nomination (I hope not!) Iowans will squeal with glee that they were the FIRST in the nation to send a gay man to the White House. YAY!
But, you know, in reality he isn't the first empty suit in the White House, we've started a tradition of sending men with little to no experience to leading the country. Some god somewhere, help us. (Insert roll eye emoji)
2
In re. Bret's wonderful meth-lab-in-the-Oval-Office analogy, he left out Mick Mulvaney saying it was perfectly normal presidential activity and we should get used to it.
Today it's the Senate's turn, which will be: "Possibly turning the Oval Office into a meth lab wasn't the best idea. I hate to scold, and you must believe it hurts me to do it more than it hurts you. I hope I haven't hurt your feelings. I'm sure this will be a lesson to you. Promise me you won't do it again. Please. Now go play in the Oval Office some more."
1
4 more years— four more years—because No one is going to give you guys the keys to the car—
1
Bret, did you forget about Bill Clinton? He also delivered a State of the Union address while impeached and almost certain to be cleared. https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-clinton-1999-state-of-the-union-address-impeachment-history-2020-2
Gail & Bret, And your point is...?
1
Howdy neighbours....tell me, if the GOP gains control of both houses.....could they amend the constitution to extend presidential term limits? Please say it isn't so.
The electorate isn’t going for the grumpy old socialist with a bum ticker or the gay mayor of a smallish city. Biden or Elizabeth Warren seem the best bets, especially if Bernie will get real and stump for Warren, who has more substance than any of them. Biden needs to trust his own good instincts and stop being handled by the same geeks who killed Hillary’s chances.
3
I'm shocked Bret Stephens's faith in democracy got a boost from the caucus debacle. It's hard to think of a voting process less democratic than a caucus ... at least this side of the Iron Curtain. A caucus is old-time voter suppression masquerading as a barn dance.
5
Sadly this article failed to mention an important false word, that the Trump administration is protecting pre-existing health conditions. In fact it is in court trying to destroy the ACA which will end that coverage. Furthermore, the so-called great health plans that Trump touted are in fact inadequate and also undermine the integrity of the ACA.
5
Iowa has demonstrated their irrelevance. Iowa will now revert to their legacy moniker, I Oughtta Went Around - which is precisely what most people do when it comes to Iowa - go around.
5
Clearly Pete Buttigieg benefited from some quality noncompetative campaign time while Bernie Sanders and Elizibeth Warren were tied up with the impeachment. Joe Biden has no excuse for his poor showing. Pete Buttigieg appears to be the mainstream "get rid of Trump and everything will suddenly be fine" banner bearer for the time being.
6
In my state we went to paper ballots after the questionable 2000 Presidential and 2002 NM Senate elections.
Computers and apps are hackable by their creators as well as a lot of other people with bad intent and the right skills.
It's a no brainer.
No State should be running any election without paper ballots that can be counted by hand and with proper quality control and quality assurance audits. This is just more proof.
Iowa got that part very very right.
It should be a Federal law if we truly care about democracy.
7
The answer is, of course, vote by mail in all elections-you'll have a paper trail; which is the best thing that happened in Iowa. They had a paper trail and were able to ensure honesty in the vote. Not that the Iowa caucuses are very democratic by their nature, they are not. As to the results; love Mayor Pete and Senator Warren; would accept any of those who are running over what we have. BTW, Iowa is all white and has a small number of votes in the primary; wait until the big states are done as well as those states without a lily white population before we sing anyone's death knell. Again, BTW, I am a white female who is 70+.
3
Can both the left and right agree that incessant coverage of polls need to end?
8
Gail,
Your closing comment precisely echoes Steven Rattner's concise summation of the same argument today on this page: most of the good stuff can be credited to the Obama administration, and most of the bad stuff can be laid at the current administration's feet. Bottom line: national economic improvement numbers benefit the lives of the already well-off. Inequality thrives. The Democratic nominee needs to hammer these points home repeatedly and with unflinching disregard for subtlety.
5
"Bernie Sanders, who is 78, is appealing to the youth vote. Pete Buttigieg, 38, has a very strong following among older Democrats". This is a very interesting demographic assignment! Somehow, these two age groups need to combine and we need a candidate who appeals across the spectrum
In the larger world would either of these candidates win the WH? I don't think so. Bernie is a socialist and he will not win. Although we did say that in 2016 about Trump! And Pete is too inexperienced. His time is in the future. And I don't think Bloomberg is the guy! Perhaps by the end of Super Tuesday we'll have a better idea, and the final candidates will have more realistic policies to present.
2
I'm still trying to get my hear around one of the sorriest nights in American history (while trying not to breathe our smoke-filled air.) What has Trump put in the Kool-Aid over there? Sorry Mick, but I will never "get over" the trashing of American values and the Constitution.
Please whizz through the primaries and nominate anyone.
(Mitt is my new hero!)
4
The view that the SOTU was successful is as troubling as it is widespread in the media. The man said everything is great and that was good enough.
3
What a screwup. But give the Dems in Iowa full credit for proceeding cautiously and with purpose to get it right. They're poring over the paper trail, finding the glitches in the system, using extreme caution in applying complicated mathematical equations to figure out the delegate count and when all that is done will anounce the obvious.......the 49'ers won the Super Bowl.
2
I don't support Sanders but the US has become unconscionable economically over the past 16 years - and welfare payments won't help. Bernie loses votes by equating illegal entry with victimhood, not to mention
lower wages and opportunities for Americans. Ultimately, Bernie's cause is a good one.
3
I had to laugh at the quip by Chris "thrill up his leg" Mathews, that Democrats couldn't organize a three car funeral." When Democrats have lost Chris, who else is left?
Liberals showed they have NO ONE that can beat Trump. That's what happened. The Democrat party is a mess, how embarrassing for you liberals.
4
Dear NYTimes:
After condescendingly dismissing Pete Buttigieg during your HULU show and in articles afterward, are you ready to consider that perhaps Pete has an understanding of what the country needs that you have become too cynical to see?
Please come out of your bubble and report on Pete with respect. He's earned it.
Thanks,
Loyal Reader
6
By all indications, Joe Biden way underperformed compared to the polls, while Buttigeig way overperformed. Why is nobody talking about "what happened with the polls"?
45
@Mary M
As Democratic elites braced for a Bernie Sanders triumph in Iowa, a mysterious piece of technology spun out by a group those elites supported delayed the vote results, preventing Sanders from delivering a victory speech., and Pete Buttigeig exploited the moment to declare himself the winner.
The App may have been intended to deliver the win to Buttigeig… in as plausible way as possible.
For a Buttigeig win to be plausible, the Iowa Poll had to be cancelled. It was...
The Iowa Democratic Party. which contracted Shadow for their services, has emphasized the data collected by the app was "sound," but that the app was only reporting out partial data, due to a coding issue in the reporting system.
Because, The App didn’t work and made a real mess, and maybe the real results will be outed…
The App was developed by a company appropriately named Shadow Inc. This firm was staffed by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaign veterans and created by a Democratic dark money nonprofit.
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/02/04/pro-israel-buttigieg-seth-klarman-iowas-voting-app/
Shadow Inc launched on 17th Jan 2019. Mayor Pete announces run for President on 23rd Jan. CEO of company that owns Shadow tweets out her support.
Shadow inc, The App and Buttigeig, reek of mendacity.
And this renews Bret Stephens faith in democracy...
3
@Mary M Because Iowa polling is and has always been a nightmare. That story's been done to death by now.
6
Opinion columnists are about as useful as the accuracy of their methods just as the case is for polls and surveys.
1
Obviously, this is fraud. And even if Sanders would win some states, the democrats still have their delegates who actually tell who the people ‘really’ voted for.
If you still believe that voting makes any difference, you surely are stubborn case.
And if you want to fix democracy, you first have to acknowledge the problem, otherwise you cannot fix it.
Certainly, in any healthy democracy, the offices of Shadow Inc. would already have been raided by the FBI and their hard drives seized as evidence of election tampering, wire fraud, etc.
13
What's astounding is how bad Trump supposedly is when compared to the previous status quo. Those people who are struggling, Gail, have been facing hard times for two full generations. Clinton gave us "carried interest" and planted the seeds of the Great Recession by Repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, all while casually enabling 7 million manufacturing jobs to move overseas. What could possibly be more criminal than invading Iraq under false pretenses, leading to the deaths of a half million non-combatants? Obamacare was crafted by lobbyists and Obama himself either did not understand the law or else cynically lied to us about how it would work. Obama did nothing for the families still struggling, and went with keeping the Bush tax cuts and obeying big donors. Based on their records, they all failed the public. Failed themselves. Andrew Yang is right -- voters got tired of empty promises and no progress. Please stop pretending Obama created the recovery from the dismal conditions of 2008 -- that was no better than a "dead cat bounce." Trump probably is not the answer -- he's been lucky that his predecessors were so clueless and timid. But we should never go back to the against-the-people but for-the-billionaire politics of 1992-2016, in my opinion. Democrats cannot remain blind to how bad those Administrations were -- we have to be determined to do better. We can do better, but only if e recognize the failures of the last 30 years.
4
Does Iowa really mean anything except older white voters have no real preference. It does however emphasize the deep trouble the Democrats are in and that they are in danger of losing to Trump again!
3
"Even before the candidates boarded chartered jets late Monday and headed east, their senior aides were effectively backstabbing one another ... trying cast their likely Iowa caucus outcome in the best possible light ... angling to make a rival pay for a potentially dismal finish ... candidates positioned themselves as victors even in the absence of official results ... " (NYTimes, 4Feb2020)
To this Independent voter, disgusted with Mr. Trump, a day or so delay in a campaign that last years is not a major problem. But the behavior of the Democratic candidates as a circular firing squad is not encouraging. Here in Texas, we have been hearing a lot from Mr. Bloomberg, and almost no other candidate. He got in too late to participate in Iowa, and is not in the debates because of a minimum donation threshold (he accepts no donations) (!!). But I agree with his policies, especially committing to remove Mr. Trump whoever the Democratic candidate is. This Iowa circus can only help Mr. Bloomberg.
2
The DNC needs to wake up and smell the coffee. The Democratic Establishment is not working in the interests of the people. From APWASHINGTON (AP) — "The little-known technology start-up under scrutiny after the meltdown of the Iowa Democratic caucuses on Monday was founded little more than a year ago by veterans of Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 presidential campaign who had presented themselves as gurus of campaigning in the digital era.
Shadow Inc. was picked in secret by the Iowa Democratic Party after its leaders consulted with the Democratic National Committee on vetting vendors and security protocols for developing a phone app used to gather and tabulate the caucus results."
From the Texas Tribune:"Officials with the Texas Democratic Party said they were recently told by the Texas Secretary of State’s office that it will not be able to provide on election night the numbers needed to allocate a majority of the 228 delegates up for grabs in the state on Super Tuesday. In a Jan. 23 meeting, the Democrats said, top state election officials cited limitations to their revamped reporting system, which is used to compile returns from the state's 254 counties.
"They basically said that's not built out yet," said Glen Maxey, the special projects director for the Texas Democratic Party who attended the meeting with state officials.
Get it together people. You have had plenty of time to figure out how to tally a vote.
4
Bret Stephens has almost redeemed himself in this discussion. I wonder if (aside from the app glitch) the Democratic jumble of candidates is because many people don't care who is sent in to beat Trump, they just want someone who can do it to do it. I know a few I'd prefer, but were Mitt Romney to actually leave the Republican party as Donnie-Boy Junior audaciously commanded today ("acquittal day") and add Democratic nominee to his ridiculously diverse CV, I'd even vote for him! That's how desperately this country needs to flush out Trump and trumpism and all its components.
4
A somewhat side note from the what-went-wrong debate: I like Ms. Collins' idea (Ok, not hers alone but still good) that other states should have their turn at going first in the primary runup. It could be managed by an alphabetic progression: Alaska then Alabama then Arkansas ... wait a minute, this could be over weighted toward one party for many elections to come. Maybe a lottery approach? With no state able to repeat until all others have had a shot. Arm wrestling? Thumb war? Hey! Coin toss is good enough for the Super Bowl. Er ... how to pick the first two states to wrestle? Oh darn, Democracy is still the worst form of government ... except for all the others.
1
What happened was that voters voted, demonstrating that neither columnists nor polls are of much use in predicting outcomes. Only the voters know for sure. Let’s just be quiet and wait for the votes shall we?
3
THIS is the Iowa caucus in a nutshell...
Check out this Pete coin toss.
https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1224535227617464320
4
Good Lord, was this ever a puff piece after a complete disaster!
4
@Dennis
No. Hurricane Dorian was a disaster. This was an inconvenience.
We are the most technologically advanced nation in the world, yet we cannot get a simple thing of accurately counting votes right. Amazing!
7
A bit of an inconsistent result. Genuine Sanders okay, but Buttigieg, who pretends South Bend, IN with its Apple Store, Whole Foods, Starbucks, Notre Dame liberals is your typical Midwestern city he conquered as a Dem?
1
Amy hanging in there close behind Biden. Will the long shot break from the pack now that the Times is ignoring her?
3
The fix is in
5
I'm with Gail, I to had to smile at Bret's tale of the heart warming intentions behind Donald's imaginary meth lab. Sadly enough it's dead on point. There is really and truly nothing sufficiently egregious to dislodge Trump's base, at least not as delivered through their preferred media disinformation system. Unless someone can inspire the entire democratic coalition to vote it's not looking good. Perhaps Bloomberg will swamp the entire media ecosphere with accurate damning portrayals of Trump. Nice!
5
HURRAY! My belief in the intelligence of the Midwest has been justified. Congratulations to a remarkable young man. He has been recognized not just for his singular intellect, but that amongst all the candidates, he alone has shown compassion and honesty in his campaign. He has shown his ability to be incredibly courageous in being open about who he his. I would be a proud Californian American to cast my vote alongside the Iowans to propel him as the nominee for the Democratic Party.
369
You’re absolutely right. I can’t wait until young Bernard Sanders wins the California primary and the Democratic nomination!
95
@Meena. Wait, he alone has shown honesty? I’m not a Bernie fan, but he’s honest to a fault. It would behoove Bernie to be more...diplomatic. And less cranky—it makes him look like a bit of a loose cannon (which feeds into Trump’s “Crazy Bernie” and “Socialism is the scourge of any country” talking points). That said, I think Bernie has the best chance of beating Trump, because of the vote it will get out.
40
@Meena I don't go for anyone who makes the "I alone" statements that trump's made in his quest for imperial adoration and perpetual power.
And I don't go for anyone saying of their candidate, "He alone" is pure, "he alone" is compassionate, "he alone" did it... no. I like Mayor Pete but I'm not going to agree with any rabid supporter who makes him out to be godlike.
Can we just get back to being Americans again?
17
It is completely irresponsible idiocy for the Democrats to wait until two months before the Iowa Caucasians to launch an app tasked with tallying the votes. We all knew that the time was coming for FOUR YEARS, right?
So veterans of the Hillary 2016 campaign continue to be the gift that keeps on giving...to Ru$$ian Agent Orange.
Next time, don’t call Hillary’s people; put in a call to Girls Who Code.
Sheesh!
9
During the time when he was the unquestioned leader in the primary race, I was leaning Joe. Now I'm leaning Pete.
3
First, Bloomberg is the 1 (? Democratic) candidate I would not
vote for - ever. He doesn't believe that anyone with less than $1 billion counts or needs to be considered a real person with a stake in society & how it's run. It was quite repulsive. When he was mayor, he took the City away from regular people & made it a playground for the super rich. I acknowledge his positive work on gun control, but he can continue that without being President. Sanders is the best candidate & I hope he wins. But I will vote for any besides Bloomberg against Trump.
5
I am 83 and no way could I have stayed up to participate in the caucuses. All I saw were young kids running around, no wonder Pete is leading. I will wait for my mail in ballot later this month.
1
@Richard
I am 82, and I "stayed up" to take part in Grinnell's 1st Ward caucus with a crowd of 830 participants, a mixture of college students and townspeople, many of whom were of my vintage. It was important to all of us to take part.
Collins says, "I’m feeling more sympathetic to the Iowa Democratic Party."
The Iowa Dems (or was it national?) hired an incompetent SW firm and performed incompetent oversight. Don't they employ any serious SW professionals? I don't grant the party any sympathy.
I wonder, was this more than just incompetence? Who made the decision to hire this company, and on what basis? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I suspect that murkier motives were involved.
7
The Iowa system records (when working right) the 1st choice of voters for the 15%+ candidates, then invites voters for outliers to make a 2nd choice. In an election or caucua with several candidates, why not just ask for 2nd choices of everyone to begin with? Simpler, faster, and better data would result.
4
It was a real life primer on why 70 year olds should be retired and giving advice, not working(as President and Senators). The average age of caucus volunteers was 70. As one man put it, "They gave me an App four days ago and they didn't have classes on how to use it. Who does that?" Everyone! Because Apps are easy to figure out and you had 4 days!!!! Four more years of out dated ideas on its way(whether Dems or Trump win.)
2
This was not an app from an App Store, you had to bypass security features to install it. Interesting that the people who developed it worked on Hilary’s campaign.
3
Tara McGowan, the CEO of ACRONYM, which owns Shadow, the software company at the heart of the debacle, is the wife of Michael Halle, senior strategist for Buttigieg. That's how Buttigieg knew the results and wasn't shy to broadcast them. The CEO of Shadow worked for Hillary's campaign in 2016. Did anyone say "strange"?
14
It’s the DNC. That’s just business as usual.
1
@Ronald Weinstein
Someone has the app installed on their phone. Show us the code for all the world to see.
@Ronald Weinstein. Buttigieg had people at every caucus tabulation and took down their results, from what I understand. Also, from what I understand, and it seems obvious, the place to get information was not from Shadow, the app people who screwed everything up.
Gail, how could you possibly arrive at any conclusion other than that Bernie is the most obvious, natural, effortless, and bona fide foil to the current administration (and more importantly, to the American cultural-political condition that fostered trump’s circus presidency and the senate rube)?????? Warren is a liberal tourist by comparison to bernie. The others—yes all others (save for Yang, who sort of defies conventional classification)—are HRC incarnate, which is to say, DOA so far as their chances of beating the Big Orange Trump Political Machine goes. No other candidate of the Biden-Warren-Klobuchar ilk has a shot at igniting the human catalysts required for victory. The DNC is engaging in whole sale sabotage all over again in a perverse 2016 redux—that might be the only sensible thing I’ve ever heard Donald J Gump say...
4
They could always declare Guaido the winner of the Iowa Caucuses. That’s how they did it in Venezuela, right?
7
You would have thought Putin would have stayed low with respect to the start of the election circus, but there he is, front and center, sowing divisiveness. Again!
Anyways, call in the UN Observers!
Can you imagine the tantrums?
I had wondered where my Banana went yesterday, and now I see it conjoined with the Republic.
The beauty of our current political discourse is that all is forgiven as long as your level of deranged hatred for the other party is intense enough.
4
The truth is damning enough. The app didn't fail because of a byzantine conspiracy to hobble Bernie. It failed because career party officials paid $$$ to a company run by former Clinton staffers, despite no need for an app and no qualified app developers at the company. The scandal here is that the DNC establishment is so incestuously corrupt that they will risk the integrity of an election in order to reward insiders with a no-bid contract for something no one wanted or needed and which they weren't qualified to deliver.
9
@Paul
Did it fail? Or, did it work as it was supposed to?~!
3
Tuesday Morning Quterbacking, EH?
Nothing unexpected here in Iowa.
Joe Biden got his come uppance. I have said from even before he announced that he was a candidate for the Democrat party nomination that he would NEVER make it.
Look Biden is a Good Ole Uncle Joe with NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS to his name in 47 years of a Political Career. Then to add to that his Brilliant son Hunter dinged him. The more they talk about Hunter, the more Joe Biden gets hurt politically. The stink of Hunter's job is unavoidable.
Bernie will be the nominee of the Democrats unless the Democrat Party pulls stunts to deny Bernie the nomination. And, if that happens, Bernie's supporters will burn down the Party and Donald Trump will win in a LANDSLIDE.
On the other hand, if Bernie wins the nomination, the Democrats will hurt in Congress and Senate races.
IT'S A NO WIN SITUATION FOR THE DEMOCRATS. TRUMP IN 2020. THE ONLY QUESTION IS BY HOW MUCH?
1
Gail Collins: "My vote goes to Elizabeth Warren."
Of course it does. Lots of elitist, insulated from economic reality, east coast progressive, feminist, over-educated, wonk-lovers are 'Gaga for Minnehaha.'
Alas, that's about three percent of the electorate.
Why not just vote for Trump directly and cut out the middleman? Because he'd put a beat down on her that'd make McGovern and Mondale seem like real contenders.
The only good thing for Democrats coming out of Iowa is that Warren bet heavily there on a very expensive ground game, lots of time spent and ads, and came in a poor third. After she's rejected by her neighbor state in New Hampshire, she'll be Dead Indigenous Person Walking.
As a Democrat I say 'Good Riddance.' And take the Medicare For All, College Debt Forgiveness, and Green New Deal signs with you. They ain't buying it in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Western PA.
3
For people complaining that Bernie is not the center of attention- his share of the popular vote is DOWN by 45% from 2016. A whole lot of people who voted for Bernie in 2016 voted for somebody else this time.
That is actually a Takeaway from Iowa.
4
It is true, although it is much more candidates right now than it was in 2016, including more with 'socialist' agenda. As matter of fact out of three top finishers, two have 'socialist' agenda. seems like socialism is becoming more and more acceptable. That is a message from Iowa.
4
@yulia Warren spent the last two months trying to run away from Socialism. That is a takeaway from Iowa, too.
Anyway, if you carry your argument to its logical end, the moderate pov WON Iowa 55-45.
That is your cue to complain about unfairness and stay home in November so that Trump geets re-elected.
Next!
1
Who would of thought that being an oligarch and buying your way into the nomination was being "Smart". If anything, Democrats should feel ashamed that they are opening all these doors for Bloomberg that they closed for minority candidates.
6
Sadly, it may take an oligarch to beat an oligarch. Desperate times, call for desperate measures. If Bloomberg decides to make Kamala Harris his VP, now that would be magical.
3
@K. Martini He’s possibly do better with somebody like Stacey Abrams. According to articles printed here in The Times back when Harris was still a contender Kamala didn’t have much name recognition with minority populations, particularly in the South.
Knowing how much Trump projects his own misdeeds and crimes on his opponents, it's frustrating that the Iowa Democratic Party gave the GOP such an opening to start their inevitable "Dems are trying to rig the election" nonsense early. Meanwhile, if past events are any indication, Trump won't wait 24 hours after his "acquittal" before moving forward with some new scheme to try to either fix the election or make Democratic voters believe that he's fixed the election so they stay home on Election Day.
46
That the "Democrats" are working hand in glove on a "product", with a shadow corporation soliciting donations from major Republican donors,should do wonders towards elevating "Democratic" brand loyalty.
4
The entire Amerucan election system is broken. What other countries manage to do in five weeks now takes us two full years. Enough already. Primaries in September, election in November. Done.
135
@laolaohu - primaries in all states and territories in September. One and done.
10
@laolaohu I've been thinking the same thing!
4
@laolaohu
Just like the American health care system, making profit is an extremely important part of the American election system.
If elections were shorter, the opportunity to make big bucks off elections would be lessened, and media and the election consultant industry would not let it happen.
7
What happened in Iowa Gail. Here's what happened. Bernie Sanders gets 111 votes in a caucus to Pete Buttigieg's 46 and the both get awarded 2 delegates apiece. Democracy is broken in this country, but I guess I should blame the Russians for that.
9
Neither of them will be the nominee so it really is irrelevant.
1
Sorry, Bret, you're wrong about long division. We older folks learned it by rote, using the stupid expression "goes into." At the very least we should have been taught to say "comes out of."
A couple week ago I watched a pretty good fourth grade teacher do long division with her class. The algorithm she used was akin to equally divvying out a pot of poker chips. The kids totally understood what was happening.
"Um, What Just Happened in Iowa?"
Operation "Chaos" (a DNC covert operation that started 8 weeks ago) is what happened:
1. Convince the Iowa Democrat Party to abandon their long-standing practice of calling in vote totals and replace it with an untested App called "Shadow" (which was designed by ex-Clinton staffers).
2. Abruptly cancel the Feb 1st Des Moines Register state poll from being published. Why cancel the poll? Because publishing a poll that shows Sanders with a huge lead would be at odds with the predetermined outcome (a Sanders loss/tie) that "Chaos" is attempting to achieve.
3. Caucus night: "Chaos" is deployed. The media is told of "inconsistencies" and "technology issues". No results are provided. An "App" is blamed.
4. Operation "Chaos" is successful. Sanders is thwarted from the positive news coverage that an Iowa win would provide...and instead Buttigieg is seen on every mainstream media article as the "winner" regarding the Iowa caucus.
7
I share Mr. Stephens displeasure at the corruption and moral weakness of President Trump , but there is no denying that the State of The Union address was very effective and the list of accomplishments the President cited are very real. I hope Mr. Stephens doesn’t let his feelings about the personal failings of the president and his desire to be cordial with the mostly left wing editorial room of the NYT blind him to the extreme dangers represented by the socialist agendas pushed by politicians like Warren and Sanders, The damage Trump has done to this country would be a pittance compared to the disaster a socialist presidency would unleash on our country. As one the very few conservative voices at the NYT it’s your job to tell us how and why. I assure you that the NYT audience is far greater than the left wing army that occupies the comment sections of this paper.
5
There are millions and millions of people who feel exactly the same way as Gail does in her last comment — struggling working people, with an understanding of all the injustices in the country — who won’t be able to vote because structurally the system doesn’t let them. There’s no day off work, the lines are too long, there’s no way to vote by mail, and on and on. Republicans have been very good at ensuring that it is difficult for certain people to vote. That needs to change.
21
Des Moines has voted and the world trembles. So goes the last threads of democracy, chased out of town to the great state of New Hampshire that will likely put the final stamp of approval on the process of electing a candidate.
Nice thing that they are both so representative of the nation.
2
The entire primary system was designed for the days before the 1970s, when the primaries were just non-binding straw polls, and the actual nominating was done at the parties’ national conventions.
You can still have the primaries but they should be non-binding and then there should be a nationwide election on a single day to nominate the candidate.
1
Follow the money here. Pete is backed by some very big money, Seth Klarman, hedge fund billionaire. His company was also responsible for the bad app.
78
@penney albany Mr. Buttigieg does not have a PAC, and accepts only donations from individuals - over 720,000 of them from all walks of life, and yes, some do work for big corporations, as do some individual donors for Senators Warren, Sanders and the rest. Stop trying to tear down and divide when we should ALL want to defeat Trump.
98
@penney albany oh my lord... this “app” was done to appease bernie supporters who are, frankly, sore losers and worse winners. Turns out paper is best and yet, still... complaints. I hope other states learn that certain people will never be happy. Plus, may this be the end of caucuses.
13
@penney albany Yes, that means Klarman gave him
$2800, whew! Sure he’s expecting some big favors,
watch out!
10
I agree with this:
"Their priority was not making a mistake."
And the messiness of democracy has been welcome relief from the tidiness of tyranny.
273
@MAmom2
Just want to say that these caucuses were designed for the illiterate, so lets' move on to the 21st Century, OK?
4
@MAmom2 - I completely agree with your comment. Americans are getting to used to watching autocrat Republicans fall lockstep behind Trump. Democracy done correctly is a little messy, I think a lot of our citizens have forgotten that. Cable news doesn't help.
12
@MAmom2
Messy Democracy, sure. But let's not wallow in it the way dems did in Iowa.
2
While we twist ourselves in knots about the dysfunction of the caucus, no one goes back to a VERY important problem: the current POTUS doesn't believe the Russians interfered with our elections, doesn't believe the last election was problematic and has done NOTHING about very real threats to our elections. He has put zero attention on what to any normal president would have inspired a grand plan.
You wanna see the economy tank? If our November election doesn't feel solid, it will shake up the world. And the dotard didn't do what any normal president would do today - assure us that s/he's going to make sure election glitches are addressed - rather he did the opposite, threw some blame at the Dems and some fuel on the fire of mistrust.
I think most of us could write a very long list of the reasons trump deserves impeachment. He is utterly unfit to serve.
368
@Barbara The Russian conspiracy thingy flopped. It's time to move on to the real issues like Social Security, Medicare, health care reform, affordable college, jobs, etc.
6
@P. Greenberg No way. The Meuller report was conclusive and clear: the Russians meddled in our 2016 election, and are interfering as we speak.
Every intelligence agency came to the same conclusion.
Trump's campaign met several times with Russian agents last time, and the Meuller report did not clear him of collusion.
There is no Russian conspiracy--only Russian facts.
45
@Barbara
" the current POTUS doesn't believe the Russians interfered with our elections,"
Oh, he KNOWS, all right...
He's just adopted that stance to mislead his cult followers.
I'm sure too, that at one of his private meetings with Putin, Vlad whispered all kinds of things into his ear, such as the idea that it was Ukraine that did the election-interfering.
You give him too much "credit"
Kinda like Deutch Bank.
11
I was born and raised in Iowa...in Steve King's district, which he never could have won unless I and every good friend I made from birth to age 18, and many people like us, left.
That's why Trump is President and will be win again unless the Democrats are somehow able to combine the moderate and progressive appeals to defeat the worst President in history. I am not optimistic.
179
@bnyc I am not sure one can claim Trump as the worst president in history - even if you limit it to US Presidents, certainly the one that signed the Indian Removal Act was worse?
2
I’d like to recommend a book entitled “The Speech;” a transcript of Bernie’s 2010, 8.5 hour speech that laid out an impressively detailed, heartfelt, humanistic case about the injustices of extreme wealth inequality and bought-out politicians.
Compare that to the “to me it’s personal” catch phrase of the ex-mayor, who seems to think an earnest look is enough to overcome lack of experience and lack of diverse support.
Substance vs. dubious style.
Bernie for the people !
175
It’s easy to deliver a speech. But after decades in congress no results. The man is hollow.
163
He changed the entire agenda of the country, a profound paradigm shift. Quite an amazing accomplishment.
71
@GC
In the early parts of the transcript, we learn about legislation Bernie brought to the Senate that would have sent a $250 check to 50 million seniors and disabled veterans, to recoup a two year shortchanging of their Social Security benefits. Though the bill had bipartisan support, it was rejected by a Republican filibuster.
I imagine it’s very hard to “get things done” when your own priorities align with the non-power-brokers of the world. This was the same era that the government “accomplished” using tax payer money to bail out Wall Street and extend tax cuts to the wealthy. Which, of course, Bernie took a stand against.
I very much hope that our people realize that it is most certainly not the mark of a hollow person to adhere to principles, even when surrounded by corruption. Speaking up for the poor and working class seems to me a great accomplishment, throughout decades of being dismissed by and surrounded by colleagues far too copacetic of corporate power.
Bernie counts on We the People to demand results. It’d be a great victory for us all were we to prove that his great faith in the power of the people is not misplaced.
53
Biden is done. He lacks fire and vision. His line of I'm electable is tired and as old and creaky as he is. Also I thought Pelosi's rage demonstrated by her ripping the pages of the speech up played right into Trumps hand. We need people better equipped than this to lead the party. Joe and Nancy have had a good run but it is time for them to stand aside.
1
Agree about Biden but not Nancy. Her ripping of Trump’s speech was genius. Instead of talking about Trump’s speech, everyone’s focused on Nancy. Love it or hate it, in the age of Trump, no press, is bad press.
8
@John Nancy holds her own, no problem there. Anything can be played by trump, that’s his one area of “expertise”. I loved that she tore up the speech- he shows no courtesy or respect to anyone, why should she show any to him?
This discussion about Iowa - and the media coverage in general - reminds me of the Hillary emails back in ‘16. The important story back then was that Russia was behind the hack and release of the emails but instead the media obsessed about the emails themselves. Now everyone is focused on the screw up releasing Iowa results but not on the astounding fact that an unknown, gay millennial just won over candidates who have been at it for years if not decades. When are more people going to notice that Pete is an amazing candidate, better than the rest, and perhaps that’s the reason behind his incredible success? This was not a fluke. He is exactly what we need to beat Trump. Gail still is incapable of noticing this as she focuses on a woman President.
4
We all know what happened in Iowa. Bernie won. The DNC doesn’t like that. The DNC serves Big Insurance, Big Pharma, and Big Banks
3
"Trouble in River City" now has a whole new meaning.
1
Trump's campaign strategy is clear from the speech:
1. The economy is good.
2. The Democrats are socialists who are going to raise your taxes and give the money to illegal aliens.
The Democrats need a candidate and message that can counter these two statements.
1
Could you guys wait a minute, I'm "re-aligning". Thanks!
Before we get all tingly about the results of the 2020 Iowa Democratic caucus, consider the winner of the Republican caucus in 2012, Rick Santorum (remember him?).
3
What went wrong in Iowa? Classic Democrat elitism. Let's dump big, bad Microsoft for a "progressive start-up" tech company to handle our app. See how "progressive" we are? Hooray for us!
Another verse for "The Middle-Class Liberal Well-Intentioned Blues." Even the clown car of candidates deserved better than this.
@TexasR "... progressive start-up" tech company..."
Not just any startup. I'm sure they exceeded the minimum standards for diversity. And, they had a couple of Clintonites, for good measure.
Yes! We should go back to signing our names with an X using a chisel on stone. And I’m selling my car and buying a horse carriage!
When a dyed in the wool Republican like Bret loves Pete Buttigieg - you know he knows there won't be any change to the status quo.
4
All you need to know about Iowa is that Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst are its senators and the state also harbors Steve King! What a joke!
Are Connecticut and Iowa even part of the same country?
4
Iowa as a bell-weather is insane. I am a mid-westerner all my life, but I never understood why Iowa deserved first in the nation status. Beyond the strangeness of how the caucuses in Iowa work, who in their right mind unleashes a new vote counting app without testing it first? Pure idiocy and/or hubris.
Anyway, beyond Iowa, I truly believe that whatever candidate that manages to garner the nomination will prove a worthy foil to DJT. Disclaimer: I have backed Elizabeth Warren from the start and would love to hear her on a debate stage with Trump. OTOH, I doubt Trump would be willing to debate any candidate the Dems produce.
1
"Gail: I have a sinking feeling that whatever happens in November, Trump will be declaring victory. My list of election nightmares range from Russians hacking the system to a massive computer crash in some swing state, to Donald Trump simply claiming “Vote fraud!” and refusing to leave the White House if he loses."
No doubt about it, being a Democrat is tough these days. Let me grow your nightmares. Suppose there is candidate above 40% after Super Tuesday. Bernie, Booty, Biden, maybe Bloomberg. She could come back. She's been keeping up. She has spoken, recently. You know who "she" is.
The Iowa caucus devolved from a great fire works show, to a cookout with no fire. Just uncooked meat and departed guests. Anyone that wanted to promote smart apps, AI or some kind of new fangled way to count the votes, just got unfriended.
None other than Chris Matthews, Chuck Todd, James Carville and Van Jones have all expressed no confidence in the Democrat field.
The President, guilty of crimes, past, present and future is still a free man. And, improving the country for everyone. The Wizards of Genius just can not bring him down.
Lastly, this meme of "The economy is not fair to everyone." Yeah, when was it ever? Isn't that a good description of socialism?
It's a bad time to be a Democrat.
"Who can ever forget the episode where space aliens descended on a small Midwestern state and ate all the ballots?"
Could we have space aliens descend on the White House and eat the President?
2
The current reporting claiming that Buttigieg is leading is deceptive.
Bernie is leading in both the First and Final vote totals.
In the First vote, which is the closest to a genuine primary-style popular vote, Bernie has a very clear lead of 24.4% to Pete's 21.4%. In the Final vote, which occurs after supporters of candidates who do not achieve viability, "realign" themselves, Bernie still leads, 26.2% over Pete's 25.2%. Both candidates are currently slated to receive 11 delegates each.
So how does the corporate media justify reporting that Buttigieg is "leading"?
They do so by counting what are called "State Delegate Equivalents" or SDEs. SDEs are a calculating device that have been used in past caucuses to predict how many delegates each candidate would have to the State Convention where delegates to the National Convention would be elected.
But delegates to the National Convention are no longer allocated in that manner. The fact that Pete is slightly ahead of Bernie in SDEs is effectively meaningless unless his lead grows to the point where it gives him an additional delegate which is highly unlikely given Sanders' lead in the Final vote.
The Times and other corporate media reporting seems calculated here to deceive and to obscure the fact that Bernie is most likely to win the Iowa caucus.
2
Bloomberg can
win against Trump. Witness
Trump needing to argue against him already and "label" him and mock him a. A good sign
that Trump fears Bloomberg
as someone who can beat him and has actually run a large metropolis successfully. This column is so chatty, what is the point?
Let's get back to serious analysis of what the problems are in the country and what we need to do to solve them. Bloomberg is doing just that by the way.
2
Bloomberg is too old and not nationally known
1
This article towards the end is eerily similar to a lot of articles that came out in 2016 bashing Trump before the election. Saying a lot about the bad stuff he's done and how he'll be remembered as the worst president ever but having almost no analysis on how Democrats are supposed to beat him come November. Trump has an avalanche of momentum at the moment after the irresponsible decisions made during his impeachment saga by the Democrats, how do Dems stop that and start getting traction for their candidates? For 4 years they have called out every misdeed the man has done and he is at his highest ever approval rating with a mountain of base support, why do Dems think that strategy is working when it clearly just empowers him more?
4
The way I see it, Biden's poor performance in Iowa (and Buttigieg and Bernie's strong ones) should be attributed more to the caucus system than the overall direction of the Democratic party. Caucuses bring out the most passionate, activist supporters - and often scare off moderates and laymen. The people who showed up to caucus are more likely to have been Bernie and Buttigieg supporters - the youngest (most passionate) and oldest (retirees with time or commitment to democracy) respectively. If neither Buttigieg or Bernie get substantial media bounces, I fully expect Biden to show up in states like New Hampshire that have primaries - rather than arcane, outdated caucuses, which provide unrepresentative reflections of public opinion.
1
Insecure Premature Pete — kills the gold-standard survey/final poll showing he was trailing in third place on the eve of the caucus. And then claims victory when only two-thirds of the actual caucus results have been released.
1
All the talk about health care for all and free college for all won't mean anything if the Democrats don't gain control of the Senate as well as the White House. They need to get real and stick to the themes that won them the House.
4
Bret is still shilling for Trump. A segment on Morning Joe showed that under previous presidents, including Jimmy Carter the country had higher economic growth than Trump. I'm sure you can look it up. Stephens isn't the only member of the press who just takes Trump's word for his amazing economy It's happening across the board. Please, correct this, Bret, and spread the word!
10
The best way to ensure votes are recorded accurately is: paper ballot along with a fingerprint and a copy to voter. Poll watcher to verify count.
1
Fingerprint! Genius. That would work for mail in ballots too.
SO an Opinion piece about Iowa doesn't talk about Buttigieg or Sanders. What is the problem here. I love the NYT and I really do believe that they helped get Trump elected with their single minded focus on getting H. Clinton elected. Look at the map. Bernie got the large population counties - just like democrats got (and always get) the highly populated cities. Buttigieg won the swing counties - you know the ones that went for Trump last year.
Please cover the top candidates and talk about their victories and what it means - Not just the Candidate you endorsed. Learn from the last election and don't hand this race to Trump.
5
The outcome of the voting was purposely delayed by Democrats to take media coverage away from the State of the Union speech, the good jobs report, and Democrats probable loss of the impeachment vote in the Senate. Pelosi was so upset with Trump’s good news, that she ripped up his speech in disgust. There was little to criticize Trump for in his speech that stated the facts.
The worst Candidate ever was not Rudy. It was and is Trump
That said, no more First in the Nation Primary. National Primary day and paper ballots.
Paper ballots cannot be hacked.
5
Anyone who watched the last few days is likely to have the same conclusion: Both sides are bought and paid for and are corrupt to the core. Suppressed polls, skewed coverage in a thousand large and small ways. In the end, people will be called sore losers and a thousand other things to deflate and deflect, but underneath it all will be an unshakable truth. People know their frustration and anger is justified.
2
The “both sides” argument is untrue and a cop out. On every issue and every level Republicans are driving the corruption and abuse of our system.
4
Screaming against the plutocrats (Sanders) or handing out endless plans and white papers (Warren) is not what Americans crave. They want decency and competence -- and an uplifting vision for America. My hope, at this point anyway, is Bloomberg and Klobuchar. Biden should step aside before he suffers real humiliation, and nice guys Yang and Steyer should drop out.
With the impeachment almost behind us, it's time to get serious, folks.
1
It might be just me, but this off-the-cuff lighthearted bantering about the disintegration of our country is becoming ever and ever more tasteless.
4
Enough time has been invested in explanations the broken Iowa vote tally is prima facie evidence of vote fraud or, at minimum, the most poorly disguised conspiracy to commit vote fraud in election history.
Time needs to be spent looking at the way P. Buttigieg put up good numbers in Iowa. Buttigieg's Iowa committee demonstrated a min-model of how to win within a system for delegate allocation (i.e. an Electoral College model) based on regions and space instead of each delegate representing the same number of voters.
Personally, and with my deepest apologies if I'm mistaken, but I can't help thinking that the fact that most of the Iowa precinct leaders interviewed on the news were older folks (like me) may have had something to do with the "app" not working correctly. I have a very basic "smartphone", but I often need the assistance of my kids (and grandkids) to make certain apps work... Could it be as simple as "operator error" that doomed the introductory use of the app in the 2020 Iowa caucuses?
2
@Chris Wildman When they tell you your "Jitterbug" phone isn't good enough, ask them who won in Iowa.
@Chris Wildman that's why they should have tested the app to make sure it worked for users.
1
Forget the botched technology for a moment. The bigger concern is with turnout. Turnout was an absolute disaster for the Democrats. It's on track to be at 2016 levels or worse, at roughly 170,000 voters vs. a whopping 240,000 seen in 2008.
For a party that prides itself on being so educated, knowledgeable, and connected with average Americans, they sure do a poor job of marketing themselves.
3
I think that turnout (which, remember is the second highest ever) has more to do with the multitude of choice than lack of enthusiasm among Democratic voters.
"We need somebody who can speak to the large number of Americans who are still struggling to make ends meet in a country where the rich get richer while paying precious little taxes. The vast number of citizens who have nightmares about medical bills. All the people, from farmers to families on food stamps, who are teetering on the brink of disaster because of Trump’s ideology-driven, intellectually impoverished management of government programs. And then chart a clear alternative."
Hmmmmm, if only there was a candidate who has spent his entire life building a movement around these ideas....
3
@Sam the movement based on the idea of expropriation of wealth because it worked so well in the USSR. The movement based on conspiracy theories and the “us against them” mentality on full display in his supporters’ social-media propaganda campaign. The movement that embraces an ideology rejected by the very same countries where it was tried. Yes, that candidate.
@Sam - And accomplishing nothing. That candidate spent his entire career promoting himself.
Please America wake up and pay attention to Andrew Yang! He is best positioned to earn support from those who voted for Trump in 2016. It's all about personal economics. Humanity First.
1
For some time now, I've felt that one step in reclaiming some sanity in our national politics is something almost nobody agrees with me about: Electing presidents to a single, six-year term, rather than having them be eligible for two, four-year terms.
Appalled at the thought of Individual 1 (or whomever) getting two more years? Consider that, on average, presidents who have stood for re-election in the post 22nd Amendment era, serve *more* than six years already:
Truman* — 1945-53 (* he could have run for a third term, since his first term was incomplete, due to assuming office upon the death of FDR, but he chose not to run)
Eisenhower — 1953-61 (two full terms)
Kennedy — NA (1961-63; assassinated)
Nixon — 1969-74 (but elected to two full terms)
Carter — 1977-1981 (one term)
Reagan — 1981-1989 (two full terms)
George H.W. Bush — 1989-1993 (one term)
Bill Clinton — 1993-2001 (two full terms)
George W. Bush — 2001-2009 (two full terms)
Barack Obama — 2009-2017 (two full terms)
The total number of years served is 58, over nine presidents 58/9=6.44 years if we count Truman; if we leave Truman out, it's 50/8=6.25.
US presidents spend their first terms angling for re-election, which grossly distorts the governing process. Then, often as not, they run into trouble in a second term, or lose Congressional support, and become lame-duck-ish. Not to mention the enormous amount of money consumed.
Who thinks presidents spending all that time and money to get re-elected is worth it?
5
That makes sense to me. I would add term limits for the Senate and Congress.
Think how much we could have a accomplished if McConnell hadn’t been able to accumulate the power he has.
Term limits - 2 for Senate, 3 for Congress. Then let them go home and live under the laws they pass or don’t pass.
4
I think it is interesting how Buttigieg surprised the Democrats with a win in Iowa but there is still little focus on it. I have been a fan since the beginning. I realize he has a tougher road in states like SC, but he has overcome a lot of odds to win over Warren and Sanders.
1
If the New York Times is to be believed, David Pflouf, an Hillary Clinton guy, got the DNC to hire a near bankrupt company owned by tow other Clinton people to make the app in two months, when even Google said it could not be done. Sounds like extreme nepotism. Heads should roll. All that said, I would like to see Trump run against an openly gay candidate who is smarter than he is.
11
Any of the candidates are smarter than Trump.
I fine with Mayor Pete. He’s definitely smart, we’ll-spoken, actually religious and a vet. He’s also gay and married and that’s fine with me too. I’d be happy to vote for him.
6
So the manchurian candidate won Iowa.
Why do people start their sentences with um? It's just too cutesy.
1
Buttigieg has no chance of beating Trump
6
Never before, in the field of political journalism, has so much nonsensically biased reporting been spieled by so few.
1
Me,too, Gail
The "outrage|" over Iowa's app should have been left to the Media and pundits, who had nothing to talk about all night, and who fulminated -- I would say theatrically-- & disappointed their sponsors.
Everybody thinks that history is a game show. If it took 24 hrs to get the ballot straight, no tree died in the forest.
2
Not much.
What just happened? Oh, Buttigieg funded the app that counted the votes, and he is leading. Yep. His campaign paid. for. the. app. Why isn't this all over the front page? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/buttigieg-campaign-paid-firm-that-developed-voting-app-blamed-for-iowa-caucus-delays
2
Washington Examiner? They are a tiny step above the rags you pick up at the supermarket checkout.
No one believes anything in the Washington Examiner but even if you spent one minute thinking for yourself you’d realize this makes zero sense.
3
It was Putin...
1
If you arent outraged....you're not paying attention.
So reads the bumper sticker.
I'm guessing most of you have not read the bumper sticker.
....
#1....Bernie won in California, 2016. But the DNC controlled vote count, gave the resulting delegates to Hillary, anyway.
#2...Jill Stein got a court ordered re-count of votes in Michigan. When the re-count began to uncover DNC vote fraud in Detroit, the DNC stepped in as "a friend of the court" to demand that the re-count be STOPPED....and so it was stopped.
#3.....Do I even have to point out the accepted belief that DNC vote fraud in Chicago is rampant?? And that nobody ever, ever challenges the DNC results from Chicago and Illinois??
and now.......
Iowa....with a brand new electronic system, recommended by DNC officials.......
???
4
Bret, don't give up on Bloomberg, he is the Dems only hope.
Mayor Pete has everything going for him except his sexual preferences.The country isn't ready for two men dancing at the inarguable ball.
Sanders will always be looked upon as a Bolshevik. Remember what happened to Trotsky
6
I agree. I like Mayor Pete and I think many who might vote for a gay man won’t because he is married to a man. Not yet.
But Mayor Mike is a real possibility- real self-man man who didn’t inherit everything from his Daddy and then crashed his businesses MULTIPLE times into bankruptcy, leaving vendors, tradespeople - everyone else with unpaid invoices.
Mike Bloomberg knows Trump from NYC - he will makes Trump crazy. Worth it just for that.
1
Fox News' efforts to create some kind of Hillary conspiracy to the contrary, this was a Charlie Foxtrot of the highest order.
The Iowa Caucus is and always has been a joke. Its time for it to go the way of the Dinosaur.
4
God I wish both of you lost your salaries and had to live in public housing. Surely it would make your tone less insufferable.
7
Buttigieg Buttigieg Buttigieg That's what happened in Iowa. Every time I type his name the NYT says I misspelled it.. He's the man with a plan. Better get used to it..and learn how to spell Buttigieg. Slow results are nothing new. Those old enough to vote in the 2000 election could be grandparents by now and back then it seemed they could be grandparents before the Supreme Court made it's selection. If time is of the essence, what does Melania have to gain by putting in another four years in the White House? She's not getting any younger... and he's fast approaching his applesauce years.
1
What happened in Iowa? The gross stupidity of the inept and failed Democrats was put on display quite clearly. These dopes think they can run a country? My Goldendoodle could do a better job.
1
I guess you’ve forgotten 2012 when Republicans called Iowa for Mitt Romney and had to reverse a days later and admit that Rick Santorum actually won.
Guess that proves Republicans can’t run the country. Unfortunately we have proof of that - they can run it for the rich and powerful just not for the rest of us.
4
The incompetence of getting a new, nearly untested app only months before the caucus is breath-taking. It tells us a great deal about the democracy party's institutional machinery and its priorities -- buy something from major party insiders and contributors, rush it into use, go against all the best advice about insuring election integrity. The people at the high party levels need to be out of jobs. Luckily, they kept a paper trail -- as a back up, and the Sanders campaign kept back-up records. But brains and integrity in the upper levels of the DP? Forget it.
4
The last few days have shown that the democratic establishment is not the counterweight to Trump. It's just another manifestation of the same corruption. Corporate America says: Heads I win, tails you lose.
3
HA! Bret, my faith in pollsters was crushed in 2016. Remember that election?
Please, please, please stop exalting Michael Bloomberg. I doubt that he could be re-elected Mayor of NYC, if it were possible that he could run again. He definitely has no support out here in the rest of America, aside from the Mayors whose endorsements his foundation has essentially bought (such as Louisville's Mayor Greg Fischer, a lame duck in his last term). His presidential candidacy has no serious legitimacy with Democratic voters, and has no purpose other than to drive up advertising rates for every other Democratic candidate.
4
Don't forget AMY. She has room to grow. Closing in on Joe.
2
Who needs election interference from the likes of Russia, Ukraine, China, when Trump has a supercharged asset right here in the United States - Hillary Clinton. Her fingerprints all over awarding the Iowa caucus software app to a total neophyte vendor, and the ensuing mess she served for Trump to feed on.
4
It seems to be increasingly clear that only Mike Bloomberg can save the planet from the catastrophe of a second Trump term.
Warren and Buttigieg would clearly lose in November. She is way too far left.
I doubt if the nation is ready for its first openly gay President. Furthermore Buttigieg lacks significant high-level executive experience.
2
Bloomberg has got to be the savior, with a just as savy VP pick.
Beat Trump!
2
The GOP and the Democrats are playing by different rules. Trump, backed by quiescent GOP, appears on course for a putsch. The Democrats are conducting honest politics warts and all. Talk about bringing a knife to a gun fight! I fear for the world right now.
2
This entire political process is making me sick to my stomach. What a message the Republicans are sending to the nation: We can behave as we like and without any consequences, but everyone who disagrees with us is held to a double standard,.
We are fine with that. What a horrible disservice Republicans have performed for this country, what dishonor. They are beneath contempt.
4
Midwestern white guy wins midwestern white state. Ho Hum. Which has generally been my reaction to the vastly overstated (except for publicity) "importance" of winning Iowa. When Obama won Iowa it was a big deal as it demonstrated that a black candidate could win over two white contenders in a midwestern white largely-rural state. It was much like the importance of JFK having won West Virginia.....it proved that he could be electable as our first Catholic president.
1
Why do we care about Iowa, a State with a few million people, more than 90% White, and many Republicans?
4
first, on the technology side. No reason an app couldn't speed up the process. However, it is clear that they never actually tested the app -- some caucus leaders were complaining that it wouldn't upload. Now, anyone who knows anything about technology (or anything else) knows you test before you go live. If you're a rock and roll band, you have a sound test before the concert.
Second, the dems ineptness with tech makes me doubt even more the intel communities conclusion that it was the Russkies who hacked the DNC. Since the dems have shown they are inept with tech, I'm betting on the 400 lb guy living in the basement theory. Why would you need the Russkie military?
Third, Biden is likely toast. Warren is close (although there may be a plan for that, or a tasty recipe using burnt toast in pow wow chow). So it may be Pete v Bernie. But we aren't going to elect a socialist and Pete has no real experience. So I'd say the dems are toast. And they can't nominate Bloomberg, the dems would end up exposing themselves as the biggest hypocrites of all time to nominate a billionaire that makes Trump look poor. It would throw all the populist support to Trump.
I don't believe this is anything but a strategic fix by the DNC.
2
Would someone please direct me to the greatest goose stepping instructors in the states?
1
Um, what just happened in the State of the Union speech?
A horror show of lies, emotional manipulation, exaggerations and vulgarity. The military industrial complex just loved it; filled with war-mongering, fake nationalism, etc. The most vulgar state of the union speech I have ever seen and I have watched at least 65 of them. Talk about tyranny, propaganda, lies and deceit! wow
5
I have to say that after Iowa I am much more optimistic. My husband is from Iowa and does not have a high opinion of his former classmates who remained in the small towns and on the farms where they were born after he went to MIT. But when he saw Mayor Pete in the first place and the map that showed he had support in the rural and suburban parts of the state, he conceded that they are smarter than he thought. Another proof that ideology trumps identity. Having to choose between a socialist and a gay man, Iowa farmers rationally decided that the gay man with stellar credentials and a centrist platform is preferable to the guy who praised the USSR and Venezuela. If Mayor Pete chooses a female VP (Kamala? Amy?) he will beat Trump. Sanders never will.
4
@Mor That’s more than a little condescending. Why would anyone think less of a person who chose to stay in their hometown or work a farm than one who went to MIT?
4
@ Maggie
Well said. But condescension is a major attraction for the Buttigieg fans. The think that getting behind CIA-Pete with his impeccably groomed credentials makes them seem smart, too.
4
It’s as though we are observing an Eastern Bloc country in the 1980s.
Extreme division in the electorate.
Foreign interference in our elections.
Rampant corruption.
Successful cover up.
Sham impeachment trial.
Broken Iowa primary process.
When will our leaders acknowledge that we fell asleep at the wheel and lost the Cold War?
3
What just happened in Iowa? Not much.
About 42,000 caucus participants supported Bernie. Maybe 44,000 supported Mayor Pete. Those numbers each represent about 7% of registered Democrats in Iowa, but only 2% of all registered voters there. And together they represent about 0.03% of eligible voters in the US.
But on with the show!
4
There is only one relevant number for each delegate after the second round: the number of voters in their group. That number gets divided by the number of voters in the precinct, which is then multiplied by the number of delegates that precinct has to select. This is a single formula in an Excel spreadsheet. The rounding of the result is automatically done in Excel by setting the number of decimal places to zero for that column. This spreadsheet can be set up beforehand by any eighth-grader. All one had to do was find people to run the caucus who could count heads and enter one number for each candidate into an Excel spreadsheet. They could then have printed that out and sent it by fax, mail or pony express. This overcomplication, depending on phone apps, and making the process unnecessarily convoluted is a reflection of the fact that most people nowadays apparently cannot do fractions or use a simple spreadsheet.
3
Now that Iowa has proved itself a terrible place to hold the first primary (something many of us have thought for a long time because of the state's elderly, virtually all-white electorate), Democrats need to find a new testing ground. I recommend California because a) it's the most populous state; b) it gives greater political relevance to the American West, where most new, good ideas come from; c) will give those of us in the Eastern time zone a better night's sleep, knowing we can skip hearing the post-midnight results until morning. Or maybe better yet: choose a different state every four years. No reason it should always be in the same place.
4
Why not a series of rolling, regional primaries, first-second-third choice options on the ballot? Ten states every two weeks, with debates in between each? In deference to New Hampshire, let New England and the Mid-Atlantic states go first, then the Old Confederacy, then the Midwest, etc.
Each set of results would be both representative and also instructive to subsequent voters.
Campaigning would be more compact, with overlapping media markets.
2
Its time to retire the Iowa primary. It is not only irrelevant, it is antiquated. In SC and CA there is a diverse population that represents the core of american voters. The results of primaries in these 2 states is essential. The Iowa primary should disappear.
3
I find your banter charming, but I am surprised you can go on this long about everything EXCEPT the fact that Buttigieg's win is amazing for an outsider who is openly gay. Why are you not analysing his brilliance in delivering a hopeful and forward thinking message that conservative Iowa apprently approved of?
4
I consider Iowa irrelevant
5
Can everyone give the Dems a moment without Trump. You are endlessly beating his drum for him. Free advertising for him by a few “pundits” who are besotted with him.
Um, watching Iowa caucus from 7,000 km away, we, Europeans Martians, circling Earth are waiting for the emergence of a strong Democratic nominee. And from high up, we are the ones to better comment objectively.
No comparison with the Bush - Gore “Hanging Chads”, apart imagining how better the Planet would have been after 8 years of Al Gore Presidency.
What happened in Iowa was a "fluke" outcome: Biden, was utterly defeated and Bernie did not reach the first place. Think of it: they are both 77 years old!
Buttigieg (Nomen omen), using an oxymoron, is a “No country for old men”: no chance to win in this current aging and burly USA society.
Warren: she lacks the inner texture to become a credible POTUS: in her NYT video interviews, she utterly overacted. And this, belies a problem.
Bloomberg. Nice guy, but he too is 77 years old! He has got blurred ideas on foreign policy. BUT he can have a role in propping with his money – if need be – the only one who can beat Trump.
That is, Tom Steyer. He can corrals most democratic votes, plus, large fringes of undecided, or, (if any yet!) liberal Republican voters.
Tom, 62 years old, now a determined Global warming fighter. Half of his money donated to foundations. His key foreign leaders: Nelson Mandela and Angela Merkel. He has got equilibrium, STAMINA, and intelligence.
We, European Martians, hope Tom being the next President of the United States of America.
P.s: and, of course in November, Trump, will whine “Vote fraud!”
1
How disappointing to read so many conspiracy theorists in a NY TImes comment section. I thought I left that behind when I detached from social media sites. I guess it’s impossible to escape. At least the discussion between The columnists was fun and interesting.
4
How do we know this wasn’t “fixed” by Russia for Trump?
Oh. Right. We don’t know what Trump promised which countries that no whistleblower has reported on and that got out.
Who would Trump want to run against? The young mayor with a name no one can pronounce, and the crazed flamethrowing socialist who isn’t a Democrat.
2
I wonder if psychologically many women are unhappy that the first president to have a husband in the White House may be a man.
4
@ Paco?
Um no.
I make a motion that they change the name of Washington, D.C. to Jonestown.
5
If Buttigeig gets the Presidential nomination King Trump could not have wished for more then this as an opponent ,all sad but I am afraid true ,we Democrats have to do better but we need a change in leadership in our party of donkeys
Why does Trump's name and what he "says" have to be featured in virtually any article about politics? Click-baiting?
2
Gail: 'Who can ever forget the episode where space aliens descended on a small Midwestern state and ate all the ballots?'
Will she still tweet her wisecracks after her retirement?
"Imagine, Gail, if Trump turned the Oval Office into a meth lab. First, the president would call it fake news. Next, Mick Mulvaney would admit it is a meth lab, but that was O.K. because he hadn’t yet cooked up any meth, that his real intention was to teach chemistry to indigent 9th graders, and that Democrats are “anti-science.” Finally, his lawyers would insist that it’s unimpeachable because, if the president does it, it’s legal." This scenario makes my day!
1
Mr Stephen's nails the issue with his observation that 'things that used to be relatively easy are now hard'. High Tech is the culprit. No Tech person ever said 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'. This is a refutation of the Yankee practicality that was one of the USA's prime attributes. High tech is not always the answer and it is often pointlessly complex
4
Biden's lackluster performance in Iowa and empty donation coffers speak loudly, which is an opportunity for Michael Bloomberg to step in and occupy the center lane. At this point I think Bloomberg is the only one Trump really fears.
2
2012, Iowa Republican Caucuses took weeks to verify their results.
So much for the conspiracy theories swirling around now.
2
You embarrass yourself with that first quote, Mr. Stephens. As someone who trusts Nate Silver more than any other single person in the news media, I am aware that primaries are much harder to poll than general elections, and caucuses are even worse than primaries. I also am aware that trend lines are as important as individual data points (Pete was trending up in Iowa in the past few weeks). I am even aware that in recent history - despite being a generation behind you - that the Iowa winner is often a candidate who comes from behind in the last few weeks and is spending the most time on the ground talking to real people (John Kerry, Barack Obama, Rick Santorum; Mayor Pete not being stuck in the Senate). If your faith in pollsters is really “kaput” because of this weeks results, you really didn’t know anything about polling.
Now, to read the rest of the conversation.
2
Uh Oh, two nationally unelectable Democrats take Iowa. Trump is licking his chops over that ticket. Biden suffers wounds from Ukraine fiasco, no big push for Warren she's fading fast too much pie in sky old Liberalism.
Hope for open convention, maybe someone else with the juice, no not Clinton please
2
Everything you know about Iowa....is wrong.
The Press is misleading you with outdated stereotypes, as if thats a big surprise.
Further, the NYTs in particular is simply carrying the torch for the DNC.....the DNC itself a modern version of Tammany Hall.
Iowa is doiing just fine, as always, there's no confusion amoung Iowans.
The confusion is all amoung the outsiders, the Press Corps, the DNC.
To claim that Iowa is not "diverse" ignores the results!! 7-8 candidates and each of them got delegates! What the heck did the DNC(and, by extension, the average NYTs reader) expect?
The DNC moved into Iowa and attempted to saddle Iowa with an electronic system of delegate voting. The experiment worked.......the demonstration shows that the DNC will be able to contest everything at the national level...
Third times the charm....and steal a national election Tammany Hall style.
What happened on Iowa?
Bernie was winning. They stopped the count and report they Buttigieg is ahead. That will reduce the impact of the final blow to the centrists (read Republican light) when they declare the final numbers.
Pathetic. Even worse than 2016. Shadow App investors including Buttigieg and Hillary is a real joke. Banana Republics look real good right now.
NYT publish this.
4
1. Donate the app to the Senate. 2. Stop hiring companies with underworld connections to the Clintons and a present candidate (the Boy who would be King). 3. Nancy Pelosi for President.
4
Gail, it’s now Liz and Pete, together. The Professor and her best protege, which is miles ahead of the current Beavis and Butthead. That would make me very happy, and encourage my dwindling faith in the future of our Country, and Planet. Bret, you need to remain strong, and throw off the shackles of your past. The Voting Booth is single occupancy only, for good reason.
Cheers.
1
The Times should give Collins/Stephens an extra column to discuss last night’s campaign preview in the outrageous, utterly sickening, turn-it-off-after-the-15th cynical lie SOTU. Djt won’t even need the GRU to win. Done & done.
1
Best quote ever:
“Imagine, Gail, if Trump turned the Oval Office into a meth lab. First, the president would call it fake news. Next, Mick Mulvaney would admit it is a meth lab, but that was O.K. because he hadn’t yet cooked up any meth, that his real intention was to teach chemistry to indigent 9th graders, and that Democrats are “anti-science.” Finally, his lawyers would insist that it’s unimpeachable because, if the president does it, it’s legal.”
sorry, but iowa, 90 percent white, means nothing. what a waste of time.
2
@darius molark yes! On to New Hampshire, which is 95% white!
Tom Perez, resign already!
3
The DNC will do anything to stop Bernie! Now it’s made itself unelectable. Such incompetence, it’s disgusting.
2
I am going to say it again. Trump can’t be beaten by any one person or candidate, for they become the lightning rod by which he can attack and assault for months to ultimately weaken. Someone needs to break from tradition and speak to the team of competent leaders they will bring to managing the country. Trump’s biggest weakness is that he stands alone unable to listen or draw competence within his grasp. Imagine for instance Bloomberg pledging to take Buttigieg as VP and groom him to run in 2024, or that he wanted to resurrect Barrack Obama as his Secretary of State to mend the burned relationships around the world, or that there was room and a place for Warren or Bernie on the team. Does anyone not think Harris would make a wonderful Attorney General? That Klobbuchar could not run Homeland Security or Commerce better than any of Trump’s appointees? Break tradition and run as a political dream team, deny Trump the ability to make it about any one individual. That’s a winning combination that doesn’t just unite the party, but ultimately the country, and sends hate back where it belongs.
10
Michael Bennet is putting all his eggs in New Hampshire. I hope he succeeds. He is the candidate everyone has, alas, forgotten but he is the best one out there in my view. Smart as a whip, deep integrity, pragmatic and a winner. When he was facing adversity in one of his elections in Colorado, rather than ducking or obfuscating the issue he went out to rural voters, listened and turned them around. He is loved in Colorado and respected by his colleagues. Give him a look and then Vote Bennet.
2
@David Bukey my fave too..... I hope he does well.
What happened in Iowa? A stark and clear realization that the Democrats don't have an electable candidate.
1
I'm undecided, but Bloomberg has shown some messaging brilliance with a campaign slogan: Stop the Chaos.
Speaks to Trump certainly, but also Warren and Sanders who promise a different version of chaos and loss to Trump.
I can live with Stop the Chaos.
2
I am so sick of the media so constantly portraying Democrats as splintered and disorganized. What’s going on now is normal, several candidates competing for the nomination. It’s a messy process. Unfortunate that the app didn’t work but that doesn’t doom the party. Democrats are united in Congress and will stay that way. It’s Republicans that are “retiring”- running for the hills because they’re afraid of Trump.
15
if warren and biden are done already, individually much less as a team, then we are guaranteed 4 more years
If Trump wins in November then
History will record that the Democrats never
got their act together.
9
Have to say in the age of OK Boomer, I got a bit of a kick out of the tragic/comedy goings on in Iowa. Let’s use an APP because “everybody’s got a Smart Phone”. The old hands used paper and pencil, 6th grade math and the landline to call HQ to report the results. ( except they couldn’t get through). Hey Whiz Kids not everything needs to be computerized. Especially not a quaint exercise in democracy like the Iowa Caucus.
7
We've all seen the Democrats-are-a-circular-firing-squad jokes, but apparently, given what's going on in Iowa, they are more aptly considered The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight, even IN a circle.
Frank Bruni, in his column, was dead right about how this looks--an absolute eye roller that plays right into both Republican talking points and every crackpot conspiracy theory you can think of.
Unless, of course, the conspiracy is not just theory . . .
3
Bernie won the popular vote and TIED with Mayor Pete in the delegates buried. Pete did not "win." He tied in one count and came in second on the other, the second being perhpas more significant. This is so typical of how the main stream media always spins stories against Sanders. I could not find ONE major media outlet who did not bury the raw vote count or point out it is really a tie. Liberal elite Pete. A dream for the main stream media.
7
I remember when not too long ago all of the Bernie supporters were saying that Warren’s statement about Bernie telling her a woman couldn’t win backfired on her and cost her the election. Likewise, I think this is the moment when the Sanders campaign and its aggressive embrace of conspiracy theories will backfire and cost Bernie the election. We don’t want your paranoia!
2
Trump can congratulate himself. Ove ninety-five percent is something previously only found behind the iron curtain.
1
Elizabeth Warren has never resonated with me. I want her to, she is intelligent and capable. Something about her grates on me, I have trouble connecting to her as a person.
Bernie is too radical. Buttigieg is amazing, but being gay am not sure what the Trump team will come up to throw him under the bus if he wins the primary. Amy Klobachar seems like a nice person, but can she win.
Your running commentary is a good one, especially the part about Trump having a meth lab in the Oval office. Is there nothing he can do that his supporters will not forgive? We are living in disheartening times.
At this point, I am leaning towards Bloomberg for my vote in the primaries. And will support which ever candidate wins, they are all better than Trump.
8
@Deirdre Lamb Warren increasingly sounds like a prerecorded announcement. Perhaps she came out of the gate too fast. Mayor Pete is the new shiny object who also happens to be charming and intelligent, but without much experience and little following among minorities. Bernie's barreling drive down the healthcare for all freeway is short-sighted. Biden, a good man, whose time has passed. Bloomberg can deliver in the areas of national debt and tax reform, climate, gun control and just plain decency. The only obstacle is Mitch and Co. and I would hope voters would go blue wherever they live.
1
@Deirdre Lamb
Those who would oppose Buttigieg for being gay are already in the Trump camp and always have been. These are the evangelicals whose only concern is abortion.
In the scheme of things what happened in Iowa doesn't mean much. Things do not stop at the border of Iowa. Thank goodness.
4
The US can't even run a caucus anymore, but they want to police foreign elections to make sure they are run properly.
The US wants to push democracy on the world but can't even impeach the most corrupt President it's ever had.
2
Great analogy that meth lab, but don't let Bret fool you Gail. He's an economic elitist who won't allow himself to care very much about the underdog - be it uninsured Americans, the millions of Americans with not enough saved for retirement, one illness/job loss away from economic insolvency, the people around the globe who will be negatively impacted by global warming, the Palestinians. What's the point of having attained money/power/privilege if you can't use them to dominate after all? He doesn't really care about underdogs, and moreover, he doesn't trust people who do. He had a brief moment of identifying with today's immigrants based on his grandparents immigrant roots - but that moment clearly passed and he has since resolved not to vote for Warren or Sanders and to make the case that others shouldn't either.
What does he think about Mitch McConnell, the power behind the throne? That's the real mark of a repentant conservative.
2
ACRONYM and SHADOW will be the new internet memes for incompetence. Politically connected insider enrichment scam perpetrated on the donors to politicians. Wake up America. Demand better from the political class.
5
Warren not winning a single county in Iowa is what happened.
2
Trump most definitely won this round; he may end up with over 50% approval before the dust settles. But the Democrats have a lot of ammunition from the impeachment trial that could change things between now and November. The question is whether they can use it. Sanders and Warren (and any hard core progressive) lose to Trump, period, and it looks like Biden can't get the nomination. So of the original candidates, it looks like only Mayor Pete is viable post-Iowa, though Bloomberg remains unpredictable and Klobuchar could move up as Biden and Warren fade. But the Democrats need to unify ASAP. A pitched primary battle deep into spring plays exactly into Trumps hands. In particular, the Bernie Bros need to be shut down. The anti-Trump ads need to start now with footage revealing himself to be the raving lunatic he is, as well as the parade of Republican senators and Trump lawyers contradicting themselves about impeachment and the constitution. But the Democrats really have to stop the bleeding and quit looking like a bunch of incompetent boobs or it will be too late. Might be already.
1
Bernie won 28% to Buttigieg 25% and the corporate media is attempting to change and bury the results.
Buttigieg gave $40,000 to Shadow Inc. the app that messed up the final results.
4
Um, some us have been commenting for months that Joe Biden has a documented history of being a terrible candidate. Not sure why you thought this time would be different.
6
Russian hacking is not fake news. They did it before and there's no reason to believe they didn't do it in Iowa. Of course the Trump administration won't investigate because TrumpCo is a wholly owned subsidiary of Putin Inc. Democracy had a good run, but the race is over.
1
Well Fox news and Trump have did a pretty good job beating Biden up. Looks like his support just bleed over to Pete. I kind of thought it might split between him and Amy.
I really think Iowa shouldn't go first any more. This is embarrassing.
1
I think the Corporate Democrats playbook went off without a hitch.
Delay the impeachment so the progressives candidates would be in Washington for the last two weeks and off the campaign trail. Have Hillary's gang that runs Shadowinc and Former mayor Pete who helped finance the app scuttle it on caucus night. Pete can claim victory and leave town with no pushback.
Two days later with selective voting count Pete is in the lead. A week later on page six we will read how Sanders won handley but it doesn't count because it took so long to get the results.
4
Bloomberg may have gotten a late start, but he's smart to avoid all this caucus nonsense. He's emerging as an experienced, smart, self -made business man who is taking a sensible approach to taxes, health care, gun control and climate. He strikes me as wanting this more for our country than for himself (talking to you Bernie et al).
1
A software glitch isn’t the problem in Iowa. The votes are. Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall and Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. As a result, the media spin is now in high gear with the technology ruse. The problem is the Bernie brigade is again tilting the Party to Never Neverland. Democrat fragmentation is clearly underway as minions scramble for tickets on the Politburo express.
2
Yes, its unfortunate that Iowa Democrats tried to fix something that wasn't broken. There's some mea culpas coming for sure.
That said, is waiting 24 hours for the results really that terrible? Sure, Sanders and Buttigieg could have gotten some nice images fist-pumping at their celebrations but was the democratic process upended? No, I think not.
2
Take a breath everyone. Iowa, NH, etc are not the whole US.
But we should just have primaries for all states on the same day. And we should do it with paper ballots. And we should have public funding.
7
What if the Republicans had created an app that had failed as bad as the one the Democrats had?
They would have deleted the voter data then claimed the Democrats had hacked their software. They would have proclaimed Trump king anyway as they did in Iowa.
Did the Democrats miss an opportunity to blame the Republicans?
No. The Democrats admitted their mistake so hopefully they won't make that one again. The Republicans make the same mistake over and over then blame everybody else. Except perhaps the Russians.
Iowa should be way down on the list for voting and the most populous states should be the first. Democrats need to be held accountable for their mistakes in order of their importance and so do the Republicans.
5
I'm 45. In Canada I have always voted with a paper ballot that goes into a box that is counted by hand. I'm gobsmacked why this process needs to be complicated.
13
Mayor Pete is a comer. Think Clinton. He has the personal gifts a politician needs to e successful.
2
@Alan "Personal gifts" are not what make a good president. Mayo Pete is a bright young face. That is not enough.
2
@Alan, "Think Clinton?" That makes me shudder. Buttigieg is just as unelectable as she was, albeit for a different reason— I strongly suspect that there are a LOT more Americans in the blue states than you might think, who would never vote for a gay man for president. They're just less likely to admit it than those in the red states.
“Gail: I do like your Twilight Zone nostalgia. Who can ever forget the episode where space aliens descended on a small Midwestern state and ate all the ballots?”
Thank you for making me laugh out loud. I so look forward to your columns! As someone who was sick of the Iowa hoopla long before this fiasco happened yesterday, I appreciate your humor.
2
I just read the most updated vote totals and Sanders is ahead by 1,000 votes. They have only counted part of Des Moines. Both a tied with ten actual delegates but Mayor Pete has more SDE's. What is that? Fantasy land? Is that anything STD's. Great for Pete any way you look at it. But I think Sanders is going to be the winner here.
1
Counting ballots did indeed used to be a lot easier, at least in my native state (TX): the local jefe just divided them into two piles and then adjusted the stack to ensure LBJ or similar candidates eked out a win. Somewhat more difficult now that Hilary’s henchman’s electronic reporting system has to be used. Why no speculation that Hilary “Russified” the process to throw the candidates into disarray and pave the way for her return?
Pete accepts, and asks for, big money/ corporate donors. Bernie does not.
"Accepted wisdom" by sites such as the NYT declare (in essence) "Bernie MUST be stopped" . Is there a connection?
What do you think?
2
Where's Tulsi? Looks like 2016 Groundhog Day to me only worse, she's been kidnapped by both the Media and the DNC. Not a word since she called the Dems the Clinton war machine. One would think that Bernie would have stood up for her but not a word from any of them. As far as I'm concerned she's the front runner and the rest are all tied for last place. They will never beat the President because they have absolutely no convictions only a lust to be numero uno.
1
Yeah if we are already having a "hanging chad" moment in Iowa, it should be a long couple of months. I don't want Buttiegieg as president (he's too young), but will take him over Sanders. Mayor Pete needs to bring out his husband, a lot, to show him and what he does. Bloomberg, needs to take a couple of billion dollars and start a lawsuit against Trump to keep him busy while we elect a candidate. If there's any conspiracy right now other than "well seasoned" people who don't know how to use apps properly, then it may be dems who don't want Bernie to win so they took away his bragging rights for a few days.
Looks like the NYT endorses Amy Klobuchar one day then is trying to push her out the next. She was really close to overtaking Biden, still might if Iowa ever finishes bringing in the votes. I want to see Amy's name up there with everyone else, she is the best choice for president.
2
I had the fastest "shuttle run" time in my HS gym class. I coulda won the Iowa caucus last night!
It was disorganized and put the Democrats worst foot forward. As awful as he is, Trump was the winner. "Better the enemy that you know than the devil you don't" plagued many American minds like some alien induced, auditory hallucination.
Depressing to think about Donny the disaster winning again.
Gail, might be right. He may not win, but he certainly won't lose no matter what the final tally indicates.
I'm in the "Anyone but Trump" camp.
5
Reading the comments, I am forced to look at the elephant in the room. We have endless discussions about the electability of women, or the electability of a Democratic Socialist. Why no discussion about the electability of a gay man in gun-toting, bible-thumping America? A “first gentleman”? Seriously? I don’t see Buttigieg as electable at all in the America of toxic masculinity, nourished and encouraged by Trump.
2
@Samantha Kelly the gayness is just his funding source. His lack of electability comes from being a mayor from a college town with no statewide or nationwide experience. There is a reason why we don't elect mayors in this country, and why, until the current near fatal mistake, we didn't elect billionaires.
1
When will the Times realize that few readers take what Bret Stephens has to say about Democrats or liberals (or about politics in general) seriously, no matter the form of his commentary? His political and ideological bias is overwhelming. Hence, his commentary about anything of a political nature is compromised by his partisan and ideological commitments which result in a lack of political intellectual integrity.
4
All those college educated Democrats can't do simple arithmetic, i.e., count? By now they should have all been able to count, send in results by email, phone, messenger, fax or even driven to HQ.
1
This is all about how things 'look', not how things are. It looks like Trump has taken the economy from the basement to the attic. Simply not true. He took an economy that was already on the upper floors, took America's money, and goosed the economy to the roof. He took a crime bill, created over years by others, and made it look like he did the work. He makes it look like he cares about African Americans. When this is all said and done, they will be worse off than they are today. He made it look like he won't touch the safety net, but he can't wait to get his hands on that money. He made it look like the Bidens were criminal when, in fact, they did nothing other than engage in the same type of stuff every other politician does. He made it look like he does nothing wrong, but he is as corrupt as a person I have seen in my lifetime. Rush Limbaugh, the new American hero. That is all you need to know here. If this was the 1960's the Beatles would have written a song "All You Need is Hate". And if the song didn't make the top ten, Trump would shut down the music industry. You will go along with extremism, white nationalism, xenophobia, and misogyny. Or else. All this for an extra 6% in your paycheck. God how depressed I feel.
4
The good Iowa news for Dems is the failure of its two candidates who would immediately be impeached, Biden for covering up for his son in Ukraine (what Trump was charged with) and Warren for lying on her Texas bar application. The shadowy Shadow, Inc. Iowa app developers with ties to disgraced former candidate HRC will fuel conspiracy news all the way to the election. Running start for Bernie! Looks like four more years of Trump prosperity before the hard times of eight Pence years sets in.
2
i wish this would be krugman/stephens so could get substance from two different perspectives.
America, today, is not the product of Donald Trump, as so many in the media portend. Donald Trump is the product of America. It's time to take a hard look at what meritocracy and consumerism has created. It has created you and me. The louder one screams about the hypocrisy of Donald Trump, the more of his features they see in themselves. I think that's psychology 101. Donald Trump is just one head of the Hydra we have become.
7
So sorry that for all the machinations and thumbs on the scales of the press, the buildup for the Superbowl Monday in Iowa didn't turn out to be the sports event you advertised. Please return to reporting the news, not making up reality shows. The Democratic nomination was the mess the press made of it going into this, a boge app hardly deserves the blame.
2
Of for Pete's sake.
A technology glitch and it's the end of the road for the Democrats?
Any of these candidates would be better than the corrupt liar in the White House.
If you want to vote for Trump, just do it.
But please don't say it's because Iowa flubbed an app.
Good grief.
4
Another discussion of the future of American politics without a mention of the dragon in the room - the climate crisis.
If this isn't an issue of significant political importance to be worth talking about, we had better make it one.
Here is a reminder from Down Under about what the future holds:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/gallery/2020/jan/06/a-weekend-of-bushfire-devastation-in-australia-in-pictures
2
To quote Shakespeare, "There is something wrong in the State of Denmark". One could exchange "Iowa" for "Denmark". Not that there was nefarious intent. The appropriate description for the problem is "incompetence". Political incompetence. My concern is it goes WAY beyond this "glitch". Actuwlly, this was more than a "glitch". "Glitch" implies a minor foul-up. What happened has implications far beyond the counties in Iowa.
It all comes down to my contention that from a strategic and tactical standpoint overall, Democrats have been guilty of political malpractice for 50 years. Democrats like to talk and debate social policy. Democrats focus on things that do not unite an overwhelming majority of Americans in a way that the majority of voters in ALL 50 STATES will support them. Democrats do not effectively market and sell their positions and candidates. Most Democrats want a better America for the lower and middle classes. Only problem is, selling that is something Democrats have been utter failures at. Democrats would rather debate how to fund Medicare for All, which doesn't sell ANYBODY on WHY we should change healthcare funding. Dems just do not understand that people buy based on emotion, not facts. The GOP really does not care about facts. It sells fear. Fear of socialism. Fear of Bernie and Biden. Fear of truth. They are very successful at it. They play to win elections. Dems play to pedantically win arguements, and lose elections. It better change.
Someone in Iowa sold the app to someone in the Iowa Dem. Party. The app failed. Miserably, in-your-face embarrassing the large party gathered for the large number of candidates. The quaint, old-fashioned country notion of caucuses where all speak to all and "decide" one out of the pack didn't work. Blame it on the app and while you're at it, blame it on the too large number of candidates. The quite capable and knowledgable Democratic House members who presented the impeachment case to the Senate lost their case. Their presentation and arguments were in my estimation perfect and convinced me of what I had read were improper actions by Trump. Then comes this fiasco in Iowa. Democrats have got to learn how to hold together and present the strongest and most electable candidate. Iowa and New Hampshire are not bellwethers for the country; they represent in fact a very small, if not blip, in the diversity of our population.Get it together, Dems. Bernie and Pete are two sides of the same coin, appealing to the young and restless while the middle, the rest of us, are outside that ring.
Is it possible the big donor Democratic establishment would prefer the current occupant of the WH to Bernie or Warren? The big money, the socially liberal while financially billionaire would certainly prefer that option.
No. I think most of want Trump out and will vote for whoever the nominee is. What about Bernie’s loyalists? Will they vote for a nominee they don’t particularly like? One wonders.
4
After nearly a year being in and out of Iowa, the press had had it with Culver’s and Pizza Ranch and was mightily ticked off that it wasn’t all over so they could leave the frozen Midwest.
They missed the big story. For one night a bunch of neighbors put aside everything else and went out to speak and listen to each other about big ideas. Now that is an idealized snapshot of the caucuses, but in more than a few of the 1700 location, it is accurate. We have all been bemoaning our inability to talk politics with each other. Iowa has a tradition of it. I’m a bit envious.
4
@Jeanne Van Voorst last night, our local activist group took a vote on whether Iowa should get rid of caucuses. I voted "No". I did it because number one, it's your caucus not ours, we should have no say in it. But I also like the idea, it feels like town meeting (not the phony TV events, the form of government). Your comment has bolstered my faith that I voted correctly.
The Democrats are doing their very best to create a three-ring circus, when they should be laser focusing on Trump’s fundamental flaw: his monumentally, embarrassingly poor character. Instead of driving that message home, using the wealth of material Trump has provided them, they let the Republicans set the narrative during the impeachment trial, fumbled the Iowa caucus for the first time ever, and continue to present bitter, petty infighting as their public face. It’s almost as if they’re determined to lose. Can no one call forth an inspiring vision for our country, as Obama did so well as a candidate? Or is it going to be constant backbiting and keystone coppery? THAT’S what will lose this election.
5
I find all of the hysteria over the Iowa caucus reporting problem hilarious. Considering how many problems we have had in the past with malfunctioning voting machines, and questions about the accuracy of election results, I would say thet Iowa, which had a paper trail with the actual vote counts , got it right.
2
One interview with an Iowa caucus voter that chose Buttigieg tells us a lot about how much attention some are paying to the campaigns. A lady of advanced age was asked how did she feel about Buttigieg being married to a man. She expressed shock and said she would not have voted for him if she had known. If many voters are as well informed as she is the US democracy is in serious trouble.
5
What we haven't heard Democrats in Iowa explain is specifically why they thought they needed an app for voting. Have they never heard of Scantron? They've been around for nearly 50 years. They instantly tally and report voting results, AND they leave a paper trail.
Specifically why did they try using an app? What functional or time efficiency benefit did they think they were getting with an app? It takes longer to download the app, install it, navigate to it, and as it turns out report results than it does to fill out and submit a Scantron and have this system collate results, AND you have no paper trail with an app.
3
@JA They do have a paper trail.
'While reminding the nation that the good parts of the economy are mainly the products of the Obama administration.'
Those who agree with this opinion, and those who disagree with it, are set in their beliefs and will not be dissuaded, and reflect the current allignments of most voters. Once again, the contest will be a massive effort to influence that small band of voters blithely wavering in the middle. Same old same old.
3
If Pete Buttigieg in the remaining 29% of the votes that still need to be publicly released, slides down to a firm 2nd or 3rd place, it would be highly suspicious and possibly merit an investigation. He has been benefiting by being the focus of the news cycle for the past 24 hours, in a largely positive light despite suspiciously under reported financial ties to the app developer Shadow and having an employee if his being married to one of the higher up in the parent company of Shadow, ACRONYM. Everyone knows the Iowa primary is largely symbolic and the true prize is the media hype and momentum and not the delegate count... The fact that none of this, NONE of it, is discussed here is appalling and dereliction of journalism.
4
To consolidate his position as the progressive/liberal alternative to whoever emerges as the centrist candidate, Sanders has to have Warren leave the race. If Warren does not win or come close in New Hampshire, it is hard to see how she goes on much after Super Tuesday.
1
@Want2know, for the first time in quite a while, California is having its primary when it will actually count for something. It's exciting to be able to vote a choice among many candidates, instead of having the nomination handed to us by the states to the East so it really doesn't matter what we do.
The media is staging their coverage as if it is the way it was, it's the martingale theory of election forecasting and leads to all the tropes you see uttered by the "experts" they quote or have on their shows.
California and Texas both vote March 3rd. Any campaign that doesn't have much money should spend their time there. Three weeks after New Hampshire, and three days after South Carolina. Nobody would be foolish enough to close up shop before March 4th at the earliest, sorry to burst everybody's bubble about the "bellwether" "early" states.
IF this paper turns into (predictably) a campaign sheet for Michael Bloomberg, I'm done with you all. And I won't be alone.
7
I have found that people usually don’t respond well to threats.
3
Sorry, Gail, but the worst presidential candidate in the history of elections is the current occupant of the White House.
9
will clearly not because he won. you probably mean unqualified but he was a great candidate.
1
Let’s wait for 100% of the votes...
No need to read tea leaves. Just a matter of time.
K
2
The app worked as intended to sow chaos about the actual results of Bernie winning. Only 62% of votes in precincts favorable to Buttigieg have been reported, the remaining are favorable to Bernie have not been reported.
From another NYTimes article:
“Even before Monday, there were other concerns with the app itself, which was developed by a private firm called Shadow. Cybersecurity experts worried that it had not been vetted, tested at scale, or even shown to independent experts before being introduced in Iowa.”
Gerard Niemira, a veteran of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, is the head of Shadow
Via @TheGrayzoneNews
“Behind the app that delayed Iowa’s voting results is a dark money operation funded by anti-Sanders billionaires. Its top donor, Seth Klarman, is a Buttigieg backer who has dumped money into pro-settler Israel lobby groups.”
2
A little bit of life in Fantasyland for you this morning? You give Iowa Democratic Party leaders far more credit for wizardry than you do incompetence.
One of MANY issues: The Shadow App, like many, IS NOT AVAILABLE in the Google Android Play Store or the Apple App Store. Apple very closely vets apps available via its store for security reasons. Google does same, although to a lesser extent. The default settings on IPhones and Android phones do not allow downloads from 3rd party sites on the Web. This default has to be turned off in the phone settings or over-ridden prior to download, and there is a security warning at that point.
Caucus Chairs did NOT download the app and DID NOT go through any training in the app's use. A lot of poll worker and caucus worker folks are older, retired, and not tech saavy.
While tha app may have had bugs and glitches, a
the. central server may have been overloaded, and I don't know if any data was or was not encrypted, it appears the largest issue was the complete incompetence of the implementation of this system. The State Party broke every rule in the book in rolling out new procedures and implementing brand new software. No massive testing occurred. No training accountability was established. It was like a bunch of 13 year olds plan ed all of this, and not a sinister scheme to disenfranchise Bernie. That's plain paranoia.
The DNC needs to sanction the Iowa Democratic Party and prohibit caucuses like this.
4
The fact that Pete won just says how irrelevant Iowa is.
5
Did you catch Adam Schiff's try-out for comedy stand-up nights today? He can make up stuff out of thin air now, like giving Alaska to the wascally Wussians.
At least he's not pretending to be MY Congressman.
4
"Um, What Just Happened in Iowa? Buttigieg and Sanders were triumphant."
"Um," no, that's not "what just happened."
"What just happened" is:
1) Biden tanked in Iowa and has no money and few feet on the ground, instigating the mass exodus of right liberal NYT readers to flee his sinking ship for Bloomberg;
2) Buttigieg has bought himself time to do well in NH too - which, along w/IA, he has dumped all his billionaire donations in - but is super-low nationally (like, 3% w/African Americans and voters under 35) - meaning he's not long for the race; so that...
3) As Sanders surges, Bloomberg is on the cusp of being the imminent, establishment, anybody-but-Sanders replacement for Biden.
7
Joe Biden declares the Iowa caucuses Malarky.
5
You're joking right?
Buttigieg?
OK then. Run Buttigieg vs Trump.
It will be the easiest re-election campaign ever.
Go for it Democrats, you have been campaigning hard to get him reelected for the past 3 years, just give it one last push, run Buttigieg and re-election is all but assured.
5
Since you are a Trump supporter who wants Trump to be re-elected, I accept your double bluff.
1
"Imagine, Gail, if Trump turned the Oval Office into a meth lab. ... "
[Warning: The chemicals used in the production of methamphetamine are highly dangerous to human health and may even cause explosions and house fires.]
I have to say, if Dear Leader Trump wants to play around with cooking meth, I'm with the Republicans on this one: Who are we serfs/citizens to tell him no?
3
Great advertisement for how well the Dems will run the government.
3
As Democratic elites braced for a Bernie Sanders triumph in Iowa, a mysterious piece of technology spun out by a group those elites supported delayed the vote results, preventing Sanders from delivering a victory speech., and Pete Buttigeig exploited the moment to declare himself the winner.
The App may have been intended to deliver the win to Buttigeig… in as plausible way as possible.
For a Buttigeig win to be plausible, the Iowa Poll had to be cancelled. It was...
The Iowa Democratic Party. which contracted Shadow for their services, has emphasized the data collected by the app was "sound," but that the app was only reporting out partial data, due to a coding issue in the reporting system.
Because, The App didn’t work and made a real mess, and maybe the real results will be outed…
The App was developed by a company appropriately named Shadow Inc." "This firm was staffed by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaign veterans and created by a Democratic dark money nonprofit.
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/02/04/pro-israel-buttigieg-seth-klarman-iowas-voting-app/
Shadow Inc launched on 17th Jan 2019. Mayor Pete announces run for President on 23rd Jan. CEO of company that owns Shadow tweets out her support.
Shadow inc, The App and Buttigeig, reek of mendacity.
And this renews Bret Stephens faith in democracy...
5
one more nail in the coffin of the democratic party, and in fact, the democratic process in this country.
the amount of distrust and disaffection for the system, and specifically for the media and you 'pundits' is at an all time high.
your manipulations of the facts in the interest of your corporate parent companies are more and more apparent, and the last events of the Iowa caucus have become a flagrant red flag for all to see. (the software company 'responsible' was named 'shadow'? you can't even make up this stuff...)
it's becoming clear that the two options that will be left for us will be another four years of a tin-pot dictator or a billionaire oligarch. in other words, brand A or brand B.
3
Although I am on the "left" (a meaningless term these days given that the Republicans have become the Gang Of Putin) I agree with Brett about a few things. My faith in pollsters is kaput as well. Also, I have come full circle regarding Michael Bloomberg. If it's our billionaire vs. their (wanna be) billionaire, I'm all in. I like Mike. If he's the guy I will vote for him proudly.
I no longer care about niceties. I will vote for whoever has the best shot at beating Trump, be that Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Bernie or (my personal favorite) Elizabeth Warren. I would vote for Biden as well but have serious reservations as to whether he will make it to the general, despite his much lauded "electability," which has proven to mostly a mirage propped up by the DNC. I think Joe is a good man but have come to see him as ineffectual candidate. Iowa was a total and complete mess. No need to include a poorly tested app into an arcane process like caucusing, especially when you can't be bothered to train the people who are supposed to be using it. Ready. Fire. Aim. Can we do better next time Democrats? Please?
4
"Um, What Just Happened in Iowa?"
The stupidity of Democrats all evident and the guarantee of Trump Re-election.
What a bunch of fools these Democrats are - the Iowa Party Machinery, the miserable Tech guys from Silicon Valley and totally 'flop slate' of candidates.
Been following American Politics very closely over 2 decades and never have seen Dems at such a humiliation.
Either Dems draft Nancy Pelosi as the one-term compromise candidate or rally behind Billions of Bloomberg.
As things stand with Trump's approval rating at peak (49%), Economy all holding up and Dems in a self-created mess with the loser's mentality to run after the non-sense of Bernie; Donald Trump is at his strongest politically. (Learning from the Master - Boris Johnson....)
80
@Umesh Patil I agree we need to rally around Bloomberg (or Nancy but not likely). He is the only one who can stand up to Trump on his own perceived level.
We also need a new DNC chair, maybe a woman who can work more closely with state chairs, someone who is detail oriented. Someone who is not a politician but a work horse with smarts and tech experience.
15
@Umesh Patil - too much doom and gloom in your comment. Counting fiasco has happened before in Iowa, and it was for the Republicans. It's only a disaster if you were salivating for instant results. And it is not the fault of the Democratic Party or any of the candidates.
Please put things in perspective and stop cheering so much for Trump.
35
@Umesh Patil
No reason to panic, it is too early in the game. Sure, the Iowa caucus was a misstep in the process, but Iowa is a small state with few delegates. The big picture involves the big states, New York, California, and Florida.
The case against Trump is not closed. There is little doubt other legal problems for him will emerge as time goes forward.
15
What just happened?
massive incompetence. The DNC should be ashamed.
114
@Jack B Wasn't the DNC, it was the Iowa state democrats that flubbed this.
12
@Jack B
As Democratic elites braced for a Bernie Sanders triumph in Iowa, a mysterious piece of technology spun out by a group those elites supported delayed the vote results, preventing Sanders from delivering a victory speech., and Pete Buttigeig exploited the moment to declare himself the winner.
The App may have been intended to deliver the win to Buttigeig… in as plausible way as possible.
For a Buttigeig win to be plausible, the Iowa Poll had to be cancelled. It was...
The Iowa Democratic Party. which contracted Shadow for their services, has emphasized the data collected by the app was "sound," but that the app was only reporting out partial data, due to a coding issue in the reporting system.
Because, The App didn’t work and made a real mess, and maybe the real results will be outed…
The App was developed by a company appropriately named Shadow Inc." "This firm was staffed by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaign veterans and created by a Democratic dark money nonprofit.
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/02/04/pro-israel-buttigieg-seth-klarman-iowas-voting-app/
Shadow Inc launched on 17th Jan 2019. Mayor Pete announces run for President on 23rd Jan. CEO of company that owns Shadow tweets out her support.
Shadow inc, The App and Buttigeig, reek of mendacity.
And this renews Bret Stephens faith in democracy...
2
@Jack B
The DNC does not run the Iowa caucuses. The IDP does. What Iowan Democrats think is pretty irrelevant anyway considering that Iowa is pretty much in the bag for Trump.
6
Iowa with a little over 3 million, mostly white population (less than 1% of the entire nation), I absolutely don't care who wins or loses there. It is a random coincidence when Iowa primary winner becomes president. Dems, if you have learned anything form the last election, mostly focus on three states: Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
3
If American politics seems bizarre to those of us a long way away, at least it makes for great commentary.
If Buttigieg does prevail, I'm looking forward to the contrasts with the current presidential incumbent his dogs (if they learned to spell and became the least bit political) could emphasise on their twitter account:
"Did your guy serve in the military? . . . Mine did."
"Is your guy under 73? . . . Mine is."
"Is your guy a practising Christian who respects people who practise other religions and those who practise none as well?. . .Mine is."
"Does your guy have dogs? . . . Mine has. Two."
In the meantime, I look forward to further updates from Stephens and Collins.
9
"Um, What Just Happened in Iowa?"
Um, the Democrats lost.
7
The Grand old Polluters/GOP who think think they are Christian but are fake supporting will condemn a gay President and polarize the nation even more. I will vote for Mr Bloomburg he will save our planet from coal and make the billionaires pay taxes.
4
Bernie pulled in 49.6% in 2016 so he is now toast. On the other hand Buttigieg showed he has legs. Since his only viable opponent left in the field is Mike Bloomfield, the race suddenly has legs. What tack will Trump take? Rabid anti-LGBT or anti-Semitic? In the meantime, as Trump gazes at his navel in the mirror, the Dems have six months to regroup.
3
What Just Happened in Iowa?.
Um, Sanity prevailed, Go Pete.
3
The most ridiculous part of this is that all this attention has always been given to Iowa, a state that has 44 electoral votes out of 1991 needed for the nomination! What an outrage that all that time and money has been spent just to get bragging rights to the first contest of the election season. No one cares about Iowa except the media that pump it for 6 months simply to have something to talk about. In reality, Iowa matters NOT ONE IOTA - um, NOT ONE IOWA.
8
I’m sorry, but I want a geek. Warren would be my first choice, Mayer Pete my second. I would like to have brains in the White House again.Would not hurt if there was an ethical heart at the center of it.
11
Mayor Pete had a good night, but if the Dems want to win in November they need minorities to come out and vote. The unfortunate truth is that some of these voters will not vote for a gay man, including my educated Asian parents...
Hope the Dems get their act together or we'll have another four years of misery.
3
@PM What makes you say that. Older farmers got out and voted for a gay man. Ask the minorities if they would rather vote for a gay, military served,, Christian man or Trump and they will tell you Buttigieg every time. I know, I have ask and I don't make blanket statements rooted in prejudice and stereotype.
1
Not a single word on how archaic and undemocratic the actual process of a caucus is?
4
Apparently certain brackets cut words out!
One sentence should read: Too eager to talk in terms of, “as a (woman, black, latino)” rather than “as an American.”
1
Considering Democrats are giving Pete Buttigieg a win in Iowa .... I doubt Democrats will turnout in November, Trump will squeeze him like a python and eat him over lunch. Get your beer and popcorn ready during the debates and on election night you will NOT need to watch MMA fights.
Democrats sure know how to precision strike their own foot.
3
So far it looks like Buttigieg did well in rural areas which, by definition, in Iowa are white and old. Oh that Mayor Pete, he's such a nice boy! I don't see the same demographics playing out in his favor much beyond New Hampshire.
1
One of your better banter politico banter pieces so far. My question is who is the Whistleblower who told Bret about the Meth Lab in the White House?
5
Could the technical glitch be Russia testing the ground for this year's election to keep Putin's puppet in the Oval Office?
1
Can we just get this week over with.
2
Love the meth lab scenario. Thank you for the chuckle.
2
Skiing has more to do with terrain and snow conditions than with momentum which is therefore a result of the former.
As I see it, everyone fifth place and lower after new hampshire should drop out and support one of the remaining candidates.
4
The canard is that trump doesn't reflect the average exceptional American; the truth is that trump is exactly the average exceptional American, we have been in denial.
8
Sorry Gail, Rudy can only be the third worst presidential candidate in history. First place has to go to Hilary Rodham Clinton for losing to the second worst, aka, the star of The Apprentice.
11
Wow! I get to write one of the first comments. This must be because I am not listening to Trumpy's speech. I'm not boycotting; it's just that he nauseates me, plus he is utterly predictable. You could write the blow by blow without even watching.
No one can predict what's ahead leading up to November. Millions were blindsided last time. We are talking about human behavior and free choice. People just might not do what you expect! ( and there will probably be some major surprises)
I can't stop thinking about how the voters that united to elect the first Black President twice, can unite again to stop the nightmare. It's true that it's confusing right now to understand the Democratic line-up of candidates, but the confusion will rapidly wane as the primaries winnow the field.
I too like Warren and have from the start. She is a truly attractive candidate. She has not been clear though. I don't think her campaign has been on target in assessing who she needs to reach and how. Straight up, Bernie Sanders is the best candidate. If he was younger it would not even be a question. He's unfailingly consistent and genuine. There is no doubt that he would be a great leader. I do think he can beat Trump, but will he get the nomination? He needs to persuade a wider base than what he has now. If he does well in South Carolina watch out. Anyway, Trump won narrowly in 2016, and is now skating on thin ice. I was confident in the 3rd quarter of the Super Bowl and I'm confident now too.
5
Why are things that used to be relatively easy now so darn hard, Brett asks? This is a question I have been digressively asking both professionally and socially since the year 2000.
The most likely answer:
As technology advances, our tools become more complicated and we tend to spend more of our brain power focused on the tool instead of the problem and letting the technological tools make our decisions for us. Analytical thought is in decline. Meanwhile, the population is getting more and more stupid. Watching the Republican response to the state of the union address was just one more example.
7
@whipsnade, The smartphone is more of a curse than a blessing. I've been convinced of that for a long time now, and this Iowa debacle is just more proof of it. I don't own one, and I never will. Being well into middle age and not having grown up in the smartphone era, I ask myself, "if I never needed one of those things before, then why do I need one NOW?"
I also believe Henry David Thoreau's advice that the best way to live one's life is to "simplfy."
Unfortunately, we happen to live in an unfortunate era when most people tend to endlessly complicate.
Yet the New York Times is hiding the popular vote in Iowa, which Sanders won. This is NOT a democratic primary. It should be ignored and banned from the party's nomination process. The incompetence is icing on the cake.
6
Gee, guys, give the world a little more hope here. Your
president is a disgrace to your country; he's been
impeached; a small state not at all reflective of the entire
nation did nothing to prove the Democrats' hopes are
dashed because primary picks don't look likely to beat
The Evil One.
The Democratic Party needs to see to it, for the sake
of humankind, that they run a winner. There's
still time, especially for Bloomberg and Biden, to make some
strategic moves. Bernie should know enough to throw his
youth following to a candidate who will withstand the GOP meat grinder geared up and waiting for him.
8
@ TH Beyer
Bernie will never do it, his ego is out of control. There are so many elements wrong with his candidacy it’s hard to wrap one’s brain around it. Djt announced during interview Sunday, it’s not going to be about “socialism” but “communism” - Putin bathing in the irony
1
It’s simple math.....just addition really. But I guess it’s just another 4 years.....again simple math.
2
I love when you guys have these conversations and share them with all of us! Agree we’ll be stuck with Trump another four years. And my favorite Buttigieg surprised me by winning!
2
The dumb Iowa Caucus.
It isn’t as important as the media and politics is pretending it to be.
It was never a serious indicator of nominee.
We are really blowing up any possibility of removing our very own oligarch.
The Democratic Party I just joined isn’t doing strategy very well.
I will vote for their nominee.
Do you even think trump will debate the nominee.
The extravaganza will be a money maker for media and billionaire donors.
It will be glitzy and unreal.
Bread and Circus like the SOTU.
So if you are aware and intelligent and know your current events why not boycott news shows and all the future debates including any with trump. It will be a hard withdrawal but en mass boycotts of products and shows would send the message our elected BRATS! are ignoring.
Get Russia out of congress and our White House and courts.
2
Sorry, I'm sick and tired of this bizzare fixation on who "wins" Iowa and making it preordain the nominee. The truth is that that (a "win") and a token should only get you a ride on the subway.
As for "In the short term, it looks as if he’s (ie Trump) going to avoid any punishment for his astonishingly awful misdeeds." Well, he could drop dead tomorrow of natural causes.
6
We should be so lucky.
3
@Dennis
That’s been my best hope and prayer for four years. But despite his obesity/ diet/ stressors he’s continues robust: his outlandish mental illnesses keep him roaring and fighting
2
Looks like the DNC wants Pete to cool off Bernie. Sounds like major conflict of interest for Pete to give money to the app company. This whole thing in Iowa smells. We have become a banana republic.
7
Didn't Pat Robertson win the Iowa Caucus back in the day?
3
Gail, Bret: Why did those generals look so angry? The Iranian slaying? The Space Academy?
2
Gail: Bret, you made me smile. Was not planning on smiling for at least two days.
Awwww, Gail and Bret. . . you're a ray of sunshine . . keep it coming.
1
No one won in Iowa. The results thus far are muddled and tainted with technical glitches and hubris filled declarations before any quasi reliable counts can be verified.
Ding, dong, the democracy is dead....
3
Once again a column ignoring Bernie Sanders, even though he’s winning the popular vote. What will it take for columnists to take him seriously?
112
@Js27 the popular vote is only important to these Democrats when "their" person is winning it. Otherwise it is immaterial.
16
@Paul
Well...in any primary state the actual (1st)#s would mean Bernie won, a result in IA that matches the polls. The state delegate thing is so byzantine it reminds of the Electoral College (don't we all love that?).
Maybe Mayor B gets one more DELEGATE vote than Bernie. Game over. Email in the Convention.
What strikes me in all the CNN coverage, spotlighting STATE delegates, and the counties (in the national election no EC votes are awarded by county:) is it seems constructed to steal the stunning change from late Dec when many put Bernie 3rd. It seems about as scripted as Mayor B's victory speech and rally, replete with a high school like spirit squad doing cheers, except one filled by Mad Men triangulation with women, and AA folk, counter programming against B's poll weakness...
Someone needs to break through his wall of words to ask him directly: what is his plan for this, that and the other thing, really...
6
@Js27 It's an organized and concerted effort here and in almost every other major news outlet to either ignore, dismiss or outright denigrate his candidacy... if they think the "fake news" phenomenon that emerged from 2016 is a thing of the past, they're severely mistaken.... Now it's just blatantly back to "biased news" and they make almost no bones about it.
5
Anyone else seeing a brokered convention?
1
"Um, What Just Happened in Iowa?"
Iowa shot itself in the foot. On live tv.
The Iowa caucuses should never be the first opportunity for Democrats to select a presidential candidate again. Totally unrepresentative. Totally undemocratic (because you are disenfranchised if you cannot show up for a specific two hour interval). And now, totally incompetent.
5
Calm down. There are paper ballots, this will work out. Some tally's took days back when there was paper which we need to return to ASAP.
One thing I want to point out about the youth for Sanders and Elders for Pete: We Elders vote at much higher rates than younger voters. This makes us the largest voting block by far. I have backed Pete from day one because he has what it takes to get us out of our mess and put us back on track. We need young men in office now. He is not too young. Alexander the Great did OK at 19. A president has to be 35 and a citizen. That's it. What we need is an upper limit.
I think that POC will get behind him if they listen to his plans. Sure he can't give a speech like Obama, but he has the empathy and intellect to make this country a leader again. That said Dems are going to vote for whomever has a BIG D after their name. Donate. Participate.
6
Bloomberg delegates. That is what will make the difference. It is his strategy. And it is his way to make the electoral college go jump in a lake.
Bloomberg takes Florida out of play. And without Florida, Trump is toast.
2
The American Experiment is a failure.
4
Bloomberg just spent 300 million dollars so far to win the presidency.
Someone should stop and frisk him and put that money to fix the NYC subway before he fixes the rest of the country. Money in politics is ruining this country .
4
It was a delay of about 24 hours. Everyone calm down.
5
Since Trump gets a lot of mileage from insults we should all look to the candidate who can fend him off the best with his or her mighty wrist deflectors. Could Biden? No. Buttigieg would be too polite. Bloomberg is short-man fodder for Donald. Sanders would be apoplectic and lose his voice shouting at Trump on a debate stage. Warren would easily knock him down 2 or 3 pegs with every remark.
The dems very best approach to the rest of 2020 is going to have to face facts-the pollsters and speculators and book makers aren’t casting bones looking for the most prudent, practical or even brilliant ideas for America- they are furiously examining entrails for the person who can fight trump fire with fire. Who can stand up to the bully and kick him flat? That is who will be the nominee.
2
Um maybe next time use carrier pigeons? The pony express? You know, something more likely to deliver the results than an untested app with coding errors.
3
"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows..."
I think the name of the app that brought about this mess must be somehow related to the old radio program.
1
"...[Giuliani] the worst presidential candidate in the history of elections.".
No. The worst candidate in the history of elections delivered the State of The Union last night.
5
My vote goes to Elizabeth Warren too, Gail.
3
Sounds like a nice fairy tale to tell to Trump’s supporters. You’re dreaming if you think any of them will believe this.
“All the people, from farmers to families on food stamps, who are teetering on the brink of disaster because of Trump’s ideology-driven ... then chart a clear alternative ... reminding the nation that the good parts of the economy are mainly the products of the Obama administration.”
Gail: Were we really that pathetic? Why did the liberal media not put a positive spin on it?
Bret: Yes, we were and we could not contain it.
Gail: Trump must think we’re laughable.
Bret: Yes He must.
Gail: I despise Trump
Bret: Me too
And so the saga continues.
2
Seth Klarman says, 'What's Ap?'
Who wouldda guessed the Buttigieg point man behind the high tech boondoggle is smiling. Right now!
This inside-the-bubble chat doesn't get fact checked?
Stephens says: this "State of the Union [is] the first time in history a president delivered a speech to Congress while awaiting the verdict of an impeachment trial in which he will almost certainly be acquitted."
Hello? Clinton did the same thing in 1999 in his SOU address. Neither Clinton nor Trump mentioned impeachment in their respective addresses.
Clinton went on to win.
Stephens has supposedly-conservative cred?
Nah. Stephens is a Times tool.
1
Yeah, Florida, the "new candidate pinnacle". Iowa is 24 hours late with results. Florida was seven weeks late, and still didn't get it right.
5
Senator Klobuchar is political toast. And Warren is in big trouble. The Dems talk diversity but the proof is in the pudding and their pudding is one note vanilla.
The Democratic Party still hasn't found any firm ground to build on.
1
Bret brings lighthearted banter
Excuse me, America is losing
Despite the Dow Jones
Bret brings Republican talking points
Um, can we stop pretending this election is normal
Gail, where is your principled outrage?
1
It is getting interesting.
My guess is that Bloomberg is hoping that Bernie knocks off Biden and the Boot in New Hampshire and South Carolina and that Liz and Amy do not catch fire. The former Republican turned Independant turned Democrat from New York will then ride in on a white horse--or a pile of cash--to save the Party from the Independent democratic socialist from Vermont.
Bernie is hoping that enough mainstream Democrats will be repulsed by the sight of a rich man trying to buy the election that they will join his cause.
I have no idea how this is going to turn out but it's quite likely that the next Democratic nominee, and potentially the next president could very well be an elderly Jewish guy with strong ties to New York who earned political stripes as a mayor--a job which if you do it well--tends to transcend politics.
1
Health care rollout? Voting app? Geeze this stuff isn’t that hard...
1
Gail, sigh....
Trump voters = “the large number of Americans who are still struggling to make ends meet in a country where the rich get richer while paying precious little taxes. The vast number of citizens who have nightmares about medical bills. All the people, from farmers to families on food stamps, who are teetering on the brink of disaster because of Trump’s ideology-driven, intellectually impoverished management of government programs. “
Aren’t these the same people who consistently show up at his rallies? The ones in the middle-America diner pieces on CNN who say Trump’s a jerk but he’s doing good things?
Fox news watchers?
We’re doomed.
2
@Alicia : or maybe Gail -- and Bret -- in their Big Blue Coastal bubbles of affluence -- don't know what the heck they are talking about.
They wouldn't know what a working class person was if they tripped over one.
Mayor Pete is building momentum. He's not my #1 choice right now, but I just made a donation anyway because if it comes down to Buttigieg and Sanders, it's Buttigieg for this voter.
3
“Trump has emerged...no worse off, and possibly politically stronger...”
I remember when O.J. was acquitted, he tried going back to favorite restaurants, saying “it’s all over, I’m innocent,” and they wouldn’t let him in. He was acquitted, but nobody was foolish enough to believe he was innocent. He was now a pariah.
I suspect it may turn out that way for Trump. Republicans have sacrificed their dignity for him. Many of them must be privately seething.
5
Media and Democrats are obsessing daily about the polls which show which candidate is a percentage point ahead.I hope that at some point people give attention to a,crucial part of the 2020 election-that would be electing a Democratic Senate! The Senators have behaved so shamefully during the Impeachment that surely they will face stiff challenges and we need to aim a lot of our outrage at them.Our mantra has to be “ Ditch Mitch “ as well as “Dump Trump”! With this evil duo gone we can reclaim our Democracy!
7
Reading many of the comments by Bernie supporters, they appear to be the least...sane? So much cursing. Theories galore about how and why they lost or why they’re going to lose. I even read someone thinks Russia is back at it again.
the internet and recorded answers that take you thru a series of prompts are ruining civilization.
having said that, aside from biden last night's hter big loser was Bernie. The three moderate candidates are currently at 55% of the Iowa vote. Liz ran as a "...bridge Over Troubled Water..." candidate and is getting 18-20 %.
The Candidate of the Left got- 25%. I am looking at you, Bernie.
The non-Left candidates, to put it plainly, took 75% of the vote.
And that is the Big Story out of iowa.
4
The top two contenders should run together in November.
How about this... All primaries are held on the same day. On a Saturday in August. All ballots are on paper using pens to "blacken the oval" just like the old days.
Wait. That would be the hallmark of a democracy and the U.S. is emphatically no longer a democracy. Actually, it never has been given the existence of the Senate and lifetime Supreme Court appointments.
When I was in college the Right would proclaim, "America – Love It or Leave It!" Bye...
1
Conspiracy theories galore thanks to Russian trolls and their fellow travelers among Bernie supporters. Too many people think you have to cheat to beat Bernie. Some of us just don’t prefer him. It doesn’t make us less than you. So many people accuse everyone who doesn’t vote for Trump or Bernie of being some kind of bought corporate shill. It’s sickening. I don’t want to vote for either of Putin’s preferences from 2016. Bernie or Trump. Anyone else.
2
If you are supporter of a Democratic candidate and all you have to offer is an attack on another candidate, you are definitely part of the problem.
2
She is my favorite as well. She would make a terrific president.
I don’t understand, besides sexism, why she is not leading in front.
2
This charade was to allow the DNC to act like socialists. They knew Biden would get less than 15% of the vote so like all true socialists they used some of Bernies votes to help Biden.
The system is rigged against Sanders again.
There is a cover up going on.
2
My wife's cousin was at a caucus in Page County, Iowa. They had the data entered
into the app and were ready to go. They hit "send" and their pitiful internet upload speed was too slow for the app to work as planned.
2
The debacle in Iowa is the perfect representation of a formerly competent party that has turned itself over to the likes of Adam Schiff, Ilhan Omar, and AOC.
3
Warren and Bloomberg are the only ones who can face down Trump. Maybe the pair could work something sensible out on health care.
135
@jwdooley Warren absolutely cannot under any circumstances "face down" Trump, she's already been all-but annihilated by him
10
@jwdooley Maybe Bloomberg. But Warren has made some really poor decisions in reaction to attacks from Trump in the past. She can't take the heat.
9
@jwdooley
I have to say, this odd couple has some appeal. I think though it would have to be Bloomberg at the top of the ticket as his appeal is his executive competence and so you'd want him as chief executive. Warren, though, would be the soul of the administration pushing Bloomberg toward reform and progressivism.
Could this work? Honestly, the two are both smart, serious leaders who, for all their differences, seem like they could respect each other and even work together.
My one fear: the reason I think the two could respect each other is that they are from the same social milieu. And that's a problem: this is a ticket that reeks of Northeastern Ivy League and Wall Street white elitism.
5
The Democratic party wants to bypass states and have a single vote by all of the American people in the general election. So ask yourself why didn't they use a single vote by all of the people of Iowa to pick their candidate(s) there?
1
You two find what happened in Iowa "fascinating"? You think it's like a Twilight Zone episode? A candidate whose entire resume is getting ~10K votes in a college town is in the lead? You don't have to worry whether Trump will leave the White House if he loses. With this field and these results, 2020 will be a Trump landslide. I fear for our country.
4
What was Trump’s electoral resume before being elected, again? How many votes had he won? Oh yeah. Zero.
6
Iowa began its march to electoral irrelevance. That's what just happened.
16
"I have a sinking feeling that whatever happens in November, Trump will be declaring victory.... simply claiming “Vote fraud!” and refusing to leave the White House if he loses".
This is a great danger. And if the Republicans lose a ton of seats in Congress, which may well happen, they will all be backing Trump that there was voter fraud.
If this happens there will be sleepless nights for many of us until he is - hopefully - physically removed from office.
8
@Richard Phelps
You are right, like all else Trump has touched in his self-indulgent cruel life, it will be not only illegal with an expectation of no consequences, but a real-life nightmare as he calls for a Civil War, the real American Carnage.
If he physically refuses to leave the White House and calls for his second-amendment Bundy-types to form an armed ring around the building, he can just stay there as long as he wants while the hopefully new real President runs the Government from elsewhere.
Then if Trump gets bored stuck in the WH and calls for Marine One to take him somewhere, my vote would be a surprise trip to Leavenworth.
So, as I understand it, the Iowa caucus consists of small gatherings of elderly white people who do some kind of interpretive square dance in neighborhood school gyms and somehow this dance ends with a ranking of Presidential candidates.
What could be clearer and more straightforward? Yet some party insider actually expressed and acted on the sentiment, "Hey? Know what would make this Iowa thing better? A PHONE APP! There's nothing old white people enjoy more than figuring out phone apps!
That's why, as Will Rogers said, I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.
14
Pete talking on MSNBC had the best response - check it out. So on top of his apparent win in Iowa, he had good coverage around Nancy's ripping up the Oprah like State of the Union and called it what it was - a show. The kid's got some good words, always on the spot shining! A breath of air after all the horrors of the last 24 hours. Yeah Pete.
11
How many of Pete’s delegates were awarded via coin toss? How many of Bernie’s?
Will we ever know? (Probably not)
3
Follow the money. Silicon Valley Wall Street types are investing in Pete Buttigieg, an unrepentant taker of large corporate donors.
The youth, the future is theirs. Please listen to them. You and I won’t outlast our youth. They need to take charge. Trump has shown it doesn’t matter if you are a “party” member. Till yesterday trump and his family were donating to democratic party, he even donated to Hillary’s senate run and remember bill Hilary Clinton attended his wedding to Melania. We live in a topsyturvy world. Bernie might not be an established democrat per se, but he can mold the future inclusively. If trump, an outsider has been good for the Republican party (look at them kissing his ring), why cannot Bernie do much for democrats? Why the fear paranoia; where is your American spirit of adventure!
5
@petey tonei I don't understand why taking money from companies in Silicon Valley or Wall Street is a problem. They are donating to his campaign. Should he turn them away? Have you run a list of who has donated to Warren or Sanders? Have you seen how much Trump and Bloomberg are spending. Have you looked at how many small donations have also gone to each candidate?
Jut because you can raise money to out campaign someone doesn't make you bad. Somehow that is the argument against Buttigieg. He raised money from big corporations. Oooooh. He worked for a big firm. Oh no! HE also served in the military, is a Christian and a gay man and is under 70. You mean he has a wide range of viewpoints? Is this really a problem?
1
How can any responsible news agency even publish the results of an election when less than two thirds of the results are in?
One third of the state hasn't even submitted their results.
Tacky.
6
Democrats better wake up.
We are in a 911 type of emergency right now.
It is no time for games and picking people who have a good chance at losing. Bernie and Buttigieg both are extremely risky, if not a given that they will lose.
Pick Biden, or Bloomberg, and get it done. Pull in the moderates and slam dunk it.
We must get rid of the guy who ignores the constitution. And then all those who are enabling him.
Our country is at stake.
Stop messing around!
6
@Jane if Biden is nominated from day one Lindsay Graham has pledged to start Ukraine investigation! He will send the DOJ after father and son Bidens. Doesn’t matter one bit that Lindsay and Joe were friends with late John McCain. In politics even best friends become foes, overnight. No one is a true friend when it comes to politics. Watch out for back stabbers.
1
I too am hoping to vote for President Warren. But all the Democrats are worthy, and I'll vote for whoever ends up on the ticket. Trump's speech tonight was so rife with lies and evasions and what Stephen Colbert called "truthiness" that he probably made a great impression on his naïve base. The suggestion that he be "censured" instead of removed from office is ridiculous; it's obvious that censure would mean about as much to Trump as a mosquito bite that doesn't itch. I yearn for the day when America comes to its senses, wacky as that is sometimes--at least maybe we won't have lost traumatized children looking for their parents (applause for the ICE man!) or whimsical tweets that change military strategy, or a president who has closed-door meetings with Vladimir Putin. That is, unless we get another Republican.
4
Dems have allowed the primaries to work against them. Iowa is a ridiculous initial state for obvious reasons. A caucus exacerbates the problem and is antithetical to the Dems' desire to increase access to voting.
Imagine what the pundits would be saying had the election season begun with South Carolina?
If Iowa and New Hampshire must go first, let them do so with three additional states. THe Dems are defeating themselves.
6
No one seems to be talking about the effect the Trump & Co.'s false conspiracy theories on Biden corruption may have affected Biden's Iowa results.
In fact, it may largely explain how "Joe Biden, who was the surefire winner, had an astonishingly poor showing."
If so, Trump is the candidate who truly triumphed or, dare I say, stole the election?
7
@American Abroad
False conspiracy theories?
In what universe was Joe Biden’s ne’er-do-well son even remotely qualified to sit on the board of a foreign energy company for astronomical pay.
We all know — because it’s patently obvious — that Hunter got the ‘job’ because his father was VPOTUS, and that VP was in charge of the Obama Admin’s Ukraine policy.
You can lie to yourself but don’t expect the rest of us to buy in.
1
@EGD
Weren't you listening? The corrupt prosecutor that Vice President Joe Biden applied pressure to get fired, with bipartisan congressional and global support no less, was NOT going to investigate Barista.
Biden's actions made it MORE likely Barista would be investigated. Plus, multiple investigations showed absolutely zero wrongdoing by Joe Biden, or Hunter, for that matter.
The fact that Hunter got the job isn't good, but no different from the favors Trump's kid get every hour.
Moreover, Biden has promised not to allow any of this children to hold positions abroad or government positions which is more than I can say about Trump and his utter nepotism?
2
Michael Bloomberg might be no one's first choice and everyone's second choice. Ranked voting, anyone?
6
@Mike P More like last choice, which isn't much of a choice at all. Given the doomsday peril of another four years for Trump, certainly I'd hold my nose and vote for him, but he is deeply, deeply flawed.
1
@Mike P
who wants the president telling them they cannot have a large Pepsi with their burger?
3
Talk to me after Super Tuesday . . . this is just the media turning every political event into a breathless drama.
2
Dems want the government to run healthcare for 330M people when they can't even count votes for Iowa.
5
Glad Pete Buttigieg is going do better than predicted, was hoping Liz Warren would do better.
In summary, whoever is the nominee should get everyone's support.
Regarding the current occupant of the White House and the State of the Union address: Medicaid rules changed and it is not going to be long that he will "tackle" Medicare and Medicaid.
The stock market still looks good, but the economy is not doing great, despite all the chest pounding. We are still involved in the Middle East and Afghanistan, and kids are still in cages.
Nothing to smile about, really.
7
Were they triumphant? How do we know at this point? The results aren’t in.
2
I'm not comfortable with the military intelligence background of Mayor Pete. He'll be pro war. Pro CIA. How about something different?
2
@Erin Was Eisenhower pro war?
2
@Erin HE is the only candidate that knows anything about war (at least war post Cold War). This is a stereotype. Just because he was in the military he would be pro war??? What has he EVER said that would lead you to that thought?
1
What really happened in Iowa ? Biden bit the dust. Sorry NYTimes, you just dont get it. Many (most?) Americans are sick of mainstream politicians who are remarkably consistent in making the same old promises and then proceed to ignore those promises. That is what Biden represents. Many Americans want someone who doesnt represent politics as usual, either Trump or Bernie. It really doesnt matter which one (their policies may be very , very different , but either one will break the political rut we have been in for decades). Trump understands that when he said that Bernie would have beat him in 2016 if the DNC has not stolen the nomination from Bernie. (Remember your article about Wassermans resignation? Of course you remember ALL those articles about "Russian interference"!)
4
Primaries are the worst way to choose a candidate. Delivering speeches in barns, eating donuts and shaking hands do not prove the leadership qualities needed to govern. And Democrats are incapable of avoiding a food fight. Herding cats is simple by comparison.
Defeating a well funded aggressive opposition demands strategy and discipline, not county fairs and hot dish. Bring back the smoke filled rooms.
144
@Mel If I learnt anything from the chaos in Iowa, it's that caucuses can function a lot like the old fashioned smoke-filled rooms by relying on neighbors and friends to cajole and convince, building consensus and commitment mechanisms for later campaign work. The big benefit is that they are occupied by the party faithful rather than the party bosses, who could rely on promises of appointments rather than friendship.
The only thing is to make them a little less transparent! It only confuses and muddles. I don't mind vote tallies across the rounds, but they need context. As it is right now, people just compare them to primaries and fail to understand that the selection process is all different.
6
The male only smoke filled rooms ?
6
You'd only get Hillary again! And the people rejected her in the states that mattered, and where she believed she didn't have to go. So, lets see all of them, talking to the people in small settings where they can be asked tough questions and see what happens. Liz told a father who saved and paid for his daughter to go to college, he won't be paid back when she gets in and forgives the debt of current students. That was an important moment and we need to see more, not less of these revealing interactions.
6
The Party of Incompetence on display. I’d vote against Dems if there was any credible choice.
Let’s hope Bloomberg gets some momentum. He’s our only hope as a voice of reason and track record of competence.
140
I was not in support of him but perhaps you’re right.
He could create the technology to make sure our elections are fair.
At this point I don’t know if anyone without billions can beat him. We are up against international meddling and the entire GOP and all of their sponsors.
6
@Open Your Mind —Bloomberg is selling himself through commercials, like a product. He needs to interact with the other candidates, he’s not a guy that gets in the trenches. As Mayor he presented himself as above it all. It’s not his time, a Wall Street billionaire, former Republican, Independent, now Democrat. Now calls for higher taxes on the wealthy, not a issue he would support while making his money on Wall Street.
3
Unfortunately, we have a choice between the Evil Party, and the Incompetent Party.
6
Did anyone else notice the President touting the new President of Venezuela in the audience and telling Maduro - the loser of the Venezuelan election to give up his office? Kind of ironic considering no one thinks Trump will leave if he loses. I just don't think that will happen - movers and Secret Service won't let it. But maybe he can go to Venezuela.
1
Having a flash of maybe a Pete/Kamala Harris ticket. They are both super smart and she's not afraid of anyone. And they aren't too old for the job.
3
Even, on occasion, Trump can read. Brett, just because Trump read reasonably well last night, it doesn't make him presidential.
4
This early on it could be any of the boogie woogie bugle B boys for company D.
What just happened? Well, the first voters in the country spoke in favor of the articulate, brilliant, measured, calm, young, gentle, self-effacing, energetic, self-disciplined, fresh, non-Washington, Eagle Scout redux and Afghanistan veteran, that's what happened.
A perfect one, to the Pelosi one-two of signaling to Trump's craven lickspittles in the Senate that their passing the Enabling Act has not gone unnoticed.
5
Go, Mike!
This opens the door. The others are too lightweight, too old, too left-wing, too pie-in-the sky We need someone like Bloomberg who's got the New York toughness (and, I would guess, the inside dirt) on Trump, and the stamina to stay the distance.
This year, forget about remaking America in your dreams; just beat Trump.
3
So... the column starts out being about Iowa but ends as a push piece about Bloomberg.
And in between we have soothing ironies about the universality of human foibles.
No whiff of the threat to democracy; just the usual nornalizing of the System by corporate media.
4
What happened? Democrats were in charge of something. They and their progressive IT team failed miserably. But sure - let them control your healthcare.
3
The Democrats fell victim to technology. Too much learning curve, and too much user-friendly. Next time, use a pad and paper. Even Trump and Putin won't be able to mess with that.
156
@JR The app breaking wasn't a fluke, it was a feature.
We should be doing all our elections on paper with as little tech as possible. Drastically reduces the chance of overseas interference. I don't know what republicans would do without cheating.
28
@JR
Dems fell victim to both technology and ideology--the need to award almost every participant something, multiple votes and rules that apparently gave the candidate who got the most votes less state delegates than the one who came in second. This should have been a primary election where people could come, cast their ballot and leave.
3
@JR
Vote. By. Mail.
It works.
5
Dems are underestimating what it would take to defeat the reality star. Whoever they nominate has to have the charisma to appeal to the gullible, most of whom support Trump. We don't need policy wonks, we don't need scholarly arguments, we don't need outrage. We just need someone who can get through to the misled. No easy task. Sanders can do this except he comes across as an angry socialist preacher. Warren is a through-and-through policy wonk. Biden has potential but his time might have passed by. Buttigieg has potential too but he needs to be less scholarly, more blue-collar, less privileged, more diverse. Bloomberg is not a reality star, he is more of a staid producer of such a show. It is going to be tough for the Dems and they can blame our education system for creating so many gullible voters who are being led by the Pied Piper.
226
Why do you dismiss Warren as a policy wonk?
Sanders will be crushed with the socialist communist label- and he has facts/ events to use to back that claim up that Bernie is too pure to even answer to.
I see that battle going badly. I see many images and memes of Bernie in Cuba - USSR- and Nicaragua. He has made it so easy- with his history- for trump and co. to spin if he is nominated. Trump has already started with the socialist label. And for Bernie it’s true. He has been praising socialist and communist leaders for years : this will crush him and us.
Don’t discount Warren’s genius. I know people are bc of the age old male preference for leaders / seems people like men shouting at them.
I am tired of it.
25
@Lule
Every republican who watches Fox news thinks every democrat is a socialist. And Bernie isn't a socialist.
Republicans and fox will scream socialist at the top of their lungs no matter who gets the presidency.
23
@JJ BUttigieg need to be more diverse? Really? So you are saying that a gay, white collar, small town America, veteran, Christian is not diverse enough? He has more diversity than the rest of your candidates combined. HE also is under the retirement age, hasn't been in the system for year and seems to be able to appeal to more than just the Democratic base.
This is the problem. Democrats are looking for someone to appeal to the base. The base is going to vote for the nominee - whoever it is. Because the alternative is Trump. What you need is someone who can appeal to the swing - the folks that went for Obama AND Trump. And look at that map of Iowa - Buttigieg got that vote.
25
If Bloomberg is good enough for Henry Louis Gates Jr he is good enough for me. I want someone to beat Trump before he becomes president for life.
9
What went wrong in Iowa mirrors whats wrong with our political process.
We pay homage to our Founding Fathers as if they had all the answers. Their concept of a new form of government was brilliant, but no amount of brilliance could have imagined a country of 330 million interconnected Americans as well as a planet of 10 billion inhabitants.
Our election processes, our two party system and our inherent prejudices have limited Americas greatness.
Its time for some serious changes to evolve to save our nation or we will descend into an autocracy and a second tier player pn the world stage
2
I do not know a single Republican who actually likes Trump, but I know a number who have voted for him. I could not, but I can’t stand most of the Democrats either. I believe in a melting pot, not in segmentation by race and gender. I believe that grit and independence are hugely important. I believe in tolerance for people with other points of view. I see too many Democrats too eager to call people racist and sexist. Too eager to talk in terms of “as a ” rather than “as an American.” Too eager to blame others for their problems and issues.
Capitalism, while not showing its best side right now, is a great thing. There is a reason so many countries have turned to it. There is a beauty in letting the market, made up of people, decide rather than the government of a few. Does capitalism some control? Yes. Are we moving into significant automation? Yes. So some things need to change, but we want to reward the innovators of our country, we want to be a country the best and brightest people want to come to.
While Europe might be a great place to live, they are not the innovators we are. I suspect in some cases this is something we pay up for in things like prescription drugs & med devices, where others do not pay their real share. We need a really smart, less-partisan president to lead our country into a better place that can unite our various interests.
Please give me someone I can vote for.
8
@Karen
It's not whether you can "stand most of the Democrats".
You are not electing a perfect someone to join your family and move into your house.
But you will live with the winner's policies and decisions.
I have yet to hear any Democrat "blame others" at all. Consider the extent to which Trump does each day.
You will have a choice between continuing the Trump disaster, or voting for something better.
This isn't rocket science.
1
Ethanol gasoline. It does did not have a salutary environmental impact and is harmful to car engines. Yet it seems to be unassailable. The reason? Iowa corn. The Iowa caucases loom menacingly over any politician with future presidential aspirations willing to mention these facts. Perhaps the current ballot debacle will be the impetus to create a more fair and representative nominating process.
8
Iowa is what happens when family members, insiders, and hangers on suddenly become contractors in a field better left to people who know what they're doing, to take advantage of funding they lobbied to bring into existance In this case, newly minted election app developers. This is not unlike Neil Bush becoming a reading expert after the passage of Reading FIrst- in other words, traditional government dysfunction. An established developer could have developed, tested, and rolled out the app, taking into consideration the intended users. It's not technology that's the problem. It's, as always and ever, greed.
5
Bloomberg is betting on this: by Super Tuesday, there is severe dissatisfaction with the prevailing candidates, and he can swoop in and exploit that dissatisfaction.
He is probably right. Basically, if Buttigieg takes a commanding lead, Bloomberg probably has no play.
But if Sanders does, definitely, because moderates (and swing voters) won't vote for him. If no one is clearly ahead, Bloomberg's strategy also works.
9
The caucus process is neither democratic, fair nor, it seems, efficient. The horse and buggy had charm and was quaint, but it's no way to get anywhere in a timely fashion--same with the caucus. Replacement with a primary is long overdue.
3
Iowa doesn't feel very Twilight Zone to me. Waiting for election results is fairly typical in any state with paper ballots. The results are about what you'd expect too.
Sanders out performed Warren but split the vote with a moderate candidate. Buttigieg outperformed Biden because he made a massive campaign effort in Iowa. We're about where we'd expect to be.
Sanders will do well in New Hampshire. Biden will make a show in South Carolina. Nevada is an open question. Then we hit Super Tuesday and whatever happens, happens.
Klobuchar might drop out by then. Warren probably should if she hasn't generated some new momentum. That leaves a three-way split among moderates with Bloomberg as the spoiler. Sanders either takes the lead or splits the progressive vote with Warren. Away we go.
The wildcard of course is the DNC. Realizing Sanders is on a slow walk to the nomination, they're going to start attacking him. 2016 redux. Democrats prefer defeat to tolerating something they disagree with. The question is whether they choose to consolidate around Biden or Buttigieg or even Bloomberg. We'll have to wait and see.
5
There is a fair chance that Trump will loose in November because of chaos fatigue--or we have all truely lost our minds. Would agree with Gail that we should prepare for his refusal to leave office. No doubt, he'll claim a rigged election. He will stay in office until the Supreme Count swears in a new President. The military will support whoever the Supreme Court decides is President.
3
Haven’t been a Biden supporter but no one seems to have broached the question, “did Trump’s attempted smear of Biden work?”.
The Republicans successfully smeared Hillary with drawn out investigations of emails and Benghazi so this seems to be the new strategy.
Bernie will be a Leninist and suddenly guys who Pete has had relationships with will start coming out of the woodwork.
And the Democrats will continue bringing knives to gun fights.
7
Trump and his GOP had nothing to do with Biden’s showing in Iowa. I like the guy, but Biden is a terrible campaigner. This isn’t his first rodeo. Glad Pete did so well.
2
Every few years Presidential candidates spend over a year in Iowa for 44 out of 2000 votes. What self respecting business would spend time and money like that with a small return? I suggest the first vote should be the original 13 states. That includes both large and small populations and also includes north and south. It would also divide candidates time among a group of states that are racially and ethnically diverse. There is zero reason for Iowa to remain in its' current position.
16
Bret's take on Trump's likely future Oval Office meth lab, doesn't quite ring true.
When the chemical stench permeates most of Washington and the West Wing blows up, Trump, having decamped to Mar-A-Largo or Bedminster, will strut in front of reporters in the driveway and insist that there was noting wrong with having a meth lab in the Oval because everyone is saying meth is so good for you. When the negative response to the events drags on for two or three days, Republicans will rise up, mocking all the naysayers, and rush to meth's defense, pushing legislation requiring, not just legalizing, the use of meth. The majority of Americans will insist through polling that requiring the use of meth is a horrible nightmare of an idea.
Realizing they may lose and that Trump might even be impeached again, Mitch McConnell will summon Leonard Leo and a cabal of Federalist Society judges from the courts to conduct a public seance to conjure up the ghost of Justice Scalia. Covered by Fox with the other cable channels following along, the ceremony will end with Scalia's ectoplasm writhing above the Supreme Court, his distant voice intoning the clear intention of the Framers to require the use of meth. He will end with one of his profound appeals to reason: "After all, requiring meth does no harm, unlike the truly harmful things government has forced on us, such as insurance and broccoli."
13
One of the things that "just happened" in Iowa is that Buttigieg, Biden, and Klobuchar received 54.8% of the caucus votes from the 120,000 so far tallied. The two progressive candidates got 43% in one of the oldest, whitest, and most rural groups of Democratic voters. Are there "lesson"? Sure. There is no great swell of support for Bernie, as his bros claim but progressive answers to problems continue to attract support even at this end of the Party spectrum. Iowa, given it's size and demographics, consumes far too much of the energy expended by the press and really should be ignored, insofar as "predicting the outcome" of the primary goes.
9
Bret: it isn’t a civilisational issue. Just look at how all other Western democracies manage their elections. None have the problems the US does.
7
I read this and thought, “Right on!” But then I remembered Boris Johnson. Still, at least they can force a vote of no confidence. They don’t have to rely on a corrupted impeachment process.
1
@Ben: and we can vote out any President after 4 years.
We need serious discussion about what a second term for Trump would look like. All the policies that were part of the positive trajectory that came out of Obama's 4 years have been completed by now, and Trump has taken credit for them. But now what? It will be pure Trump from now on.
Now imagine that! Bloomberg's ads should explore this.
14
I find myself rooting for an invasion of Martians, for that is probably the only thing that will unite us all.
Imagine being a kid born a hundred years from now, when the land and the sky are blistering enemies thanks to unchecked global warming, when the economy is all about supporting a tiny few Trumpian oligarchs and the majority fight for the few jobs robots haven't taken over.
What does one call a parent who ignores the needs of the kids?
Republicans.
Hugh
47
It is sad that an alien invasion or global pandemic are probably the only scenarios in which all of humanity would unite. That is an indictment of our particular time, however. I refuse to believe that we cannot evolve to match our dreams.
4
I don’t think an invasion from Mars would unite anybody, anymore than the invasions from Mexico have. But imagine if we had first contact, not with Mexicans - because I was joking about that - but with beings from our closest neighbors, Próxima Centuri. In all the old movies, there’s two places they go - to Washington (Gort, Klatuu) or NYC (MIB). Where would they go today? Who speaks for the planet? First, aliens would know everything and they’d be illuminated, figuratively and maybe literally. So they’d look for the leader of the free world. That means China and Russia are out. The leader of the free world was once the American President or the Mayor of Gotham.
My fear is that we'll have to use a facial recognition app to be sure that the person entering the oval office is actually the one elected.
10
Pete won in an area that was friendly to him..but he needs to be tested.
Bernie performed well but failed, by his own admission, to drive turnout.
Elizabeth underperformed and is polling third in NH...another third place there and I think she’s done.
Biden doesn’t need to win NH but certainly South Carolina and Nevada or his big money donors will bolt.
I like Amy but I don’t see it happening this time.
Keep an eye on Bloomberg as a dark horse.
Oh, and subscribe to my newsletter “Free Advice is worth what you pay for it “
9
A pretty fair assessment. But don’t ignore momentum. Political success and failure both seem to be exponential rather than linear.
3
True
I read multiple digital newspapers daily and the thing I have noticed is that the focus after Iowa is not on Buttigieg's win, but rather on Sanders " close second" , Biden's weak showing and
Warren's poor performance. The analysis is exhausting and misses the point that PETE BUTTIGIEG WON.
18
@Thomas I am not so sure because the election is weighted to favor rural voters. I hope Buttigieg has less ambiguous wins. A key problem is that Sanders voters failed to show second choice selections meaning their voters have not trend.
As pointed out, Trumps record as President is fairly good. Let’s remember he’s been a politician for a few months over three years. The issues and problems some of our citizens are experiencing, as Gail noted,didn’t happen recently. Those problems speak more to Biden and the House speaker, they have been around for decades.
4
@Joen Trump getting the job done comes at a cost. Children separated and caged; people of color thrown to the back of the bus; public humiliation by Trump of anyone who dare speak up; terrified republicans now kissing his ring; border wall keeps falling after diversion of pentagon funds; and on and on. If trump had his way poor homeless people would just die off and the country would only have survival of the fittest. Forget the Christian proverb that the meek inherit the earth.
2
I see only one huge takeaway from the Iowa caucuses, and it’s not the two day lag in reporting results, not the fall of Warren or the crumple of Biden, not the progressive turnout for Sanders.
In conservative, whitish, corn fed Iowa, a young married gay man won their primary. This new fangled dude did it the old fashioned way: strong positive message, great personal appeal, terrific statewide ground game, steady demeanor, and, always, the adult in the room bypassing the impulse to call voters liars, to throw hissy fits at opponents for things they supposedly said a year ago, to pretend that radical overhauls of health insurance and radical cuts in military spending will really happen.
The one story out of Iowa is the story of the gay mayor from that little town in the Midwest.
120
@Mullingitover Thank you! It’s a BIG deal. Whatever you want to say about his chances, Pete’s political talent, along with his personal story, are inspiring to many of us. Let’s not forget that a positive outlook and a values-driven campaign still excite voters.
12
@Mullingitover You are messing up some simple facts and not portraying Iowa fairly.
Iowa is not conservative. It is on the fence in nearly all elections and often goes blue. Iowa City and Des Moines are very progressive cities. Iowa allowed same sex marriage since 2009, which isn’t early, but at the time was a positive milestone. They also don’t have a primary they have a caucus.
However, you are spot on about it being corn fed :). Besides the factual errors, this is a nice narrative that isn’t getting enough spotlight.
8
@Ca
A candidate must be inspired by massive amounts of cash to even be taken seriously.
1
We need to have a thorough, transparent investigation of the Iowa vote fiasco by a publicly trusted (the public that still believes in law and order and actual facts) outside party -- perhaps the New York Times and/or the Washington Post (certainly NOT by the Justice Department!). Understanding what went wrong, how it went wrong, why it went wrong, will help dispel conspiracy theories and restore a little confidence going forward. But...
Before the November elections we need to have a stress test of our elections security. We can't do what Iowa did - waiting to test their app in the election itself. The elections must have the confidence of the American people. And sadly, Republicans are not reliable partners in securing the elections or promoting the confidence in their integrity.
McConnell sat on a House bill to fund election security until last September. Then he agreed to a Senate spending version of $250 million, but that was less than half the $600 million that the House bill sought to secure elections.
We need to follow that money. Which states are spending it? Which states are not doing much or anything to secure their election results? What is not funded by the Senate bill that would have been funded by the House? Which states are most vulnerable to hacking, vote tampering, vote miscounts, vote reporting problems, voters turned away?
If we go into November with no confidence in the election results, Trump and the Republican Party will exploit any problems.
18
@JABarry How do you conclude Republicans are not reliable at securing elections after the Democrats just proved they were inept at running their own caucus? Why do you assume a $250M “election security” bill is inherently good? It could have been a waste of money or even been earmarked to spend money on risky technology (like the app on Iowa, which until Monday was branded as a “secure” way to count the vote). I encourage you to explore the facts without a partisan lens.
@JABarry Huh? It's the Republicans fault? C'mon, the Democrats in Iowa decided on this dumb App idea. Don't blame the Republicans because you hate Trump.
Even the most partisan Democrat admits that they failed. Take a step back. It's okay to criticize your side when they mess up.
And boy did they mess up!!
1
“So I’d give both Biden and Warren at least one more chance before we write them off for the year.”
According to Bret, candidates that don’t do well in 2 very small states have to go before the rest of the country gets its chance?
You’ve just made the case for a single primary day across the 50 states.
31
@MB
I think after Trump, we should all consider going back to the conventions choosing the candidates. I like democracy, we need to vote, but these intraparty systems never made much sense, and is astonishingly random for a Republic (Straw polls, caucuses, Super Tuesday?).
We would consider the Congress choosing the President (and yes, I know it was Republican 4 years ago, they would have been more responsible than Trump at least). Just add an amendment that the States' electors are the same as their House members and Senators. At least, then, we'd have some coherent policies implemented and some accountability to Congress - Trump has almost completely broken this with foreign money and contempt of Congress.
Ultimately, the founders believed in Congress, believed in legislatures and that's who wrote and ratified the Constitution. If we make changes, it should be to return to that, and swing away from our dictator tendencies, before it's too late.
Given the Iowa disaster, can we stop with the caucuses and simply go to a system where you place a traditional vote for a candidate. While elections are left to the states to decide, the DNC can drive that process. Can the DNC simply make primary voting online and by App so that working moms and the poverty-stricken that work all day can vote in a primary. Even those in poverty can generally get to a library with free internet access and place a vote. Concerns of electronic hacking can be limited. It is not like the Iowa caucuses, which were not hacked, worked.
10
@Anthony Wait. The App based reporting was the problem, and now you want to double-down and use it completely?
If anything, Iowa has showed that Mobile/Online voting cannot beat the simplicity and ease of the old fashioned method.
5
@profwilliams The App-based reporting was not the problem. The people using the reporting was the problem. The App itself might have been bad, but do we really think that having caucuses to keep the majority of voters out of democracy is a good idea. I'm fine with paper to a certain extent, but paper means you have to be somewhere to vote. The other alternative is to also use mail-in ballots on paper, which I can support.
1
@profwilliams The App-based reporting was not the problem. The people using the reporting was the problem. The App itself might have been bad, but do we really think that having caucuses to keep the majority of voters out of democracy is a good idea. I'm fine with paper to a certain extent, but paper means you have to be somewhere to vote. The other alternative is to also use mail-in ballots on paper, which I can support.
Furthermore, the App was not used by individuals but the Caucus organizers. It was simply a calculation tool that was not properly vetted.
It seems Iowa tries to enact a weakened form of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) by allowing the voters of candidates with under 15% to vote for their second choice.
Such counting misinforms the tally much more than straight up RCV where everyone initially chooses their top candidates and ranks them in order of preference.
RCV would be the best, most accurate way to decide among the Sanders and Warrens as well as the Bidens, Buttigiegs, and Klobuchars.
RCV would give us the candidate most would vote for against the impeached one.
14
I love the column and also found myself unexpectedly smiling very early in the morning. However, the news on the other side of the "front" page, that Gail and Brett did not know during their discussion, brought me back to my senses as far as the Democrats ineptitude. Former Clinton staffers created and profited from the app used in Iowa - it is as if Fox news provided a headline for the DNC to work from. Another demonstration of meritocracy at work in the US - I am guessing the "creators" of the app were all in the same frat at Yale before they joined the Clinton team.
9
@Chris Clark poor Hillary, her presidential campaign failed multiple times, but her senate runs were solid. That the tech part was a product of her campaign alumni should have been warning enough loud and clear, to stay off! What a spectacle. In the end slow and steady hand counting is the best way. God gave us two hands 10 fingers to count :).
1
@petey tonei : um, you do know she was HANDED a Senate seat, arranged even before she left the White House…in a state in which she and Bill HAD NEVER LIVED? (Because Arkansas wasn't good enough for them!)
Perhaps Iowa should switch and hold a primary the same day as NH's It could pass a state law along NH's lines. Theirs read “The presidential primary election shall be held on the second Tuesday in March or on a date selected by the secretary of state which is seven days or more immediately preceding the date on which any other state shall hold a similar election.”
I suppose New Hampshire could react by holding theirs seven days earlier than is their habit. But worth a try?
I agree with Ms. Collins that Warren is best suited to make educated policy arguments that illustrate the economy has little to do with Trump but there is still a huge gender bias in the American electorate. Buttigieg, as an intellectual, is also a candidate that can offer a coherent argument to counter Trump's ignorance, but there is LGBTQ bias in the electorate as well. Where do we go from there? Bloomberg is a great candidate but uneducated America does not know him.
8
@Anthony you would like to pretend Bernie does not exist right? Whether Bernie or Liz get nominated they will each support the other, both in policy and in spirit. Instead of bashing an invisible Bernie we will be better off conserving our energies for Trump the monster mob boss.
5
@petey tonei I am fine with Sanders because he is not as extreme as he seems. I am certainly not bashing him by leaving him off the list, but he is simply not part of the intellectual candidate crowd on the same level as Warren. He is not a policy researcher. He is a professional politician.
4
@Anthony "but uneducated America does not know him."
That'll bring them in, calling voters stupid. Is Hillary now writing comments now? Bloomberg endorsed at the 2004 Republican convention and endorse GW Bush. GW Bush gave us two new Supreme Court justices. Bloomberg is not a good candidate.
Whitebread Idaho mess:
Iowa - the Guy State.
Make it a public vote, and few seem to want a gurl for president.
Problems for the Democrats:
Mayor Pete has utterly no, zero, zilch, nada, nolo experience in international affairs. He would walk into office with probably more honest goals, but no idea how to achieve them.
Bernie Sanders is not electable because he’s a 70s socialist not open to compromise.
And the GOP is making the most absurd argument against the Sanders-Warren-Obama single payer Medicare for All proposal I’ve ever heard “it will eliminate jobs for all those poor insurance company workers.
Outside of the Non-Profit “blues”, if there are any left, insurance companies are in multiple businesses, health, home, auto, industrial, property, fire ...
Some wealthy people might see stock values fall, and the overpaid folks at the top of their division may lose or change jobs - but the vast number of people who file forms, process claims and watch for fraud will still be needed.
Unfortunately people are buying the idea “we have to pay more for insurance so the little people keep their jobs - unbelievable ignorance.
The problem for Bernie, in addition to age, which he shares with Joe Biden is age. Time to pass the torch. We boomers all gave up and went home when the Viet Nam War/draft ended.
Younger folks have climate change to worry about, among other things. Again, I’ll bet the “kids” 18-21s stayed home.
The press should have too.
2
@Eatoin Shrdlu
Many of the Boomers who were on the front lines of the Civil Rights battle were imprisoned for many years or killed. When faced with the draft, prison, death or go home and become your parents, the later was their choice. One also needs to understand what was happening in the 1970s. People, read "dads" were starting to lose their jobs as the factories started to close. Even the most ardent revolutionary can change their minds when they see their little kids hungry and homeless.
Bernie and Joe are a snowflake on the tip of the political problems iceberg. All of Congress must go, the 2 party system must be demolished, and strict term limits enacted.
3
@Sierra Morgan Agree, it’s one of the reasons Trump was elected. Time will tell, but it seems the voters are looking outside the typical party establishment figures , I’m not sure the mainstream media has yet understood that dynamic.
“Big make or break first primaries” is a myth that Bloomberg aim to blast out of existence with his campaign. He is the ‘Disruptive Innovator’ entering the room. He did that with his business. Think about it, Trump and Obama were also long shots twelve months before their elections. The sure fire things like Bush Sr father reelection 1992, Gore 2000, Hillary 2008, Hillary 2016 did not come to pass. Why should a caucus in Iowa be so certain ?
6
Let it play out and support the winner with everything you have. There are strong cases to be made for all of the top tier candidates. Focus on the positives and don't get hung up on the negatives. Fox Propaganda will be working 24/7 to smear the winner, so Dems must be unyielding in their support if Trump is to be defeated.
There is a long, long way to go, but congrats to Mayor Pete on the most impressive performance in Iowa
30
Remember that a caucus involving substantial time on a
Winter night where there is buttonholing and attempts to influence is by no means comparable to an Election Day vote. These results should be taken with a huge grain of salt as one minor data point from an unrepresentative state with a small population.
8
@HPower
I can find numerous Times articles and hours upon hours of tv commentary over the past twenty years praising the Iowa Caucuses has a thoughtful discussion among friends and a great example of democracy at work. That’s what I read in the Times and heard until about 9:30 pm Monday night. Check the record. Everyone knows I’m correct. People may have argued about the timing on the calendar but not the caucus. My personal view was that without a secret ballot, it’s not democracy,
3
@HPower It is obvious that the racial makeup of Iowa is a bit more homogeneous than the US average. However, it is closer to the US average than most states. Besides that, what else makes it not representative? The size has nothing to do with being “representative”.
Iowa consistently is a swing state and generally has a blend of opinions that capture the range of national conversation (i.e. Iowa City is far left and western Iowa is more mainstream).
@HPower Congratulatons to Mayor Pete for leading after only 62 percent of the vote has been revealed. They won't release the rest until the first person in the US dies of coronavirus because they don't want to give Bernie a bump. This is our excuse for an opposition party.
I don't have time to read this right now. But, I've been thinking about this. The Iowa Caucus has always been a solid indicator. With this in mind, why was it necessary to introduce technology into this process? My point is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Technology is NOT dependable. PEOPLE ARE DEPENDABLE! That's been demonstrated in this Iowa Caucus for years.
13
@Fran
People are dependable? Really?
1
If you liked the fiasco regarding the results of the Iowa caucuses, you'll love government run medical care!
My takeaway from Iowa is that this country should be able to do better than giving us a choice between a Marxist and a man who doesn't know Kansas City is in Missouri.
I don't call Bernie a Marxist as an insult. He is a Marxist. Marxists divide the world into the oppressed and the oppressors. In Bernie's mind the Middle Class will always be oppressed by villains. These villains are Big Pharma (which has produced the world's best cancer survival numbers), insurance companies (which have to pay for those very expensive cancer treatments), greedy multinational corporations (who employ millions of Americans), and banks (which commit the sin of lending money to those who ask and expect to be paid back).
Oh...and the Middle Class is doing very well.
If Biden finished fourth in Iowa how can he make the argument that he's the most electable?
Liz' philosophy is "free stuff and no way to pay for it". Her proposals to fund her elaborate schemes are so devoid of reality the WSJ called them a "fairy tale". Eliminating college debt is regressive and rewards sloth. You are asking those without a college education and those that paid for their education to pay for those who will not.
2016 proved restricting choices doesn't get you elected.
If Bloomberg doesn't get the Democratic nomination he should run as an independent.
I would like someone reasonable to vote for.
13
The middle class is not at all doing well.
1
@jkemp
Ah, part of Kansas City is in Kansas. I can forgive a non-football fan for not knowing Arrowhead Stadium is on the Missouri side.
Please consider Trump's State of the Union speech was his long awaited pivot to be presidential. Sadly, it is just not the version of presidential that is good for democracy.
5
Trump has not and will not pivot to being presidential in the traditional sense. Apparently the GOP strategy is to redefine being presidential as acting like DJT.
6
"Who among the Democratic contenders is best positioned to rebut it?" No one, if Trump remains under the control of competent handlers. But, there is almost no chance of that happening so I'm confident that anyone of the contenders that the DEMs nominate to run against Trump will win.
Trump will beat Trump, the Democrats just need to stay out of the way.
12
What can we do if Trump won't leave office in January, 2021?
Make a lot of noise, file lawsuits, implore Congress, organize innumerable protest rallies in the street and elsewhere, a deluge of radio, TV, billboard ads, heartfelt prayer.
Have such methods worked before? More specifically, would they work against the near-invincible Donald Trump, the man who cannot be caught, stopped, or even slowed down?
It will be a titanic struggle, maybe even with civil warlike skirmishes, but my money's on Trump. Sometimes it almost seems like God does want him as king; I need to discuss that with Him: What's the plan here? What am I missing? Are we being punished? Questions like that.
1
@Jim Muncy If Trump loses the election he will leave office. What makes you think he would refuse to leave office. Simply put a new President will be sworn in.
The USA is in no danger of being Venezuala no matter how much the Democrats have tried to make it so.
3
@Mr Chang Shih An
What makes me think it?
1.In 2016, Trump was asked if he would accept the election results. His response? "Yeah, if I win." He didn't seem to be kidding.
2. Upon learning that Xi of China was made leader for life, Trump said, "We need to look into that in America."
3. If he leaves office, he will be open to lawsuits and charges of all sorts. He would have to abscond to Russia to stay out of prison; therefore, he can't leave office safely.
4. Millions of Americans, plus a Senate majority, believe that Trump is heaven-sent.
5. If Bernie wins, Republicans won't let Trump leave office: fear of socialism. Republicans, by and large, have never liked government or democracy.
12
@Jim Muncy
Remember Obama was not supposed to leave the White House either. Trump will leave.
I must point out that Bloomberg is the only candidate who can even think of skipping the early states because he can spend more than God on ads in the other states. That, sadly, gives him a leg up. He really could buy the nomination, which, in my opinion, would be an abomination.
Pete couldn't have done that since he started with no money, no mailing list, and only four staff members. The only route he has to the nomination is to do well in the early states and build momentum the traditional way.
5
Why do I feel that Bloomberg, unelectable in these white Christian times, is actually just fighting a war for his party, spending money he doesn’t need on ads?
Why would Americans replace one wealthy New Yorker with another plutocrat - admittedly one who might be moderate and sane on social issues, but is still Mr Old Grand Old Party when it comes to understanding international business?
I am baffled that Gail is worried Trump may claim a stolen election if he loses. The democrats have never accepted his victory in 2016 and alleged a combination of Russian collusion and voter suppression led to a stolen election.
4
Chris,
Trump claimed the 2016 election was rigged and he would not accept the results if he lost. Russia interfered in the 2016 election while the Trump campaign asked for their help.
3
Perhaps paying attention to Trump’s own words regarding accepting a loss in 2016 would help you to understand Gail’s comment. Asking a Trump supporter to notice and not reflexively immediately excuse Trump’s comments or behavior seems to be too high a bar for the group.
2
@Chris The difference is, we have proven each and every allegation that the 2016 election wasn’t decided by the American electorate. Trump knows he’s an illegitimate president which is why he continues to lash out at truth and democracy. I expect he’s going to start ordering the executions of everyone who disagrees with him.
2
I understand that if a candidate fails to get at least 15 percent in any caucus, his or her supporters have to move to a different candidate.
This must make it very difficult for pollsters to make accurate predictions of the results. I don't think it is a fair test of polling accuracy.
5
Bloomberg is the man my liberal friends are all now gravitating toward. One data point from a proud moderate, but there it is.
20
@Mad Moderate
Bloomberg's ability to put Trump down verbally and psychologically drives this. I am a "mad progressive" Warren supporter but if she fades I can see the money and verbal attacks of Bloomberg as an option. Look any competent adult is better than Trump and his GOP country wreckers. Besides I know where Ukraine is on the map.
@Mad Moderate
He's ok in many ways other than his stance on guns which I abhor.
@Mad Moderate what you are saying is if you are white and a multi billionaire you are to be trusted more than an ordinary barely millionaire?
Nice
Buttigieg gets about 27% and Sanders about 26% of Democratic caucus voters in a state that is 90% white and non-reflective of either America or the Democratic Party. How is this "triumphant" about anything? Or a harbinger of future voting in other states that are more representative of what America actually looks like?
And after knowing it would be the first state to caucus or vote for the past four years (as it has been since 1970), all of a sudden Iowa cannot put a system in place to count votes? Are they high on their ethanol subsidies?
Can we please, please change this antiquated system so that Iowa does not get to have this undeserved, out-sized influence on the process?
45
@Jack Sonville - - Don't forget the asset that tiny states offer to the poorer candidates.
You can move there and become famous simply by talking to people and letting the locals feel like they know you.
By the time California comes up, you either have big media money that Iowa brought you, or you disappear.
1
"Bret: Beyond that, though, there’s a larger civilizational question: Why are things that used to be relatively easy now so darn hard? Counting ballots used to be a fairly straightforward affair."
Two things to do:
1. As James Carville wisely suggested, fire Tom Perez.
2. Return to hand-counted paper ballots (scanners can be hacked, so it's not just the voting machines) and minimize the chances of sophisticated attacks on the vote count. This won't be done, of course, because there's too much money being made by companies profiting from electronic voting; but it would be nice if the integrity of our elections could be prioritized above their profits.
50
What happened in Iowa won't go away. But it will fade if Pete B. doesn't over-perform in New Hampshire. His mojo is over-performance. He crashed through the first debate as the guy who actually provides insight. It was like listening to a good improv musician. But keeping that up isn't easy. The others fall back on canned lines, but Buttigieg has to keep generating new material - or new storylines, like winning Iowa. Otherwise he's just a small town mayor. A high wire act, and it took Iowans a while to come around to seeing he can pull it off.
A bit like Jimmy Carter, Pete offers fresh straight-talk after a stretch of corrupt leadership. Like Carter, the Dem's left wing doesn't like him. Carter was vilified during the deification of Reagan. In time historians will find much to admire in his presidency. But when Carter first ran, he quietly inspired people, the way Buttigieg does.
18
Pete is a Rhodes scholar. I don’t know that he will run out of the ability to generate new material. I know it is considered elitist nowadays to have respect for things like intellect and education. But they are resources. Very valuable resources.
163
(I didn’t mean to sound hostile towards the original poster like they were an anti-intellectual. They aren’t. That was preemptive rhetoric towards future posters.)
5
Ben,
It is highly disturbing to me that many commenters here erroneously equate democratic socialism with Venezuela, Democrats with Marxism, etc. when we have a fatuous president who is aptly moving us into an authoritarian mode of government. Our country has devolved into a nation that harbors an unhealthy disrespect for education, expertise and integrity.
I agree, our country would benefit from resources that have long been relegated as being passe and elitist.
38
How about Bernie (or Warren) for PResident and Buttigieg for vice president? The Dems should do a joint ticket with a Progressive as President and a moderate as Vicepres to reach all sectors.This is what the count for the two top nominees seems to indicate. That would be a winning ticket.
25
@tdb
How about winning an election instead of placating naive people with purity tests?
Neither Warren nor Sanders can win. The Republicans have held off from attacking Bernie since before the Democrats nominated Hillary. Why's that? Because they have so much ammo to fire at him if he's the nominee that they're praying he'll win the nomination, at which point all the ammo will come out of the locker and Bernie will be destroyed.
4
How about Buttigieg and Andrew Gillum, actually.
Because at this point, I want Joe, Liz and St. Bernie to all quit.
Now.
1
@tdb That will never happen. The left wing of the party, particularly the Bernie bros who are exceedingly angry and toxic, simply loathe Pete.
1
I want to point out that the moderates have split the vote in Iowa’s Dem caucus thus far. If you tally Warren+Sanders va Biden+Buttigieg+Klobuchar, I think it’s pretty even, maybe even tilted to the moderates. So, I do not think this makes Bernie the front runner. I think so far all Iowa has done is make it obvious there are too many candidates still.
21
@Liz
Yes, the "too many candidates" bit has been a problem for both the Dems and the Republicans. During the last election this propelled Trump to the top as he was a standout in terms of his uniqueness as opposed to several more "mainstream" candidates(Cruz, Rubio, etc). Same thing now with the Dems. So as they insist on going into the primaries with a huge list of candidates, the votes get spread between them. I agree with how you split it between the moderates and the radical left.
1
I was sorely disappointed (but not surprised) at Yang’s miserable showing. When Gail and Brett talk about not having a candidate who can speak to the issues of rural voters they are leaving out the one candidate who is. Maybe front-runners can start adopting and championing some of his ideas and they can be an odds on favorite to beat Trump too. It’s kind of a joke that Dems keep talking about the need to beat Trump but ignoring the one candidate with the strongest odds.
Read an interesting piece in the Atlantic that took another look at the “likability” test of a candidate and instead pitched the idea that voters respond to the idea of a candidate who would like them. Unfortunately, I don’t think Warren or Bernie feels warm or empathetic enough to connect this way. They come across as condescending with someone who did not share their values. They are also too establishment to expand their base.
Looking forward to the only other candidate outside of Yang with good odds to beat Trump, Bloomberg, and seeing how he performs. The DNC and media at least talk about HIM.
In the meantime, if you really want to beat Trump, set your policies aside and consider the candidates in manner closest to how most voters will - whether or not the candidate would approve of a person like them. It’s how Trump won the Electoral College and how he will win again.
Maybe Biden burning out, Pete’s weakness with minorities, and Sanders polarizing policies will shake up the race. We can only hope.
6
I am not a Yang supporter, although I genuinely like the guy and most of his message. I expect him to have a much better showing in the New Hampshire primaries. Iowa caucus was not his thing. Yang will not be president, but I hope some of his ideas resonate. And I definitely think he would be a great cabinet secretary.
21
Primaries only. And not just primaries, but closed-party primaries. And not just closed primaries, but paper-ballot-only closed primaries. And not just closed paper-ballot-only primaries but four primaries grouped by region, starting in April, south and east to west and north, every two weeks for eight weeks. Fixed.
26
@Paul Gallagher Actually sounds closer to democracy and almost too complicated to "fix". I agree there is nothing wrong with paper, and I believe voting machines have been hacked in the past. seems like this primary process wd be much harder to hack.
3
Out with the old year and in with the new, which is to say more of the same. As always, the news media’s need for sensations dovetails with Donald Trump’s need for tweet-grist.
As I understand it (always an unpromising opener, I know), the app that failed in Iowa was for reporting results, not for counting votes. Anyway, it’s unrelated to the public systems that will be used in the general election, apart from reminding us to worry about them. As for the line about Democrats wanting to run the country when they can’t run a caucus, that’s just the Republican cherry bomb of the week. The people who hear more in it than a bang are going to vote Republican anyway.
Those of us who want Donald Trump out are going to vote accordingly.
30
What happened was a man with great orator skills since Obama spoke to rural America. He seems to have won most of rural America. As a gay doctor, I can tell you that he is a crusader that the establishment will dismiss. The sad part of this is that the rest of the campaign goes fast. People of each state won't get to know Pete, it's turning into tarmac politics where each presidential hopeful will go from one airport to speak at a biggish crowd to the next tarmac of another crowd. I will miss the mess of Iowa. It's where understanding started.
12
@DeMossMD I agree, maybe Iowa has been such a good harbinger because the politicians come under non media mediated scrutiny. Instead of deriding Iowa and NH, we shd see them as unique lenses on the candidates, putting them repeatedly before voters, in the flesh, something not many do (Bloomberg) or are good at ( fill in ). These primaries shd be seen positively, same as it was better to wait to release correct results, instead of trying to correct them later. but as someone said, if they worked for you you wd fire them, but they dont they are volunteers ( for the most part)
I love Pete, and Amy has been really growing on me. That said, I thought Warren & Sanders both delivered great exit-Iowa speeches. I’ll always love Joe & I think Bloomberg has shown the ability to work very hard to fight gun violence and climate change.
It’s a mess, and Guilty trump has control of the gop - a brutal tragedy.
But there’s at least a glimmer of hope with the Progressive candidates.
45
The caucuses and primaries are jokes and should not be given so much credit. They provide opportunities for the most committed (fanatic, techie) folks to show support for their candidate. The Bernie Bro’s (and that cute name says a lot) seethe about lack of support from the DNC etc. last go round. Why should the DNC support someone who calls himself something other than a Democrat? The old days of smoke filled rooms were atrocious, but at least those guys (yes they were guys) had an idea of who could actually win.
13
@RetiredUSteacher And the potential candidates were thoroughly vetted by their own party before they hit the campaign trail.
5
1. Just curious, but why does it seem that some moderates regard Elizabeth Warren as the acceptable/good Progressive? Her selfie largesse?
2. I get the feeling that Mike Bloomberg is the second runner in a relay race. Who is going to pass the baton to him? Biden?
3. Why did Iowa only report part of the results today when waiting to report the whole enchilada tomorrow would have restored greater confidence in our political process? Did your conspiracy senses start tingling?
4. If after the Democratic Convention, the choice is Trump vs Sanders, are all Biden supporters really going to go all out to defeat Trump? And donate?
5. Oddly, does my Grandma enjoying ‘The Liberace Show’ on TV in the 1950s signify anything to do with Mayor Pete’s success with the senior set? Homophilia?
6. Why was it politically acceptable for the 4 Senators to be locked in the Trial for several days to remove Trump while their competitors could campaign without restraint? Surrogates?
7
@Joel H
Sanders seems more like a closet Stalinist than Warren does. People who won't benefit from his election don't want to see/hear him speak for four years. He's smart and highly educated, but he sounds like an angry old Scorsese character. Nobody wants to hang out with Sanders, unless he's paying the bill.
"[T]here’s a larger civilizational question: Why are things that used to be relatively easy now so darn hard? Counting ballots used to be a fairly straightforward affair. In Iowa, someone had the remarkable idea that an app could make things easier, and instead it did precisely the opposite."
There probably couldn't be a better comment showing naivety than this. I have on-the-ground experience working elections in a midwestern state in the 70s-80s, with the old-style manual lever voting machines. Around 1 pm or so the "breakdowns" would come in.
This was when the party (or candidate in a primary) with power had people at the polling place who could, declare the machine broken. Its back would be opened, and its counters checked. Then, if needed, the troops could be rallied, driving the elderly, etc., to the polling place.
I guess the final count was, technically, accurate. But politics has never been pretty. Democratic (the party) efforts to minimize the impact of corruption may, sad to say, be counterproductive.
2
Sanders was "given up politically for dead"? By whom?
Not the voters who kept him in the top 3 nationwide, in the polls.
Not the voters who polled him to win over Trump nationwide, and in swing states like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. (Where Sanders also did very well in 2016.)
Not the voters who have set records for individual donations, and for donations overall.
Pull your head out of . . . the sand, and you'll see that for many Americans, Sanders is very much politically alive, and roaring.
29
@F. T. Sanders did well in 2016 caucuses and open primaries, where Republicans and right-leaning independents could participate and promote him. But in closed primaries, the most reliable venues, Clinton smoked him.
10
That could explain why Hillary lost in the general election. Unfortunately for her, the general election is a little bit different than closed Dem primaries.
7
@Paul Gallagher My above info is from the current campaign.
In 2016, Sanders got 43% of the primary vote. Not bad for coming out of nowhere.
He raised more money than the Clinton machine.
Wasn't "politically dead" back then, either.
7
Sanders appeals to youth voters because he validates their victimhood. Buttigieg alienates many youth voters and some gay voters because he demonstrated that being young and/or gay is not an excuse for victimhood. That is why Mayor Pete appeals to many older voters, as an example of the personal qualities that have always accomplished great things. I am a Republican, but I will vote for any ticket Buttigieg is on. And I will confront his hecklers.
224
@Charles Becker
I can’t respect him because he’s taking corporate money. The establishment is desperate to not pay their fair share and they know Biden, Buttigieg, and Bloomberg are their best hopes.
I’m a young physician and everyday I see our medical system bankrupt my patients for excessive corporate profits. I’m tired of it. I’ll vote for anyone but Trump but I can’t help but think that Buttigieg’s McKinsey past reflects his willingness to participate in excessive corporate profits (for absurd consultant fees) that further impoverish the little guy.
I’d forgive him if his work at McKinsey forced him to grow and was a part of an increased understanding of how corporate profits are decimating our working class but he seems to have learned very little of value in a moral sense from that experience.
17
@SouthernMed,
If you recall, in 2008 Obama took "corporate money" while McCain's campaign relied on public funding. Any candidate who runs a publicly funded campaign gets my vote. Your distinction between corporate money and "other" (non-public) money is functionally meaningless. I do not share your concerns about Pete, but I certainly do have fundamental issues with both Warren and Sanders: they are pandering, effectively bribing discontented voters, and neither has shown the integrity of Pete, who chose to put on the uniform and serve. Oh, and who has not been caught lying with his face hanging out.
13
Sanders appeals to young voters because they don’t know what it’s like to be old.
15
Gail and Bret talked all around Pete again but didn't quite talk about him. Again. This isn't new in the media at large either. The pundits just don't see Pete as a real contender, which is strange because he keeps winning.
27
@Bob G.
Keeps winning? Just one win so far. Maybe they don't talk about him because there's not much to talk about. He's a clever debater who makes sly digs at his opponents and knows how to ace a job interview. At 38, he's extremely young, and his political experience extremely thin. I have a hard time seeing his conviction that he was the most qualified person to run for President at this time as anything but presumptuous. Tom Daschle, who was Senate majority leader encouraged Obama to run when he did. Who encouraged Pete? Which political elder told Mayor Pete that now was his time to enter the national scene at the top post? He bugs the heck out of me.
18
@DebbieR
Well, Obama himself named Pete a future leader of the Democratic party.
He has 8 years of on-the-ground, executive experience with local politics (so he is highly attuned to how policy actually affects the real world) and he is the only one running that has any kind of military experience.
Not to mention the fact that he has built a winning campaign from absolutely nothing is undeniable evidence that he has the managerial acumen to run large organizations effectively.
26
The last part says more about you than it does about Pete.
First of all, Pete Buttigieg, is kind, intelligent, a good communicator, has been in the military, and served as a Mayor. These are all the characteristics that all politicians should have actually have in this day, and age, if you are going to be commander in chief of this country, America, that is allies to many, overseer of billions of foreign aid, and still, after almost two decades, in the middle east, and Africa.
35
*MaryKay. You have a point. There’s an argument to be made that some sort of military service should be required to run for President. Heck, it should be a requirement for American citizens.
1
Rachel Maddow interviews 3rd place winner after Iowa caucus. She is condescending to Iowa & clearly dislikes Pete. The blathering heads on tv are more interested in maintaining their superiority than who wins (or can win) elections.
11
@Dale Hendricks FWIW Rachel Maddow’s impact on the election will be near negligible.
How ironic that she doesn’t like Mayor Pete...
10
@Kevin
It must be his gender, race or religion. Why would anyone with the ability to think question his record or lack of experience?
I'm trying not to get too carried away with what happened in Iowa as indicative only of the Democrats. One of the main reasons the GOP isn't likely to suffer similar technology issues this primary season is because they're managing to kick all of 45's opponents off the ballot.
26
@Charlie
Very good point! When R's attack Dem's over Iowa, that should be the response: Why are R's squashing primaries in so many states? Is Trump afraid of the moderates running against him?
11
Me too, Gail. My vote goes to Elizabeth Warren. She is a million times more qualified than Buttigieg and more capable of working with others to accomplish goals than Bernie. My concern is lingering elements of the patriarchal culture are holding her back. This is heartbreaking. She is the best person for the job.
61
@Carolyn
Me too, Carolyn. I have been for Warren since before she declared her candidacy, and she has only grown in my estimation, with a passionate and very well managed campaign. Watch out. Sanders will be her stalking horse.
17
@Carolyn Yes, Elizabeth Warren is indeed "more capable of working with others to accomplish goals than Bernie." Totally agree. But that's a pretty low bar, wouldn't you say?
8
@Carolyn The men seem to be beating the women in this race. Kamila Harris was another qualified candidate whom I expected to do better. Iowa voters are very concerned about which candidate can beat Trump. Perhaps they think that a young man, like Buttigieg, who served in the military and was a Rhode Scholar is more likely to beat Trump than an older, seasoned senator and Harvard law professor like Warren. Psychological stereo-types about gender are affecting peoples' voting behavior.
6
Candidates? I saw more a third world country that can't even do an election properly. Look at how far we have fallen!
13
@Cal Page just remember Cal: Our Millennial battle cry - “there’s an app for that!”
How far we have fallen, indeed.
1
It's a mistake to involve computers with voting. They have and will continue to be hacked so that votes will be rendered meaningless.
38
@Mike So the way to go is mail-in ballots which can be tallied by hand, and by at least three people to check the math. This would provide a paper trail and personal accountability, and reduce the odds of being hacked. I'm not sure how one would get the results to Headquarters, though. Fax machines, phone banks, CB radio, telegraph or maybe even the Pony Express. Whatever they use has got to be quicker than that app.
8
Proposal: Divide the country into a handful or regional primaries, rotate voting order every four years. Easier on the campaigners, easier on the media. Voters see who is carrrying the vote in the South, the Midwest, the Northeast, the Northwest, Texas, California.
22
@Hank the first 4 states do almost exactly this. In doing so they limit regional bias.
1
I'll try this one more time and then give up. There is no reason for Iowa, or any other state, to offer the offices of its state's electoral system to help any party decide whom to nominate for the presidential election. The parties themselves should be on the hook for that. No, instead, we need a two-stage, nationwide, popular election for president: a first election in which, quite literally, anyone can run to winnow the field to two (or maybe three) candidates, followed by a nationwide runoff. Amongst the many salutory effects of such a system, aside from its capacity to democratize a badly bloated and flawed process, is that it would dilute, perhaps eventually end, the influence of the current two parties to guide, and pervert, political discourse in our country
15
@richard
Giving up would be the more realistic option.
1
@richard 3 stage at least, this could be for direct election or for the primaries
@Chris Agreed.
Presidential elections are visceral.
Nixon, ever private and secretive, epitomized political calculated self interest. President Carter was a new type of politician-someone who was of the people, humble, religious and main-stream. Voting for Carter was a way to cleanse the nation of Nixon's stain.
Buttigieg similarly offers a calm, reassuring presence in contrast to Trump's persona and behavior. He offers a return to quiet competent leadership as an alternative to the exhausting style of the current White House. He is seen as an opportunity to reject Trump without the risk of the country lurching in an opposite direction. His success is the consequence of meeting Iowa voters visceral needs rather than his policies.
63
@RCK : and so, Buttigieg will have the same successful presidency Carter had? I liked and like Carter too, but remember, after Americans saw what they got, they didn't want any more. Today: who's going to get elected, have a successful first term, get endorsed by the electorate, have a great second term, and bring us back to pride in our country and satisfaction with ourselves?
4
@RCK Carter was a failure as President.
1
@RCK
You better hope that Pete is not Carter.
1
Iowa is never meaningful. So, not much happened.
6
@Chris It is often meaningful and likely to be so this time. It shows that moderate democrats have a slight edge within the party and that, given the chance to see Biden close up, don't want him. That's probably the case nationwide (or will be soon).
6
What Iowa didn’t do was to identify a front runner. And it’s hard to see that happening in any primary anytime soon. Nobody seems capable of amassing more than half the vote and nobody is in a position where that is at all likely. Buttigieg isn’t going anywhere and Sanders is limited by the number of Progressives in the party. New Hampshire is likely to be a whole different thing. And no candidate has a juggernaut going. This thing is up for grabs and is likely to stay that way until the convention
Nobody has got a clear path to success and nobody is going to get there any time soon
14
My vote also goes to Warren. I think she is the one candidate who can unite the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic party.
Unfortunately, some Dems appear to think that Hillary's loss means a woman can't win. I disagree. Hillary lost because of decades of smears against her, which were briefly validated when Comey reopened an investigation into her just a few days before the election.
35
@Susan Remember that she still won the popular vote by a huge margin--a fact the Republicans prefer to ignore when they claim that impeachment is an effort to "overturn an election and remove a duly elected president." I guess they really like that "duly."
16
@Susan Nonetheless, Hillary won the popular vote. Why? Because in spite of everything, she was the most qualified person for the office. Therefore, the right woman could win the presidential election. I just don't know if now is the time. I feel that the country would rather get back to some normalcy after the Mr. Toad's Wild Ride of the past three years. And "normalcy" is defined, historically, as white and male. Once we have regained our bearings, then the time might be right for a president who is a woman, or black, Hispanic or Asian. Just my opinion.
5
No, Klobuchar could win. Harris could win. Warren would scare off the independents, as would Bernie.
5
Buttigieg and Sanders had the largest preference groups in my precinct caucus. Biden couldn't even get to 15th viability. Judging by what I saw Monday night, Biden has been running on media forecasts, not actual strength.
54
@Lona I knew that Biden wouldn't do well in Iowa. He never has. I don't even expect much for NH, either. I think he will win South Carolina and maybe Nevada. If that doesn't happen, I'm rooting for Amy Klobuchar. She's smart as a whip, tough, sensible, moderate-yet plenty progressive, and she has proven she can win in red districts. I think she would made a great Madam President! If she doesn't win, either, I will support Mayor Pete. You see, despite all the Bernistas out here in full force, there are still plenty of us who are centrists/moderates. (Or, as I usually joke, "evil neo-liberal neo-corporatist moderate here".) I'm more a favorite of incremental change than of The Revolution. And, contrary to the majority of people here, I've actually lived under socialist governments so I know what that is like. The most important thing all of us should remember, though is that, when push comes to shove, only one thing matters and that is getting this corrupt and cruel ignoramus and bigot and all his craven lackeys out of office!
3
I’m not surprised my former mayor looks like he will take Iowa. We will see about the upcoming primaries. All I know is I want to vote for Warren, but if it’s a choice between Sanders and Pete, despite my policy beliefs aligning better with Bernie, I’d vote for Pete. The reason is simple: I can’t see Bernie being able to get anything done. I can see Warren getting stuff done. She has plans. She isn’t just ideals. But if it won’t be her, then I want someone who can at least get something done. Pete is smart. He will get stuff done. And we need a president who can get stuff done. (And yes, to undo the mess of the last administration.)
159
@SL what will Pete get done? what is his signature issue?
2
I don’t think Pete will get anything done. He is all platitudes and zero experience.
3
@SL What I'm worried about is what he will get done. He's a mainstream dem in a well-cut suit.
4
(Subject--Adam Schiff for president)
Bloomberg isn't the only one off the early ballots. We should take a hard look at Adam Schiff, and then draft him. His distinguished congressional record, but especially his performance in the impeachment hearings shows he can inspire all democrats and a good many republicans. His closing speech was righteous and filled with vision.
56
@Blue Sky I don't know that that could be managed. but he is a standout choice for VP;
8
@Blue Sky
I agree but I have the impression that Mr. Schiff isn't really interested in the office of President. I have a hard time imagining him putting himself through the slog of national campaigning. That said, I can also easily visualize him sitting in the Oval Office. Oh for again a time where I don't have to scream at the TV, but actually want to listen…
15
@Doctor T I completey agree, and had the exact same thought yesterday, however I do not believe that a white male would be any democratic candidate's choice for VP this year.
4
Brett Stephens is on fire! First the list of thing we used to be able to do but no longer can, then the Trump-met lab analogy. What's next, his own HBO special?
14
I also am betting on Warren as the one who can out talk, out plan and out Fox Trump in 2020. Iowa is not indicative of the nation's Democratic party makeup. I have hope!
18
@katethomas56 "Iowa is not indicative of the nation's Democratic party makeup." It probably is. It's not a different planet. It's right in the middle in every way.
1
@MKR
More than 90% white. Few cities, few suburbs. Few immigrants, fewer people of non-Christian religion. The nation's Democratic party makeup is the opposite of Iowa's in almost every way, and that is also true for New Hampshire.
While Iowa may be more or less in the middle of the contiguous 48 states (lookin at you, my neighbor to the south!), there is no serious demographic in which it is "in the middle" or average at all, even less so than the middle of the Democratic Party.
Illinois would be a much more representative pick, not just for Democratic and demographic numbers, but also for a true urban/rural mix. Maybe they could go first next time?
4
@katethomas56
'I also am betting on Warren as the one who can out talk, out plan and out Fox Trump in 2020'
It better be a very small bet, because you're sure to loose your shirt on that one.
Funny how we blame technology, and look back longingly at the idea of a paper ballot. I guess we are forgetting the 2000 election and hanging chads.
The real problem is with the carbon based units (us) making the decision. We have insulated ourselves from opposing opinions, and totally lost the idea that we are all in this thing together.
Trump is the perfect reflection of this, since he is so clearly concerned only for himself.
8
@John. Mail-in paper ballots don’t have chads.
You're right to prefer Elizabeth Warren. She's best on facts and ability. Has been for many years. Total contrast to Trump,
39
@AIR Warren would be a much stronger candidate were it not for her well-documented history of telling lies, often inexplicably for no good reason. The truth hurts her. Trump can tell a million more lies and get away with it, because he has an unusual version of reality.
1
Mayor Pete Buttigieg, the Anti-Trump. He is all the things that this president is not: honorable, a veteran, intelligent, well-educated, articulate, compassionate, ethical, genuine, sincere, devoted to his spouse.
And one more element that is not in Mr. Trump's wheelhouse: Pete Buttigieg actually cares about people.
Honestly, folks. Aren't these qualities what we seek in a president?
Is it so surprising that he is surging in Iowa, despite the fiasco that was the Iowa Caucus (and let's hope that's the last one we have to suffer through).
If Mayor Buttigieg can ignite a connection to the black vote he will be unbeatable in November. That is his primary challenge now as he moves on to New Hampshire.
228
@Len
And why does an alarm go off in my head that what I’m seeing is so like Hillary Clinton? I don’t trust him for one minute.
6
@FXQ He is not like Hillary Clinton in the sense that he is not arrogantly assuming he will win. As he himself points out he won 80% of the vote as a gay man in a very red state. He has been very open about discussing his mistakes as mayor. What impresses me are some of the unsolicited comments from people he has helped one to one in situations where could have easily and justifiably said no. One in particular, while in the hospital with his father who was being treated for cancer a request came for someone needing a translator for a family with an emergency. Buttigieg speaks 6 languages and the request was for one of them he left his father without pause and lent his help. The story came from the medical staff who were there not him.
Buttigieg has great lines only he can deliver the best I've seen recently was on Bill Maher Real Time "at least I understand traumatic brain injury is more serious than bone spurs" Referring to late reports of head injuries from the Iranian rocket attacks. Buttigieg is quick on his feet.
8
@Len To win the general, Buttigieg will need Stacey Abrams to be his running mate. Without her, he will lose.
7
Part of this strangely convoluted process is an attempt to determine what the voters want ideologically (liberal or more moderate) and whom they think can deliver it while beating Trump. Since beating Trump is a key objective, presumably the voters think the top two are the most electable. If the ideological choice was between just the top two candidates, then Bernie Sanders would pick up Warren's supporters and Pete Buttigieg would pick up those of Biden and Klobuchar. Even if that could be done smoothly, resulting in voters choosing the most electable candidate who shares their views, there is the wild card, Mike Bloomberg. There may also be a public perception that voting for a party that can't even manage to do a caucus competently should lead them to vote for Bloomberg as someone coming from outside the Democratic establishment and who has demonstrated ability to achieve his goals.
5
Why would anyone be surprised at, and continue to ignore, the appeal of Pete Buttigieg? It seems some in the media still do not want to take him seriously. That’s ok, those of us going to the ballot box like what we hear and see from Pete. A breath of fresh and honest air - listen closely to what he says, look at what he has done and you will understand.
62
I always find the conversation interesting but I think you both are missing the boat on Bloomberg. Bret Stephens used to wish Bloomberg would enter the race and now he compares him to Giuliani? Bloomberg’s appeal will be far wider than any other candidate’s and he can beat Trump. I don’t think anyone else can.
21
@Terence Cahill
Appeals to who? The guy has zero negative press and is an epitome of an oligarch. He is literally buying his way into an election instead of earning it through meeting voters.
Why do you worship him so?
I see they released some partial results around 6pm and six hours later they haven't released any more. I assume they cherry-picked the partial results to put Buttigeg in the lead, and are holding him there as long as possible. This is the DNC's idea of "quality control". Anything but Sanders.
36
@Paul Easton oh my gosh! Sanders supporters are just a different form of Trump supporters- always the aggrieved victims. Sanders insisted on a different reporting mechanism after Iowa 2016 and when the changes led to this debacle, they now retort "But he won the initial vote! He was robbed!" and are aggrieved anew.
24
@Paul Easton :
Oh man. Really? Really? Trump gives Rush Limbaugh the Medal of Freedom during the State of the Union and you are touting conspiracy theories about the DNC?
Sanders is fine.
Bernie Bros, though, are maddening!
17
@Paul Easton Question of fact: Does the DNC have anything to do with the Iowa primary? I thought the whole process was organized by the Iowa Democratic party. Nobody has mentioned any involvement of the DNC in the Iowa primary.
7
They keep getting so close to the answer until Bret decides to write an article saying Trump is preferable to Sanders.
I might be a cynic but seems like the current gilded age won't end in anything but bloodshed.
22
The disaster of the Iowa caucus shows the incredible incompetence on part of the Iowa Democratic party. The lack of accountability is appalling and it is even worse that they are trying to cover up their incompetence by saying that the delay was due to data quality check. It is terrible to give Trump this opening to attack the democrats but they deserved it.
Just one more reason to elect someone like Buttigieg who actually understands or has the ability to understand critical issues such as technology, data security, climate change, etc. I have no confidence in Sanders or Biden.
39
Gail, before you suggest Florida as the first primary in the presidential election, please be aware that the recent Florida Democrats webinar on how to become a delegate was awkward to mainstream. Other issues from 2016 abound in heavily Democratic counties where recounts were not greatly organized with old, slow machines, which hopefully were replaced since 2016. Florida may not be ready.
2
"I have a sinking feeling that whatever happens in November, Trump will be declaring victory.... simply claiming “Vote fraud!” and refusing to leave the White House if he loses".
This is my biggest fear as well and I have little doubt that if he loses the election this is what he will do. And if the Republicans lose a ton of seats in Congress, which may well happen, they will all be backing Trump that there was voter fraud.
If this happens I will have sleepless nights until he is - hopefully - physically removed from office.
34
@Richard Phelps
This has been my fear since day one of the Trump administration. He will not leave peacefully.
16
@Richard Phelps -- It is my nightmare that he will be, as you suggest, physically removed from office. The apparatus of the National Security State has bonded with the Democrats and they are certainly capable of doing that. Do we want the FBI and CIA and NSA to have physical veto power over the presidency?
4
@John Even Michael Cohen told us Trump won't leave.
This country will not elect a socialist.
If you want four more years of Trump, go ahead and nominate Sanders.
32
@Larry Thiel
And four more years of Trump we push for a permanent divorce. The country is liberal. The electoral college and the senate is not.
Either start respecting liberal policy that follows the majority or we as a country come to a reckoning.
18
@Larry Thiel
Lol...maybe, but your state STILL might.
Without the weighting of your rural votes, this Democratic Socialist wouldn't of just won your popular vote, as he's leading now, but the convoluted S.D.E.'s too.
"...go ahead and nominate Sanders."
Thank you. Certainly going to try.
2
@Mathias The country is not liberal. Where do you get that idea? How do you define liberal? Obama wasn't liberal, Clinton wasn't liberal, Carter wasn't liberal. We are not alt-right, we are not conservative, but we are most assuredly not liberal. I am. You are. The whole country is not. What urban bubble do you live in to give you such an idea?
Gail describes “Trumps ideology-driven, intellectually impoverished management of government programs”. There is no ideology to Trump. He operates at a more primitive survival level, driven by fear, rage and money. That’s all.
53
Gail Collins being one of the few people I would look to for direction in this mess, her forthright endorsement of Warren carries weight.
24
Iowa just let the rest of us know once and for all they have to go to the back of the line. Iowa is a Trump state and it seems like more than a coincidence that the two people that have the best chance of putting Trump back in the White House ended up winning their twisted caucus. They are too white and too fringe to be the startling line for the Dem's primaries.
3
Since more than a third of Iowan voters have yet to have their votes counted, I think the answer to your question might be, "62% of the votes have been counted, and we'll have to wait to see how it stacks up."
9
Re "kooky conspiracy theories." Talked with a young voter this afternoon. He said, "I'm trying not to wear a tin foil hat, but this whole thing looks strange to me." What could I say to him? Partial tally results release for 5 p.m. new cycle. Mayor Pete on TV declaring victory and doing live interviews on CNN. Des Moines Register's poll nullified on Saturday without ever being released. "Let's just see what happens," was what I told my young friend.
191
Pete declaring “victory” has been completely mischaracterized in order to justify conspiracy theories. It was obvious from preliminary results that Pete would end up doing better than anyone predicted he would do. That is a victory, and Mayor Pete said as much. Cut to every Bernie supporter saying that Pete claimed he had won the entire caucus, meaning that he rigged the election and knew the results ahead of time. What this election cycle has proved to me is that people on the left are just as prone to outlandish conspiracy theories and emotional anti-logic as Trump supporters are.
193
@Brown I have my hat securely tied on. America's already been taken over.
15
@Brown
It's insane to me how people decry these conspiracy theories when the evidence is right in front of them. Look at 2016, the DNC corruption and under-handedness sunk Bernie's campaign who had much more popular support and would've easily defeated trump. Time after time the DNC discredited Bernie and his supporters since HRC had her claws in the Democratic party.
We vowed that things would change next election cycle and they simply haven't. Why is it so surprising to people that they are still acting in bad faith? Bernie is a threat to their power, billionaire power, corporate power. He constantly fights an uphill battle. My only worry is that when he wins the nomination he will be assassinated by a shadow actor before any meaningful change will come to save this country.
"Bernie didn't kill himself."
23
The whole idea from the beginning of all those candidates spending all that time, energy, and money on the very unrepresentative and relatively small State of Iowa, and Iowa determining who the next Dem nominee will be, undermines American democracy. The whole system was always a mistake.
But of course even worse tonight. The Iowa system is simply a corruption of democracy.
15
The truly sad thing is that most people still believe in the virtues of the internet, obvious and inevitable fatal flaws notwithstanding.
Of course all of us here criticizing the process in Iowa are, nonetheless, complicit, inasmuch we are sitting here complaining on the internet, thus legitimating and effectively encouraging its use. For the sake of momentary personal convenience, everybody still pretends that the good guys are smarter than the bad guys and that the internet can be made secure, honest, transparent, and private.
As to the Democrats, you have to credit them with doing something the Republicans are completely incapable of accomplishing on their own: re-electing Trump.
6
Why at 11:30 PM , February 4th are we still at only 62% reporting in Iowa? May Sanders prevail, in ballots, health and longevity. On to New Hampshire.
22
Ah, Scarlet O'Hara! There's always tomorrow.
6
@Publicus I can’t think about that right now... I’ll go crazy if I do! I’ll have to think about that tomorrow.
Whos votes were counted?
There are 209,128,094 USA adults that can vote.
Iowa represented a very small number of them.
10
Iowa is not a representative electoral sample, and FAR too much monet, media analysis, time and attention is frittered away and squandered on an event that has no similarity to an actual election.
Who cares what went wrong?
22
@Camptown
Money, not Monet.
Something serious about the Iowa surprise: when I vote in my states primary, I only get to make one choice, as does every other Democrat voting ( If only it were every other Dem). If my choice doesn't make it, but the winner is picked with a mere 29% of the vote, but the winner is not my next in line -- and the winner is not the next in line for a lot of other voters -- there will be a lot of discontent, and some loss of voters in the general election.
It seemed last night that some Bernie folk had already jumped on the conspiracy bandwagon with news of the delay in the count, only to realize that he was fine - and Biden was lagging.
The caucus method seems archaic (people talking to each other and thinking about their vote? ), but people can consider all of the candidates, and opt to compromise for, say, a #2 choice over their personal #1 if s/he doesn't seem to be making the grade, and it seems that is the better route to get the government one wants. Perhaps what happened with Buttigeig is -- in person - what he said made sense to voters who hadn't given him a thought.
Yes I will vote for the Democrat in the general election. And I hope her name is Warren
43
What just happened in Iowa? A star is born for the Democrats and Biden has been defeated and he should now pass the torch to a new generation gracefully or it will be snatched out of his hands.
56
What was Pete Buttigieg campaign doing donating $50,000 to the company, Shadow, that developed the app? And is there a conflict of interests that one of his staffers is related to a person who works for the company that designed this opaque app? Did anyone find it strange that he seemed so sure of the outcome with such certainly when all the other campaigns were unsure? Why am I a little suspicious of this former intelligence officer?
106
@FXQ You need to do a little more fact-checking before commenting such a misleading statement-as-a-question. Shadow have developed several technology products, one of which was a text messaging service that allowed campaigns to connect with voters.
The money was NOT a donation and the Buttigieg campaign was one of three campaigns that purchased products from them - the others being Kirsten Gillibrand and Joe Biden. I take it we aren't suggesting that these campaigns were rigging Iowa too?
No votes were placed in private in Iowa - that's the point of the caucuses. Every campaign will have had an idea of numbers by the end of the night - they all had staff on ground. Which probably explains when the Biden campaign left so quickly and yes, why the Buttigieg campaign was feeling victorious.
16
Oh, that’s helpful.
We just watched a SOTU right out of alt-reality or perhaps 1984. It’s not the time to cast doubt on any of the Dems vying to end this national nightmare.
5
@FXQ Do a little research he said they counted the votes and had pictures of results from each caucus. Some Americans know how to do math.
8
Just my thoughts here but I suspect that part of Buttigieg is something of a young centrist, unlike Biden who may well have known the Founding Fathers on a first name basis.
As to the caucus mechanics - I'm comforted and amused that they are relying on paper ballots. Wonder what the election folks in Florida think about that?
21
Gail, Elizabeth Warren was a candidate who needed to do well in Iowa. Her performance there bodes ill for Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Those are states she has to at least split, but Iowa casts doubt on whether she can take even one. I hope she stays in the race, though, just to mute Bernie Sanders, and allow Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar thrive. And even allow Michael Bloomberg gain traction.
Warren and Sanders can't beat Trump in The Electoral College. Buttigieg, Klobuchar and Bloomberg have a shot. And did someone say toast, or was that Biden, my candidate of choice?
27
@Logan
Actually, I think Warren's performance is reassuring. She may have reversed the downward trend she's been on. She was predicted to come in fourth and instead appears to be solidly in third place, well ahead of both Biden and Klobuchar and not too far behind the two leaders. Unless Buttigieg gets more support from young and black voters, I don't think he'll sustain his strength. And Warren may actually pull some votes from the center if the race starts to narrow to one between her and Sanders.
Initially I didn't think Bloomberg had a chance . . . but I do think his ads have been effective and his executive experience in both the private and public sectors is ever more compelling. I think with Biden and Klobuchar fading, Bloomberg has a chance to unseat Buttigieg among centrists. That could hurt Warren and set up a contest more between Sanders and Bloomberg.
Personally, I am a strong Warren supporter . . . I like her policy best. But I also think that our government is so dysfunctional now that we need a great manager to fix it. And that makes me like Bloomberg more than I thought I would. It would be a very odd beast indeed, but a Warren/Bloomberg ticket would appeal to me with these two very different people complementing each other in a tense, but maybe highly productive, way.
16
@617to416 - Three weeks ago, the NYT's said: "[Elizabeth] Warren was once the Democratic candidate to beat in Iowa, lifted by the kinetic energy of her crowds and a sprawling campaign infrastructure that far exceeded those of her rivals. . . "
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-iowa.html
It didn't go well for her, so I don't see her performance reassuring at all. The trajectory, at least in Iowa, was steadily downward.
I just hope Elizabeth Warren stays in the race, for the reasons cited in my comment above - but, given her lackluster performance in Iowa, if she were to become the Democratic candidate for president, the nation would face four more years of Donald "John" Trump.
3
@617to614 Bloomberg/Warren. The odd couple, but I like it!
2
If Trump did indeed turn the Oval Office into a meth lab, as Bret Stephens sarcastically describes, Stephens himself would STILL refuse to commit to voting for ANY Democratic nominee over Trump. That is the great irony. He will still say, hey, things aren't THAT bad under Trump.
It also reveals sloppy and irresponsible logic to assert that the one day delay in results from Iowa should or could cause folks to lose faith in elections. Get real! We sure MIGHT lose faith if pundits like Stephens keep saying it! On its own, the Iowa problem was human error. Move on.
Mr. Stephens would do well to remember, as he ponders whether the Dems can nominate a candidate who can beat Trump "fair-and-square," that Trump was impeached because he will NOT compete fair and square. The Dems don't have the luxury of a fair and square contest.
80
@Joan Johnson Brett Stevens has said that he voted for Hillary.
2
@BibleBeltOfSantaCruz Please see the Stephens column from January 24 in which he does indeed say that things aren't so bad under Trump that he would vote for just any Dem. The piece's subtitle says that he would not want to exchange one reckless president for another, as if there were ANY Dem candidate right now who comes close to the atrocity that is Trump.
1
When you live in a Country where more precaution is taken with your drive thru order than the future of democracy--time to throw a dart at world map and just move there.
87
@That's What She Said
I agree with your suggestion 100%, maybe it's just time to do that, where's a dart?.
And thanks for your screen name - it's the best I've seen.
3
Buttigieg did well but he is not well positioned for the next upcoming primaries. Democrats should be very worried that Bernie is going to leap ahead here shortly.
15
@Dan ~~"Worried"?!! I can hardly wait!...but full disclosure:
I'm not a democrat, since their party is for middle classers, and I don't make the grade...
Buttigieg proved how much winning an American election is about money - he poured money into Iowa and moved ahead. Bloomberg has been proving the same in other states, by rapidly moving up in the polls.
The scary thing, is that Trump has collected far more than any Democratic candidate.
Money, Money, Money: that's what makes American Democracy go around - which means that the worst man, has an excellent chance of winning.
Can that be changed? Only by you.
53
@Peter Zenger
That’s why the rich bought the government, then had the Supreme Court rule that the guy with the most money wins.
It was a business investment.
57
@Peter Zenger sanders spent a lot of money too, so stop selectively calling out only certain candidates. Pete ran a great ground game especially considering he came in with zero name recognition. he was supported pretty evenly among rural and urban and young and old voters and managed to pull in independents and many Obama to trump voters as well. That's what we'll need in the swing states to get trump out of office.
21
@in-the weeds
When I'm campaigning, I knock on doors.
I wasn't "selectively calling out candidates", I was illustrating a point. There are many other candidates besides Pete that I didn't mention. I was illustrating a broad concept, not doing an election run down.
Certainly, "freedom of speech" allows me to choose whatever candidates I want to use, when I'm making a point - don't you agree?
Attempting to bully other people, is Trump behavior. But so what? After the convention, we will definitely be working together - if Pete wins, I'm good with that.
6
Democrats need to quickly see how this mess looks to the rest of the nation, the 50-60% who are not ready for Trump to fall.
The problem is partially really bad timing, it being the first event in the Democratic primary campaign to select a champion to face Trump in the general election.
There is nothing more important than making a good beginning, especially in an epic political war.
The second reason why this looks so bad to that 50-60% is that this crash validates all the Republican's advertising to come about the failure of socialism.
Not being able to run an election is a base line function of democracy that can not flat line. No returns at all for almost 12 hours (And still only 62% in a day later!) means our democracy the way we do it, is dead on the gurney.
Democrats may have lost the trust of many in that 50-60% who will not trust them to provide low cost medical care now.
Plenty can still go wrong and will go wrong, but on both sides. More bad things will continue to come out about Trump also. It's a long way to November 3.
But after this mistake, fewer independents or backsliding Republicans may have second thoughts about voting for Trump again. The 50-60% not voting blue no matter who may have just become the 55-65%.
Democrats need to tread the narrow gauntlet more carefully or they will ruin their own chances like so many times before.
7
@Dennis I guess you are right that the Iowa Democrats inability to run a caucus tells us a lot about their ability to run a government. Thank god we don't have a failed businessman who bankrupted a casino or defrauded charities for president. Oh, wait a minute, we do, don't we. Must mean you aren't voting for Trump, right? Right?
16
@Dennis
If Trump wins in 2020, America will have gotten what it deserves.
2
@Dennis Wow, this country is 60/40 is blue/red - the problem is that young people don't vote and in any event, these people aren't concentrated in states like MI, OH, etc. which have a lot of electoral votes. The whole process is messed up since the last time the electors numbers were changed was a 100 years or something and they should be updated to reflect the newest population changes. Anyways, the HoR is even skewed.
Congratulations to Pete Buttigieg, once again the pollsters were wrong . Between now and the end of the Conventions they really need to figure out how to fix this.
Pete Buttigieg won in Iowa by attracting votes from Democrats, Independents and yes even Republicans . It would seem to me that whomever is the eventual nominee they will need to be able to attract the same demographics to beat Trump.
A Pete Buttigieg , Kamala Harris ticket still looks like a winner to me.
36
@Alec They will lose Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania for sire. So it is Trump for another four years
5
@Alec **yea only one thing, he hasn't won it yet. he's actually behind in vote total.
1
" Their priority was not making a mistake." Only if that were so.
1.They had an app that wasn't properly tested.
2. The app was downloaded on private phones that are easily hacked.
It was a disaster in the making. I only hope that this being the first primary/caucus these and other things that the Dems now are frantically trying to vet get worked out before we kill what's left of our democracy.
Can we please think harder about these things? Many lives are hanging in the balance.
52
I am awaiting possibly the most useful outcome of the Iowa caucus and that is "who turned out".
Preliminary numbers suggested that women had a commanding turnout vs men, 58/42. Maybe this is normal in Iowa but I am guessing not.
If younger generations snd women turn out as they did in 2018, its game over for the GOP in the White House and Congress.
Turnout in big state primaries will be most interesting, especially in states like Texas, with the lowest turnout among 50 states in 2014.
45
@Look Ahead
"Preliminary numbers suggested that women had a commanding turnout vs men, 58/42. Maybe this is normal in Iowa but I am guessing not."
Women are 60% of the Democratic party, so those numbers don't seem abnormal at all. Men are more likely to be at the Republican caucus.
3
@Look Ahead
No fe/male breakdown, but an interesting ABC News entrance poll. Shines a little more light on the caucus.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/iowa-entrance-poll-buttigieg-shows-broad-based-appeal/story?id=68735140&fbclid=IwAR3fsVrp
1
This chaotic caucus reminded me of hanging chads, Russian influence, and voter suppression. We need election and campaign finance reform (including Citizens United overturned) now in order to retain our democracy.
All of the candidates running can speak to a large number of Americans. Unfortunately, polarization due to fake news, social media, and the collapse or our media and educational institutions most citizens may hear, but not really care to or be able to listen.
21
How can you say they were successful if only 62% of the counted? This isn't counting chickens before the eggs hatch, this is counting chickens before the eggs are laid.
54
At this point with 62% of the count in, apparently among moderate Iowan Democrats a younger candidate is preferable. However, a man who was a mayor of city about the size of New Haven, CT for 8 years is preferable to a woman who has been a Senator for 14 years, sad but true.
32
I don’t think it’s fair to pin the discrepancy on sexism. Pete and Warren have different takes on some of the most controversial topics, including healthcare, and that likely accounted for the difference more than anything.
27
@ED DOC I am talking about Senator Klobuchar (2006-present) as a younger moderate candidate that is less preferable to a younger moderate candidate who was former mayor of a city the size of New Haven, CT.
11
@ED DOC That's also interesting that your comment comparing the moderate mayor with a non-moderate older senator as based on a misunderstanding of mine--comparing to two younger moderates-- is liked almost as well as mine.
2
Bernie does well in caucuses and Mayor Pete is from the Midwest. It is easy to overstate results when they are the only results around.
We can similarly expect Bernie and Warren and Pete to do well in NH. The real test is if Biden can sweep the delegates in SC. If he can, he is still the front runner. If he stumbles there he probably has to drop out.
Iowa was Klobuchar's best chance and it is hard to see how she makes it to Super Tuesday unless Biden quits soon.
23
@Alan I think she’d be a terrific VP.
5
I also would vote for Amy to be VP.
Trump may be having the best week of his presidency.
Democrats fumbled the impeachment football yet again, and made a mess out of Iowa. Trump gave a decent State of the Union speech (albeit way too long) and the economy keeps roaring.
But c’mon, it’s only Iowa! We have a long way to go.
19
It doesn’t matter what happened in Iowa since it appears the Democrats do not yet have a candidate to rally behind. The turnout was less than 2008 and it is widely spill between progressive and centrist candidates. Maybe Bloomberg has a chance to be the one. Most likely the Democrats need to find someone else, a TV star who will put on 2 hour stand up routines and who never apologizes for anything because that’s what Americans wants.
11
@DO5
Sienfield or Leno?
But they both apologize.
1
If Democratic challenger is NOT Joe Biden, Trump will bury them rest. With Joe as Democratic contender, Trump will NOT get those four Rust Belt states, which helped get Trump elected last election.
7
@Trevor Diaz
Biden is not the politician he used to be. Trump would eat him alive.
1
@Trevor Diaz I am kinda with you Trevor except I am beginning to think or is it delude myself into thinking that Bloomberg teamed with Kamal Harris, Val Deming's or Amy Klobuchar could clean Trump's clock. For one thing with Bloomberg being the presidential candidate he and his people who take over the DNC immediately and run it like a well oiled machine so antics like what just went down in Iowa would not occur again. For another he is smarter, richer and more likeable than Trump and for another he is more liberal than Biden. Any of the three women I sited would be a great Vice President and Deming might even help in the forever close Florida contest.
@Trevor Diaz Have you seen Joe speak lately? Do yourself a favor man. He's in bad shape..
So maybe Mayor Pete will be the "moderate" standard bearer, and Bernie the "progressive". But hold on. Biden may well win in the midwest, and likely all the southern states. And Warren could yet best Bernie in Mass and other big states. It ain't over till it's over.
34
"Every candidate who was given up politically for dead, including Sanders and Buttigieg, has roared back to life. And everyone who was supposed to be a heavyweight contender, including Biden, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, has underperformed."
What? Since when has Sanders even been politically dead, except in Bret Stephens's hopes and dreams? Certainly Buttigieg was never supposed to do badly in Iowa. And since when was Kamala Harris supposed to be a heavyweight contender? Elizabeth Warren has been sinking for weeks now, and she exceeded expectations last night.
Why must pundits continue to spin objective facts into literally whatever they like? So much for fact-based opinion....
103
@x Well, for one thing, Sanders had a particular health incident, remember?
5
Piggy-backing on Bret Stephens’ reference to our seeming inability to report coherent election results, build highway intersections in less than a decade, or teach long division in a comprehensible manner, the common denominator is we are heavily prioritizing process over results.
While process does demand more attention than in the distant past — for reasons of distributional equity (such as fairness to historically marginalized groups) and environmental concerns (such as National Environmental Policy Act/NEPA) — we have so prioritized process over results that our problem-solving capabilities have become increasingly sclerotic.
This also may help explain why the Trump camp was relishing the chance to poke at Iowa Democrats over this maelstrom: Not only does it capitalize on the misfortune of political opponents, it once again makes a (rhetorical) case that the “other” party is so focused on “process” that it loses sight of “results.” That may merit some reflection from all observers going forward.
16
Can we just go ahead and get a Sanders/Buttigieg or a Bloomberg/Buttigieg ticket? Let’s not waste all this campaigning and base building. I don’t even care if the candidates disagree a bit on some policies, in fact, perhaps that’s a plus for diversity of ideas and benefit of being debated within the team a bit.
We must right this ship somehow. With a the war on facts and information only intensifying, we’re all in for a test of humanity’s ability to overcome a major obstacle. Can’t say that I’m super optimistic.
18
@B I don't think anointing an arbitrary couple candidates is any way to go toe to toe with Trump, half his ammo is about how corrupt the Democratic Party and its donor base is, imagine if we just tossed this thing to the late-coming billionaire who was funneling $12 million to GOP Congressional candidates as recently as 2017? Good look.
We need to look within, and build a movement for the people that isn't relying entirely on one corrupt industry's donors to help us beat some other corrupt industry's donors like this dystopian post-capitalist Sock-em Boppers our democracy can be characterized as right now. Our Party needs to pledge itself to the ideas that have proven to be popular with the people, and programs that have been implemented successfully for decades throughout the industrialized world. You start showing the people that less of their money is being spent on wars overseas and more of their money is building up their neighborhoods, infrastructure, and education and healthcare for our children, they will forget why they were ever tricked into voting for Donald Trump.
Right now many Americans see the corporatist elite order, that people like Bloomberg and many of Buttigieg's and Biden's donors symbolize, as a big part of the problem, I don't understand why the Party doesn't seem to understand that. Americans want something different, if not, Bernie and Warren wouldn't have gotten more than all the moderates combined last night; and buckle up, because there's more.
6
@Marc but Bernie and Warren did not get more than the moderates combined.
5
Warren for Sanders — she has the ability to adjust her stance as needed whereas Bernie is fixed. If we’re gonna have an old white guy heading the ticket I’ll go with Joe.
According to Steve Kornacki of MSNBC, one reason Iowa updated the software was to provide more specific information about voting patterns so as a result we know that Buttigieg did well with working-class rural voters while Sanders performed best in college towns (where students tend to believe that Bernie was to carpentry as Eugene Debs was to railroad firestoking and boilermaking).
I tuned in briefly every few hours last night and when I heard Buttigieg delivering his victory speech I couldn't help smiling! He was right on top of it and was his usual articulate self and slightly amused, or so I imagined, at the similarity to Bill Clinton's "Comeback Kid" speech in New Hampshire in 1992.
74
Buttigieg is manufactured hope. Everything wrong with politics.
3
@LS
Ah, “the comeback kid”...
...the memes were so primitive back in those days
1
The truly sad thing is that most people still believe in the virtues of the internet, its obvious and inevitable fatal flaws notwithstanding.
Of course all of us here criticizing the process in Iowa are, nonetheless, complicit, inasmuch we are sitting here complaining on the internet, thus legitimating and effectively encouraging its use. For the sake of personal convenience, everybody still pretends that the good guys are smarter than the bad guys.
As to the Democrats, you have to credit them with doing something the Republicans cannot do: re-electing Trump.
7
Funny, sad and terrifying conversation I am sure of nothing, except this. If Mike Bloomberg had been in charge in Iowa, the caucuses would have gone perfectly. I am not at all sure that can be said of any of the other Democratic contenders.
But maybe it is too much to hope for a hugely competent president. Maybe we prefer untested Democratic aspirants who can give brave and noble stump speeches about defeating Trump. We will see...
63
@Malcolm The propaganda and absolute GROVELING I'm seeing all over the internet and on TV about Mike Bloomberg is quite Trumpian and dystopian. My goodness, as mayor he bought out enough of his City Council and judges so he could change the Constitution to allow himself a third term as mayor, despite New Yorkers voting "NO" in TWO referendums.
That's who you're praising with such hyperbole to go against Trump, the guy I'm assuming you think has authoritarian tendencies (well, real New Yorkers know, so does Bloomberg). You're praising a guy who plunged $12 million into the GOP Congressional races in 2017, real great situation we have in the Senate thanks to donors like him. But yeah, Democrats all over are typing out their fantasies about this guy saving the day; my goodness, did you even live here in New York during some of those snowstorms he bungled up? What a strange thing to say and think, that he could handle a caucus process? He's done some lasting damage to New York that we're still recovering from; developer and landlord subsidies and supremely flawed incentives that became the driving force behind so many empty luxury apartments and storefronts and wealth inequality plaguing our city right now. Ask any black friends you have how they enjoyed Bloomberg's years. I can't believe what I'm reading from moderates who are absolutely begging for this guy to completely subvert our party after helping pay for the Senate gridlock we have today, what madness.
1
20 hours after the caucus ended they released 62% of the results. 5 hours later they're still at 62%. They can't even find another 8%? The incompetence blows my mind and makes me wonder if democrats will be able to get out of their own way. I'm looking for heroes to save us from this debacle. Where's "The Squad" when you need them.
24
@David Biesecker I've heard speculation that they'll release the rest after the state of the union. Which would bring the media back to the caucus results and away from Trump.
24
It’s not the Democrats. It’s the Iowa
people. Arrogant and incompetent, a bad, sad combination. They should never be permitted to go first. The Marks brothers were more serious. It is a farce of a farce.
@Lisa So they think... but as we can always see, the geniuses at the DNC don't know much.
Gail says:
" We need somebody who can speak to the large number of Americans who are still struggling to make ends meet in a country where the rich get richer while paying precious little taxes. The vast number of citizens who have nightmares about medical bills. All the people, from farmers to families on food stamps, who are teetering on the brink of disaster because of Trump’s ideology-driven, intellectually impoverished management of government programs. And then chart a clear alternative."
For me, that person is clearly Bernie Sanders.
Elizabeth Warren would be my second choice.
145
@Wendy I wouldn’t complain if either of those choices win. For me, Yang has the best ideas and clearly explains existing problems without pandering to identity politics and fashionable outrage.
Buttigieg is gimmicky, a slick politician who lacks substance.
16
@Wendy When Sanders looses to Trump you can just go back to Sweden. Lucky for you. That means the rest of us have to suffer another 4 years and watch our country be turned into rubble. Wendy do you know the name George McGovern? McGovern was the liberal Democrat who ran against Nixon and lost every state except Massachusetts. Do we really want a replay?
Go Mayor Pete and a cheer for Mike Bloomberg too.
2
@Wendy, neither one is interested in running government; just like our current President. Sorry, even outside of his abysmal rhetoric; been there, done that. No thanks!
I like the idea that Trump won't go if defeated. The Dems know their chances of unseating him aren't very good, and getting less good as we go along, so they're already prepping for defeat and setting up to claim that Trump's victory was illegitimate.
6
A small state going first is a place for a candidate to shine at reasonable cost.
A challenger could demonstrate a serious appeal and serious challenge, and do so even on a limited budget, with limited donors and modest totals of people on the ground. The same challenger might not be able to do that in a much larger state, that could close out the challenge just by breaking its budget.
A leader could demonstrate that challengers even without the large state budget problems just don't have what it takes to be serious, cannot do it even in a small state with lower costs and lots of time to get ready.
Iowa has done this, in a negative way on both issues.
No leader so dominated as to drive off all challengers.
No candidate on a budget has demonstrated reason to be taken more seriously. I presume here that Mayor Pete does not really have a budget problem even now; like Sanders and Warren, all are stars of the small donors on line.
But one supposed leader has failed. Biden.
A couple of smaller challengers failed to rise to the occasion too.
In that way, Iowa has defined a real race, and who is in it.
That is pretty good for a single small state, and about all we could expect.
The race is on. Late entry beware.
24
I’m happy Mayor Pete did well and demonstrated he can do well in urban areas as well as suburbs and rural areas. He worked extremely hard in Iowa and this was an important state for him to do well in so it’s understandable he wanted to give his supporters a positive message last night. People are giving him a lot of grief today for a myriad of reasons, but he has run a positive and legitimate campaign. Regardless of the final results, Pete and Sanders did well and hope people will trust the results.
375
@BNewt Pete B. still as close to zero support among blacks, and that's not likely to change due to his mismanagement of race relations in South Bend. Given this, Pete's win in a lilly-white state means absolutely nothing.
Sanders is the big winner. His two major rivals, Biden and Warren, took a big hit. Buttigieg doesn't count due to well-earned antipathy of black voters. It's looking good for Bernie.
11
I'd love to see a Sanders / Pete ticket FWIW.
I'm pretty sure that a winning combination!
8
@P. Greenberg
Buttigieg endorsed by all 8 black mayors in Iowa; 15% POC voted for him in the Iowa primary, second only to Sanders (45%).
Why not support Sanders, if that's your candidate, by telling us what is good about him? There should be something better for you to say than untruths about rival candidates.
36
Biden is gone because he told the lies that "rich people aren't the problem" that Republicans aren't the problem, Trump is the problem. People don't like being lied to.
Warren did poorly because she played up a scenario in which she was fighting against institutionalized misogyny. Of course that exists. It's a thing. But she stuck with the "fighter" look and it came off as poor theater. It reminded people of the DNA debacle and hinted that, perhaps this person doesn't choose her battles well. Not a good look for a fighter, but more importantly fighter doesn't come across as leader, and that's what people are looking for. Still I really want her in the administration in a top job please. VP for the second heart attack scenario would ease my mind as she'd follow through on the agenda.
Leader is what Mayor Pete convinced really old white midwestern christians from small towns he is. So he did well.
It remains to be seen if the rest of the nation is all in on the status quo, small town white, christian, "rich people aren't the problem" thing. Because Bernie did well too so rich people are seen as a part of the problem.
And then there's the Trump Family exhibit A for the case that Rich People and their greed, cupidity and nepotism are very, very much part of the problem. We'll be seeing more of them too as the weeks roll by.
82
@Arthur I think you're spot on about the perceptions of Warren. I think she would make a great president and is certainly the candidate who has done most for ordinary Americans, bar none. But as you say, she has not chosen her battles well. I was dismayed at her decision to attack Sanders over what he allegedly said. Did Obama ever talk about being a victim of insittutional racism? Leaders don't complain.
16
@Arthur
Warren is losing support because in her efforts to broaden support, she's putting forth ridiculous promises.
I am referring to such whoppers as letting a trans high school student determine who the Secretary of Education is going to be.
If that's who you feel you have to cater to, you've lost your mind or lost your footing.
2
@Arthur Biden is gone because he doesn’t know how to run a campaign. Never has. Was a decent VP, certainly better than Cheney.
2