For that matter, why do we still have an electoral college?
1 person = 1 vote = true democracy
Our leaders tax people and decide how to spend their money. One person's vote shouldn't count more because of where they live.
That goes for Iowa's power for going first too...
2
I for one am tired of explaining this to voting age adults who should have learned this in fifth grade.
2
A lot of stuff taught in school made no sense, was not true or just busywork and obfuscation.
With all due respect to the people of the great state of Iowa, it is time to evaluate the outsized influence a relatively sparsely populated, 90% white state has on the Democratic Party nominee process.
I understand they are proud of their first-state status (and the millions of dollars spent in the 3+ years).
And caucuses would make sense if we also voted for president in this manner, but we don't.
DNC, get with it. We can still lose this election - too much is at stake.
2
Just another crisis in a long series:
1) An election process, that had 4 years to go right, went wrong, and likely due to incompetent management.
2) A president that shames America with every tweet and word coming from his foul mouth, that manages this country like the Taj Mahal casino project.
3) A company that fails at managing the design of an airplane, leading to two major carastrophes and loss of life.
4) A crisis of moral and cognitive dissonance in about 50% of society, who refuses to accept inconvenient facts.
5) Destroying the planet climate equilibrium beacause we want basically the latest US-designed chinese-manufactured gadget.
6) Failing to be the moral standard for democratic standards in the world, and becoming a country with a totalitarian Republican party promoting the cult of personality.
7) A Democratic Party promoting utopian socialist ideas, from people that have no clue what that means or leads to.
8) Failing to create as society new metrics to value growth. I just dream of a cryptocurrency that values good deeds, like trowing one less garbage bag this week, or taking the bike to work one day a year, and convert these deeds in monetary value. Do this before we go to guarateed minimum income.
9) Failing to find a unifying purpose in America.
10) Looking to a failure to beat trumpism in Nov 2020, if the start looks the way it does in Iowa.
Sad...
3
Would it be asking too much for all state primaries to be on the same day? If that’s a bad idea for some reason (though I’d love to know what it is), then maybe we should stagger the general election, too, and turn the entire process into a reality TV circus. Oh, wait, it already is.
5
I realize states set their own election laws, but it would be really interesting if primaries were kept as small as possible, so people would have a chance to see many different contenders. Regional primaries are the worst, creating a huge obstacle to a candidate who does not have a lot of money or support of the party. Have primaries every week for Congressional districts (ie, an elector), in various adjacent or nearby states, not an entire state at the same time. Start out with one or two and increase every week. States would remain in play for a month or two, and small campaigns would be given a chance to grow, if they're healthy. Since many candidates drop out and only one wins, there are a lot of orphaned votes at the end, so after thirty weeks of primaries in all 435 districts, the top two vote getters in each party who want to continue would compete in one final nationwide primary.
I think this would be a truly democratic method to choose our candidates and make more votes count. It's probably too complicated to work, and I'm sure most who read it will think it's a barnburner, but it would give the people a clearer choice. After the debacle in Iowa, the candidates were saying it was going to be a long night, yet they were stepping off planes in New Hampshire at 6 AM, obviously they didn't wait up. Iowa is in the rearview mirror for the next four years. It's too small to worry about in November.
1
Iowa is probably a good indicator what white, elderly voters will do at the polls- this is important because younger whites don’t vote (until they need government sponsored programs) and non white vote is a hit or miss depending on who is running and planet alignment. As we become more diverse and start voting CONSISTENTLY, Iowa’s relevance will diminish.
1
This mess is nothing. In presidential elections when you vote for a candidate you are actually choosing electors who are pledged to vote for the presidential candidate you have chosen. But in many states the electors, though pledged, are not compelled to vote for that candidate. They can vote for anyone. This has happened in past elections, but it has never changed the result. If Trump or some future scoundrel loses by a handful of electoral votes do you not think he will try to contact the electors and get them to change their votes?
2
Well, we watched some of the caucuses (caucusi?) on PBS last night, and it was more interesting than I had thought it would be - and so it continues.
For heaven's sake (and for ours): let's not have a third-party candidate, let's unite behind whomever is the Democratic party primary winner. Anyone. Please!
2
Starting the primary process in a small midwestern red state, where for months candidates are visiting every nook and and cranny while the other 49 states watch and wait their turn is ridiculous. States that have their primaries further down the line potentially lose clout, while front runners gain momentum without even stepping foot in many states. While voters then take on the bias of who is doing well and who is falling behind. Lower tier candidates take on a self fulfilling prophecy poor results beget more poor results. People tend to vote for a winner. It’s been a year or so that we’ve been listening to this group, but for those of us in states further down the calendar, we may never get a shot a casting a meaningful vote. Then the dems that live in red states will barely see the candidates again, or have an opportunity to cast meaningful vote in the general election due to the idiotic electoral college. And we call the this democracy? Only a very small, select group of this country gets to have a say in who will be president. Let’s find a way to take geography out of the equation, and starting treating us citizens as Americans, not occupants of select regions that increasingly becoming separate countries within America. One person, one vote, one day National holiday.
1
The only clear winner in this mess is Donald J. Trump, Mr. Chaos.
4
The dems are a joke. Was this a dry run for how they will use their "app" to try ond still te election in November? Talk about election interference, the dems are trying to perfect the art as quickly as they can.
“How a day that was supposed to bring clarity to the 2020 race turned into a cliffhanger caucus.” While the Iowa caucuses were indeed a fiasco, the idea that Iowa was going to bring “clarity” to the 2020 race is ridiculous. It’s the first primary, but its still only one primary and worth all of 49 delegates. The NYT hyped coverage (six stories per day) and speculative “analysis” did nothing but sensationalize the non-news out of Iowa - until last night when the media was left with a stunning no result. BTW, how did that needle gimmick work out last night?
2
More proof that more technology/smart apps don't necessarily improve something but can in fact screw stuff up or make it more vulnerable to hacks/glitches. It's also past time for the caucus system to be eliminated in favor of a primary. And it is past time for the primary season to be shortened – by half – and for the country to be divided into 4 or 5 geographic regions holding "super Tuesdays" with the different regions rotating who leads off. (It's also time for the Electoral College to be trashed. One vote should equal one vote in the 21st century.)
2
Donald Segretti and the Plumbers couldn’t have pulled a better prank then the hopeless caucusers did to themselves.
And to paraphrase Seinfeld ‘and you want to elect my President’
1
‘Could break Iowa’ you’re kidding of course. That caucus baloney has been broken for a long time.
‘Let them eat cake....ahh, hot dish’
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/dining/amy-klobuchar-hotdish.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
......and leave the rest of us alone
2
First, I think we need to do away with the caucuses and go to all vote-by-mail primaries with paper ballots. Next, I would like to see a system of four to six regional primaries, with regions rotating who goes first every election.
That will get rid of the problems of who goes first and make sure that if there are any glitches, there is always a hardcopy to check.
2
This Iowa Dem who caucused for Mayor Pete last nite in Des Moines has heard the excuses and more than wonders what kind of idiots run our party. The precinct caucus I attended was utter chaos, lacking any kind of normal formality. The 3 results--first and second alignment and delegates--were never officially reported to attendees, most of whom scattered based upon rumors after the first alignment. Whatever agenda was presented was a sham. Those in official positions acted more like politburo (sp?) members (granted, polite & earnest ones) than competent officials.
Now we find that the same lack of competence and seriousness exhibited at my caucus-by all reports one of the largest in the state--applies to reporting of results. No backup plan, no way of ensuring this was a meaningful experience for participants or viewers, no urgency to get the results out--a complete mess. We could have easily reported preliminary, reliable results with email photos of the 1,700 or so precinct results. Actual paper ballots could have been shipped and counted within a few hours. Why was this so hard?
Is our party ready to govern? Can we find professionals to match the amateurs currently in the White House, and apparently running our electoral system? I can believe there was no hacking by foreign powers. They don't need to hack us, just let us do our own self-destruction.
11
Who designed the App? The son of a Democratic bigwig in Iowa? Come on NYT! Find out who was responsible for designing the App and their relationship to the party leaders?
I'll bet the answers will be enlightening.
2
The app was designed by a firm comprised of former hi level staffers of Hillary's 2016 campaign.
@Jon I thought the same, and that if they were serious they would have spent some of the millions they rake in from this on an app that actually works.
Regardless of who the developers were, a crazed faith in technology underlies the Iowa meltdown and others sure to follow.
Well, Iowa has clearly not winnowed the field any (of people who made it this far, and people who didn't make it this far must really be kicking themselves)
3
Is it possible that Democratic leadership is this incompetent? They both the impeachment and now this.
2
Trump probably won a landslide 100% and now scratching their heads and wonder who he colluded with this time...
1
It's funny and sad. All these comments are pretending we still have a functioning democracy!
Did you read that Donald Trump beat the interfering in elections rap?
2
Given half an hour, my arthritic grandmother could have tabulated these results on a chalkboard. Makes me think every dolt involved in this mess should be fired, and on thinking about it, every dolt that even knew them should be fired. Perhaps that might wake up the DNC.
3
Why does it seem America cannot get ANYTHING right these days???
3
Iowa needs to be dealt with harshly. This is not a real election as it’s a primary for delegates.
The Democratic Party needs to suspend Iowa’s Democratic Party from the delegate count for the nomination and thus lower the delegate count threshold to win the nomination by whatever amount necessary.
Additionally Iowa doesn’t get to cast their delegates at the convention either. Stupidly like that needs to be punished.
3
As a Large D Dem. I'm willing to allow Iowa their more than 15 minutes of fame, provided they learn to code, if we can still let the South secede from the Union. That's my great compromise.
2
Funny thing is that the Ap was developed by a Hillary Clinton Campaign Alum. Isn't time the Clintons just go away.
3
Punxsutawney Don saw his "Shadow." Four more years of winter.
4
Meanwhile, the party of Trump is ROFL, thinking they could not have a better outcome had Putin interfered on their behalf.
If this Democrat is wondering if my party is up to the task of winning in 2020, I can't imagine what swing voters are thinking.
3
Too many of the commentators are all bend out shape because of the Iowa Caucus process and delay in delivery of the results.
If Iowans enjoy it and find it significant they should have it!
Other states can change their primaries' date -move them forward.
Also no clear winner deliver immediately - is actually interesting - SLOW MOVEMENT, no instant gratification... like the old days...
So chill -the results will be delivered later this week.
4
Trump often acts like a Democrat mole, bent on destroying the Republican Party from within. Democrats often act like Republican stooges, bent on destroying themselves. So at least there is symmetry and balance in The System.
2
@Richard Schumacher - Trump only switched from being a Democrat to a Republican a few years before he ran. Do you really think a Republican would get anywhere with zoning and permits in New York City?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the State of Iowa....the Democratic Party , the administrators and leaders of the IDP must bear the blame for this total failure. A fine example of arrogant inefficiency managed by unqualified IT personnel and inexperienced Democratic Party officials.
4
@andre duvall - Thank you for reminding us that Iowa did not make these mistakes. On CNN last night they were talking about how old untrained people using the app and tech screwed this up. It's becoming apparent it was actually the app. The older folks just had the good sense to call when the app didn't work. CNN was talking to a campaign worker who had been on hold to report in his numbers to HQ for hours and they kept talking to him when the number answered and distracted him until HQ hung up. I felt really guilty for laughing. Poor guy! I'm sorry!
1
So now since this process didn’t go as planned this year compared to the previous year, (kind of a coincidence) the victory by Bernie is tainted??? I wonder if Joe was in first would this delay would have occurred??? Man, somebody is trying real hard to gum things up??? I wonder who would want this???
1
The big winners are Bidden and Trump.
Bidden because he surely got trounced on his first at bat, and now now one will know for sure how bad.
Trump because, well, just look at the hot mess the Democratic party is. They are so bad they can't even choose a leader. This just gave much more ammo to Trump, all he has to do to prove the Democrats are incapable, is point at them.
The biggest loser was Sanders, who by all indicators was on top right to the very moment the 'software failed'. Yea right.
Echoes of 2016 will not go down into the night any time soon. The Sanders people might just let the DNC know, again, what they think of getting robbed twice in a row.
3
@AutumnLeaf - Bernie Sanders joined the Democratic Party for the 2016 primaries, and left right after he lost. He won his Senate seat as an independent in 2018, and refused the Democratic nomination he was offered. He has already filed his papers for the 2024 Senate race, as an independent. Why does he complain that the DNC doesn't want him? He doesn't want them either.
I agree 2016 was unfair, but he is not staying within the Party to influence it. He didn't create the problems, necessarily, but he didn't try to fix them either.
4
Lead with the Iowa caucuses? Never again.
6
This is just way past embarrassing.
Are these the same Democrats who want control of healthcare for 330 million Americans?? I surely hope not.
5
Florida must be feeling pretty good about now. People will start talking more about "apps" and less about "hanging chad".
1
Bottom line, those elected officials have a duty to ensure that no President abuses his or her power for personal gain. With all the baffle gab about, it was a perfect call, to he made the call, to every President dors it so get over it, to yes what he did was wrong but....., if you are unable or confused as to what your next move is then no one can help you. Who ever is elected in this nomination everyone has to get behind that individual for one purpose and one purpose only. To remove an administration that has gone completely rogue and send them all back to the stone age. It will most likely take the next 8-12 years to fix the mess they have created anyways. Do not allow a Republican near a seat of power, they have shown themselves to be absolutely unable and unwilling to respect their oath of office.
1
Two observations: Why does it take 5 separate front-page articles about Iowa to piece together one cohesive story?
Second: No update on Iowa Republican Governor Kim Reynold's statement of assurance and defense of Iowa's Caucus system.
Why is this notable? It is notable because the Governor and Republicans also see the ca$h cow the two warring political factions bring to local and state coffers: The hotel rooms, rental cars, auditorium and public rentals; shopping, restaurants... Eleven million dollars this election cycle.
Republicans in Iowa realize if the Democrat's current technological debacle is seen as a harbinger signaling the obsolescence of the Caucus process; they too loose the position of being First False-Prophets-of-Presidential-Prognostication
3
Time for a vote of “No Confidence” in the Iowa Democratic Party and the DNC! Where is Tom Perez anyway? We need new leadership now.
2
And these are the same people that want to take control of my health care??
No way.
3
The antiquated Iowa caucuses deserved to die for a long time. Just stop now. No more. New Hampshire is almost as bad, except they do have the privacy of voting booths, In New Hampshire at least the disabled, those who need a babysitter, those to work the night shift, and others of that ilk can participate.
The obvious solution is one day for a national primary. Preferably on a weekend.
We’re supposed to be having a democracy here.
2
In case you missed it, Donald Trump won approximately 32,000 of the 33,000 votes in the Iowa Republican caucus. No glitches at all.
3
Oh, I see. Sanders got the most votes, Biden got the least. That's what the hold up is about. We can't have the public knowing that, now can we?
2
And yet, I got out of bed this morning, made breakfast, went to work and will sleep soundly tonight whether I know the results from Iowa tomorrow, the next day or they wait to announce them at the convention.
Much ado about nothing .... much like Iowa itself.
2
You've clearly been riled up by the more spastic and impatient members of the media. Wolf Blitzer was whingeing before we'd even departed the gymnasiums, churches and civic centers. Would have been wiser to get a good night's sleep, allowing Iowans to carefully count the ballots. Breathe deep: once the caucus results are released, they'll be accurate. Isn't that more important than speed?
7
It's actually fair to have the first primary in a small state, where candidates can afford to advertise on TV and hire a staff that can cover all areas of the state.
Having said that, to have the first contest in lily white Iowa is ridiculous. The first contest, at least for the Democrats, should be in South Carolina.
4
@Erik - Rhode Island and Providence Plantations!
Wonder why the company that made the app decided to call themselves "Shadow" instead of something like, oh, I don't know, "Sunshine."
Sunshine is a good disinfectant. Bad things like to hide in the shadows, things like cockroaches. Then again, they could have called themselves "Cockroach" and maybe that would have scared away Iowa's Democratic Party. "Shadow"/"Cockroach" would be better off if it had. At this point the company's viability is tenuous at best.
As the NY Times just reported, NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg is now escalating his TV campaign advertising.
Perhaps we should scrap door-to-door campaigning and just select the president based on who has the best 30-second, 60-second, 2-minute and 5-minute commercials - on tv and the internet.
Or, perhaps, the candidates should compete on a Jeopardy! presidential candidate format - with or without Ken Jennings - hosted by Alex Trebek. We can have quarter-final matches, then the semi-final matches, followed by a 2-day total point finals match, with the winner becoming president.
1
So, once again, American politics has forced us to confront voting for an evil, corrupt & uncaring party that has perfected its legal & illegal voting manipulations and a party that means well but is totally incompetent & cowardly. What a choice!
My bet is that this software was written in Java or C# or Python or one of those too-high-level "safe" languages using masses of open-source javascript frameworks & add-ons, designed to develop software quickly & cheaply, & managed by that 22-year-old half-a-development methodology, Agile Scrum, by underpaid, mid-level programmers. This is the typical situation in today's for-profit corporate IT departments.
1
Not to be paranoid, but looking at that photo with paper preference slips being handed around, you have to wonder about ballot security. Then look at one of the blank slips. It's all handwritten, from the name of the preferred candidate to the voter's contact information. If this is the paper backup they're relying on, what a mess. What if handwriting is illegible? What if the voter didn't fill out all the information? If I was a candidate who narrowly lost, I'd howl, and understandably so. They've said about using photos of results to figure this out. What, exactly, is a photo of a result? These caucuses take place in 1,700 locations ranging from church basement to college gyms. Are we certain that photos, whatever they might be, were taken everywhere?
The debriefing on this meltdown promises to be fascinating, and here's hoping that NYT and other media sticks with it. Iowa is a small state and may not have the media muscle to be the watchdog that's required here. At the very least, the media needs to explain, in detail, what happened and, in detail, how the vote audit was accomplished. Seen way too many stories today written by journalists who seem overly prone to taking someone's word that the results, ultimately, will be trustworthy. At this point, how can anyone know?
The takeaway is, stop with the high-falutin' apps and other digital technology to accomplish elections. At least with hanging chad, there's a chance to re-construct.
1
The entire caucus process is idiotic and outdated. It gets in the way of a wider participation and the inclusion of all potential voters. I am not sure why in the 21st century we have to wait on hickville Iowa to tell the rest of us which of the Democratic candidates is viable! Beside the process issues, neither Iowa or New Hampshire represent the demographics or the economical fabrics of 2020 America. Time to move on past Jimmy Carter's success in Iowa and let's open up the first round of the primary process.
Tom Perez and his staff of so called DNC leadership failed to show foresight in this critical election by retaining Iowa and New Hampshire as the leading primary states. They speak of voter inclusion but yet they select the least diversified states and with one of them still living the past with this caucus process. They should resign and hand this over to someone more competent.
Bloomberg is the smart one by ignoring Iowa and New Hampshire all together. Let's move to a first round primary with a handful of states on the same day with enough cross section of representation and please include one of the bigger states like N.Y and CA on a rotational basis.
3
This is all a plot by the Democrats to upstage President Trump's State of The Union Message by announcing the results not at 5 PM today but at 9 PM tonight EST.
1
Who knows what politicians are really like? When my grandfather ran for Congress, political operatives stage-managed everything he did.
2
It's time to revamp the entire system.
No declarations of candidacy until January 2, of the election year.
A National Primary Day on April 1, for obvious reasons-it's plenty of time to campaign across the nation.
From April until November we can endure the ads.
No need for conventions.
2
@RABNDE - Plenty if time? To me something else was obvious from the date of April 1. It really reflects what politicians think of their constituents.
Iowa caucus results come from public voting. Your neighbors know who you chose, and you know who your neighbors chose. Most primary results come from private one-choice voting. Some states have private multiple-choice voting.
We do not encourage experimentation to design an election system that would give fairer or more representative results. We have not arranged tests of various systems and comparison of results -- not with private money and certainly not paid for by our tax dollars. We like the system under which our side has a greater chance of winning, and defend it with the tenacity and honesty of lawyers defending their clients.
Since elections are controlled by states, they do not happen in the same way in all states. Some states make it easy for everyone to vote, some make it difficult, and some make it easy for some to vote and difficult for others (a way of rigging the election, which many voters in these states refuse to see as rigging). Clever and specious arguments abound.
Monarchs get their positions by chance and biology; the only valid argument for the system is that it prevents civil wars. Our presidents get their positions from a system that makes very little sense and does not work the way it was designed to work; like monarchy, it usually prevents civil strife. Now it is failing -- again.
2
I am trying to think what the outrage is about. This is not a problem with inaccuracy. It seems that the results will be quite accurate. What seems to be the problem is that certain people, particularly pundits, don't have the results fast enough. So, is the real problem the count, or is it our demand for instant gratification?
4
It is unfair to expect the electorate to show up at a specific time and place and spend hours engaging in retail politics. It is also unrealistic for Iowa (and New Hampshire) to be the first two momentum makers for Democrats. The same can be said for South Carolina, because it's a state the Dems can't win.
I recommend a mini-super Tuesday with primaries in the small four (IA, NH, SC, NV) on the same day in early February, then move on to Super Tuesday. In the alternative, hold a national primary on the same day. Yes, I realize the latter will likely result in brokered conventions but, back in the smoke-filled room days, Dems used to win without a lot of internal dissension. Make the Dems great again. I'll bring the cigars.
Time for Iowa to move into the modern world and have a real primary that is ore inclusive. At least we think they know how to do that. They have proven that they can't do a caucus successfully.
1
In Canada we vote by marking an X next to someone's name on a piece of paper while standing behind a cardboard screen in a church or school. Votes are counted immediately by trained volunteers, results come within hours. This works for a population of 37 million, so Americans ought to be able to make it work at the state level.
4
Behold the reason why elections by mail only make sense in a technological world run by software neophytes. Senator Ron Wyden of OR has for years advocated for the reliability and security of mail-only elections. The US Mail never fails and machine tallies of ballots remain the most reliable and secure.
3
Good. Delighted to see the debacle. Iowa is an unrepresentative state, with an unrepresentative caucus structure. No more caucuses -- go with primaries, with paper ballots. Let other states (small to midsized, with more diverse populations and more urban/suburban areas) go first.
Iowa does not deserve its first in the nation status, and distorts the outcome. Enough. No more. The caucuses have outlived their usefulness.
2
Some renewable energy ideas are failures. Corn ethanol in gasoline is an inert ingredient and an excess carbon source. Time to liquidate it.
4
Here's my vote: switch to a primary -- you know, that thing run by the board of elections with voting machines.
The Iowa caucuses have gone from quaint to overblown and now dysfunctional. A huge amount of time and money is spent in Iowa. What used to be a somewhat informative exercise in small-scale democracy has become an all-out effort requiring millions of dollars and thousands of campaign workers, all of it dependent on a party-run rickety system of vote tallying, It's time to stop the silliness and switch to a primary vote. It's also time for Iowa to matter less in the scheme of choosing a nominee.
That said, this year's effort in Iowa has brought out more voters and gotten more people involved in the election. Organizers have gone deep. So on that note, good for Iowa. Just don't make us go through this debacle again.
2
As others have noted, the whole tradition with Iowa is way past due for retirement. I’m sick of hearing about the kitschy butter sculptures and bad food every four years. Why should one state always lead? Why couldn’t states participate in a lottery every four years, thereby giving every state a chance at first up?
1
I'm not sure I understand what the furor is about, aside from the lack of satisfaction about an instant result. It's not how Iowans vote in the actual election. Is there a link between this app and the eventual election that I'm missing?
2
This exactly. I don't care. It's messed up, but has no bearing on anything else going forward so long as they don't use the app again. I wish ppl would stop giving things like this so much power over the narrative. It's just anxiety.
1
Iowa should no longer hold influence over the media’s framing of national politics.
State election officials have long been jailed for corruption.
The antiquated caucus system does not even fairly represent Iowans since many can not spend hours caucusing.
More importantly, the state no longer reflects the demographics or sensibilities of the rest of the country.
Iowa also confers far too few delegates to warrant the money spent in that State to win delegates. Investments in highly populated states with high delegates would be a better use of resources.
dear DNC: an old adage of management is this-- when something has gone wrong, make a move. don't dwell on the error, make a change. in this case, fire Tom Perez, send an SOS hiring document to Howard Dean. He can unite this party in a 50 state, organized and United manner. now is not the time to evaluate the silliness of the Iowa caucus; it's time to pivot and win. which we can, IF we get a proven organizer to move us forward. Dear Howard Dean: say yes.
The caucus process is interesting, people have a chance to talk and listen so maybe the election is controlled somewhat less by the media, tough to call it a democratic result, though. That being said, the Democrats are inconsistent and incompetent, introducing tech, hackable tech, into the process after complaining for 4 years about the Republican/Russian hacking conspiracy. This clarifies something for me however, when I listen to the candidates and the party talk. Why should they make sense when they aren't listening to themselves?
What we need is electoral reform, plain and simple.
1) Rank choice voting should be instituted in all states. This will improve individuals’ ability to vote for the candidates that they actually want to win, without them “throwing their vote away.” It also helps to build consensus candidates, which will hopefully heal some of the divisive strife our country currently faces.
2) The electoral college should be kept (all of those big, low-density states in the middle of the country should have their voices count too, and not just be overrun by the populous coasts). Yet the electoral votes of each state should be divided proportionally to how the residents voted, and not be a “winner takes all” situation.
3) Ideally, there will be a national primary day, so no one state/region gets more say in the future of our country’s political candidates than another. There would be an initial primary in early summer where the top 4 candidates would then be eligible to be listed on the next ballot (each candidate with a minimum of 15% with the use of rank choice voting). The next ballot would then be the November election, with rank voting to arrive at the winner.
4) If we can’t do a national primary day, then having a series of primaries with at least one state from each region represented (whether the 4 census regions of West/Midwest/South/Northeast or the 9 census subdivisions).
1
Some suggestions about how to fix our Presidential election:
1) Expand the role of the Federal Election Commission to include administration and oversight of Presidential elections and primaries. This would require a Constitutional amendment, which is probably not possible in today's divisive environment. But we need a process across the states which is consistent so as to guarantee equal protection under the law for all potential voters.
The FEC is already an independent agency, and so is governed by an independent commission, a la the Federal Reserve.
So, part of this is to institute effective controls to keep the President from unduly influencing the FEC (by packing it with sycophants, i.e.). This is a real can of worms, but would need to be done.
2) Schedule primaries in groups. They don't have to be regional, but they should be grouped to appropriately represent the country overall, including demographics. Rotate the groups every election.
3) Shorten the campaign cycle. Right now, it's continuous from one election to the next. Make it a fixed time, such as 6 months. Do we really need more time than that? Ignore what the media says about that.
4) Reduce the number of candidates. It's ridiculous and unworkable to have dozens. Set a limit per party, say 5.
5) Repeal Citizens United, and institute effective campaign finance laws. And enforce them.
6) Control disinfomation, especially from outside the country. And on Facebook.
There are more, certainly.
2
More general point. Old things are not by definition best because they are first. They are just old.
electoral college, caucuses, tv debates , US constitution are simply outdated. By being first you are not getting the warranty of being the best for 300 years , you get to be the first to modernize. That is not US strongest feature.
We have oldest infrastructure, slowest internet , oldest airports , slowest trains etc.
time to catch with the rest of civilized world
1
The whole primary system is crazy, expensive, and a waste of time. A simple system with a preliminary election where anyone can run (with common sense restrictions). And a final election which pairs off the two candidates with the highest vote totals from the preliminary election. The candidate with the highest vote total in the second election is the winner. All this could be accomplished in 6 months, and the winner to be determined by a pure popular vote. The electoral college must go!
2
What is this "power" Iowa has over elections. Winners in the Iowa caucus sometimes win the nomination and other times they do not. If not for the media's hyper-focus this event would be, as it should, a minor story.
w
And maybe by the time of the Dem Convention we'll know just who gets those Iowa caucus delegates. It's past time to get rid of these early primaries that consume money, exhaust attention spans, and fail to represent the full span of the Dem Party. Two or three Super Tuesdays is what is needed.
Enough with Iowa already. It's like Brigadoon except we unfortunately get to hear from Iowa every 4 years and not once every hundred.
Press: please breathe gently into a paper bag.
The results aren't going to change because we know them a day later. The momentum isn't going to shift because we know the results a day later. The world isn't going to end because we know the results a day later. They are trying to get things right. Instant "reporting" has led to lots of speculation and misinformation. So, seems important to get things right.
Yes, media coverage might be slightly different than it might have been if the results were announced last night. I know lots of other "non-news" events, such as the fore-ordained and forever known impeachment results are upcoming. But guess who can help ameliorate those effects: you, press, you. You can do something about it--you can leave off the breathless coverage of the meaningless impeachment hearings for a second and cover the Iowa results. You can not spend so much time dissecting the rantings of a man with mental illness and a phone after the state of the union.
The sky ain't falling. Stop pounding your fists on the floor and wailing.
1
My understanding is that the problem is that while the new smartphone app was tested on and works on Android & IOS phones, it was not tested, and does not work, on the type of phone used by most caucus-goers, i.e., the Grasshopper.
1
Great. Now the whole country hates us, in addition to believing Iowa is something it's not. (There are no pigs in my back yard.) The caucuses are misunderstood. There is no "peer pressure," and they are managed by volunteers, ordinary citizens who care. Most Iowans did not ask for the national spotlight or the media swarm. I will not defend the caucus system, but I will defend the commitment of ordinary Iowans to take their responsibility seriously.
1
The whole idea of making a caucus system that draws a minority of Iowa Democrats to participate to be the focal point of a year's campaigning and spending in a tiny, rural, white, often Republican-voting state makes no sense. Instead it has become shark bait for the billionaire predator Bloomberg and a punching bag for the person impersonating a president who lives in the White House.
1
Do you want to vote for a Party Candidate to be President that can't effectively conduct a Primary? Badly flawed results data collection.
So the NYT complains that a rural largely non diverse state has an outsize influence over the primary season.
Meanwhile all that I see on the front page is coverage of Iowa. If it is so insignificant, why do you devote so much coverage to it? Some of this influence is driven by media coverage. Do we really need to see footage of Elizabeth Warren pretending to enjoy a potluck in some small town?
2
Correct me if I'm wrong here--but wouldn't public funding of elections render shadowy PACs moot and help get corrupt money out of politics?
If elections were publicly funded, we could have a National Primary Day--all primaries for federal office on the same day, with ranked-choice voting--because public funding would eliminate the concern about wealthier candidates having front-loaded war-chests, and if the one vote were in May--not February--candidates would still have the same amount of time as they do now to cover the country by plane, train, and automobile. We already have months on end of debates and media coverage that permit us voters to know who they are; that would not change.
Even before last night's fluff-up, many voters considered one or two early states winnowing the field to be undemocratic. No state, rural or heavily populated, should be deciding for everybody else which candidates are "viable."
5
Why they still use caucus while other states have embraced standard voting practices still baffles me. Tradition is good for holidays and personal lives. For something as major as electing Presidential nominees, start using the practice the majority of the country uses.
7
There are four problems with this process.
1) Too many good choices
2) Nominee needs majority support
3) Diverse and accessible primaries
4) Party needs to unite behind nominee
Divide the country into 4-5 regions and have them go in a rotational order. Every region holds an open primary, not a caucus. This way working people can vote after their shifts and non-registered or non-partisan voters can also participate. Ranking choices makes the process ensure the winner has the majority of the party behind him or her and gives less viable candidates an opportunity to be heard. Winner take all maintains the snowball effect of an eventual vi victor emerging before the convention. Now he or she has majority support and every voter in every state was heard.
1
It makes no sense to turn primary elections over to the control of political parties, any more than it would general elections. This debacle certainly proves that primary and general elections should be conducted in the same manner by statewide election entities. Sure, political parties can endorse candidates as they wish, but control over elections - absolutely not!
6
Iowa already has a representation in the Senate and Electoral College that is vastly beyond their proportion of the population.
Why should they have an outsized influence on the voting as well?
14
As inconvenient as it is, if this debacle leads to change in the DNC primary process, it will be worth it. Iowa has 4 years to come up with a system for 2024, when a new slate of candidates will be running against Trump's re-election successor. That is, unless his party ignores the Constitution, something that would not be unprecedented given what we've already seen.
Here in Washington state we ditched the caucus system in favor of primaries and also have voting by mail for all elections. Voters get paper ballots to complete and have weeks to return them by mail before the date of the election (no postage needed). They also get voter pamphlets outlining candidates positions and descriptions of other ballot issues like levies and initiatives that let voters study them over time. Those without permanent addresses can still register and get ballots. It’s simple, low tech and effective. No voting machines to hack, no lines to stand in, no need to skip work or get child care and there is a permanent paper trail that can be checked and recounted if needed. This should be considered nationwide as a potential solution to our voting problems and caucus insanity.
38
@Michele: This is the kind of formalized process every political jurisdiction should require. It levels the playing field. No voter should have to go to the polls without a pamphlet of the statements of the candidates on the ballot.
12
@Michele Same here in Oregon - except we have to pay for postage - but there are plenty of ballot drop-off sites available too. But then it seems like a lot of people are invested in not making voting easy and accessible to all.
6
@Michele they should do something like that here in Chicago, especially when the election also involves choosing local smaller city officials.
3
With something as important as presidential elections we should amend the constitution and make a formal change to how we elect our leader. One person, one vote, no electoral college, primaries held on a Super Tuesday/Any Day all at once, and mandatory voter registration.
We have made huge changes in the past to what was written in 1776. I do not feel the founding fathers meant for that document to be completely inflexible. Our democracy is now barely hanging on with a "king" installed due to the archaic electoral college. We have amended the constitution 27 times, it is past time for one more amendment to keep our republic intact.
21
@georgiadem: The Founding Fathers (Abigail Adams excepted) were constrained to allow state-level liberty to enslave to unite the 13 colonies into an independent nation.
1
It's funny. Perhaps not to the candidates and all those whom canvassed for them. But to those of us who suffered all the byproduct of media spin and the candidates soundbites, why is this arcane system elevated to a level of such priority? I think now it finally sinks in what a waste of time and effort it is to focus on Iowa. Means zip to me here in Seattle. Always has, and at age 64, I'm sure now, that it always will. Bloomberg won, I heard his message. Not that I'm going to support the man. But he campaigned Nationwide and won with his 30 second Trump dumps.
Real change requires real willingness to evaluate the process you display your product. Madison Avenue 101. Simplicity, Clarity, and creating a demand, need for your product. The democrats need to understand product placement and those who need the product.
Confusion on this level is embarassing. That is why I personally find it hilarious. Get serious about how you campaign and do it Now! There is no tomorrow in this election cycle.
8
This whole imbroglio is a reminder that Iowa (and New Hampshire for that matter) are like the little brother and sister of the election process.
They are small, and relatively insignificant in the great scheme of things but they are part of the American family and we want them to feel important and part of the process. So we create a booster seat for each state and allow them to sit at the table. It's a necessary part of the window dressing for our political process and really should not be changed.
After Super Tuesday, Iowa and New Hampshire will hardly matter so leave them alone. Taking away the caucus and primary from both states would be like leaving your little brother and sister behind.
1
I live in Illinois. I am disgusted that by the time I get to vote, the nominee will already be decided. Perhaps this is why so many are disengaged the election season.
I have not watched a single debate. Why should I bother when most candidates will drop out before I get to vote?
I will still vote. Bloomberg 2020.
14
@LS Should Bloomberg win the general election in November he will not only make history but he will also have made Iowa and New Hampshire irrelevant moving forward.
2
What no one is saying is that this intense focus on an atypical state cost the campaigns a ton of money which some were very proud of having raised from grassroots supporters i.e. us. All for what? Even without a delayed result we paid for the frenzy oriented towards people in a rural and small town state unlike the places where most of us live with very different problems than Iowans have--like thousands of people without homes. Yes Iowans saw an influx of cash and we got a lot of exposure to candidates and what they tell residents of small communities, but that's about it. Abd in the end the Democrats look like doofuses, especially those claiming victory, though the collapse of thei ap was not our fault
8
The caucuses are as modern as the Pony express. Perhaps, stepping into the 21st century might be an option?
14
Iowa does not deserve the prominence it receives in the presidential nominating process. Time to knock the state off that perch. As for Representative A.O-C., her statement (“ “If I could have one wish...I should have asked Santa to never have us relitigate 2016 ever again.”) says it all. By practically forcing impeachment proceedings on her party, she and her freshman cohorts have all but secured 4 more imperial years for Trump. Rep. Occasion-Cortez is young and dynamic and full of promise, but she does not seem to comprehend the mindset of middle America. It is time for her to talk less and listen (and learn) more. Experience counts.
9
Nor does she need to. The power is on the coasts. Middle ‘Merica is having its moment in the sun. But it will continue to fade.
1
Egg on the face of the D party leader in this state; one has to think there may have been a con factor in "selling" the use of this APP, whatever it was. Hope someone looks into the fact that it was a disaster and at what cost? Just goes to show you technology ain't always that grand.
3
I’d like to see reporting on what Iowa does to protect this privilege which I’d guess is more about all the money it gets in the process than anything else.
3
Wasn't it Will Rogers who once said: "I don't belong to any organized political party, I'm a Democrat"?
4
If this meltdown is what it takes to knock Iowa off its perch of importance in selecting the nominee for president, I’m glad it happened.
12
Iowa State democratic committee is a national disaster. No more first or last primaries. They are out.
8
This is not the time to mess with the vote. There is a month for Nevada to do an emergency ballot print so people can vote by paper ballot without fear of hacking, buggy programs, weak cell phone reception,or understandable mistakes by those who were not raised on computers. I am appalled at the Dems incompetence.
10
Did those in charge think of testing this system before deploying it last night?
Where is the adult supervision in the Iowa Democratic Party?
5
This is crazy. What do you do with a partial vote count?
Forget the release. Get a big name audit firm to certify the counts if they can do it in a week or discard the results and let Iowa schedule a primary for one of the state primary days.
1
Why is Mayor Pete declaring victory without a count?
7
@Jacquie, they all are.
One reason Iowa matters is that 31 counties in Eastern Iowa went for Obama twice and then elected Trump because, as a pollster said, they were looking for solutions.
There are people writing for the Times that apparently to this day have no idea why Trump won or why Obama voters made the difference for him.
If you think it was because of wascally Wussians, that may be part of why you're parking cars for the people who don't.
8
The outsized attention that the Iowa caucuses receive always seems to get the Presidential contest to a confusing start. This is not the fault of Iowans, who do their duty and participate. But Iowa is no bellweather of a state whose winner portends the nomination, let alone the Presidency. Short of a National primary, each of the two parties should agree to hold a series of primaries on the same day, so that there is a cross-section of the voters for each party get a chance to participate. Not everyone wants to show up at a caucus. For many, if not most, voters, it's a private matter.
2
Matt and Sydney come on, the only thing that was broken last night was the media coverage that had hours of air time and nothing to report. When Iowa, no matter how long it takes, fails to regularly and reliably pick a winner, then will the caucuses will be obsolete.
2
A few days ago The Times reported that, though not ethnically diverse, Iowa is like most of the US - with an aging population.
So, they took their byzantine electoral system, cobbled together a phone app to do the tabulating, and handed it to a bunch of Senior Citizens?
The seniors should have brought their grandchildren to the party, we'd probably have the results by now.
9
The caucus system (not just in Iowa, but especially there) is inherently such an ordeal and so inconvenient, that it is really a form of voter suppression -- because it discourages people from participating in the vote to select the party's nominee. Sure, it's a primary and not a general election, but then so was the old White Primary in the southern states.
5
How about letting another few more diverse and representative states have a chance at being first in the nation primaries going forward?
Illinois would be a great choice to replace Iowa. It has a diverse population, one very large city, several smaller cites, and a large agrarian-small town population as well. It is in the Midwest and spans from the Great Lakes to the South.
1. Illinois (Midwest)
2. New Hampshire/Massachusetts (NE)
3. South Carolina (South)
4. Nevada/Oregon (West)
5. Super Tuesday
5
As long as our media actually endorses candidates (and acts accordingly), we shouldn't expect our political proceedings to run corruption-free. Whether or not this situation became at some point "orchestrated" (or the Des Moines Register poll that was also held back) we can still learn a lot from how the different candidates interpreted the same information (presumably). In comparing their speeches after the event, I thought many of the candidates acted irresponsibly and even immaturely. When the final results of the caucus and the Des Moine Register poll are revealed it might be useful to go back and evaluate how the candidates and the media had behaved. They count on us just looking forward - and being clueless.
3
AFAIC, Iowa can stop fiddling with the papers, the screenshots, the app, the whatever. Their ineptitude has invalidated the results. I will never believe the outcome, whether my candidate wins or not.
I responded to specific solicitations to support my candidate's campaign in Iowa. I would like a refund of those contributions. I believe Iowa owes us a lot more than tallies that will never overcome the cloud of suspicion that the Iowa Dems' mishandling of this has generated. They have embarrassed everyone who's a member of the party. Mishaps occur, but not to clear the app you're going to rely on for reporting to make sure it's not subject to domestic and international hacking? That's inexcusable.
Never again does this state come before Super Tuesday. Ever.
7
If the Democrats can't design and test a software application, nor have a proper backup system in place, how do they think they can take over the US health care system, a far more science-based, human-based system?
13
@SS watch them blame Trump for colluding with China this time
Time for the Federal Election Commission to step in. Step 1. Scrap all caucuses. Step 2. Institute a lottery for selecting the order of states. Hold the lottery 2 years before election day. After the order of primary states is selected, have three state primaries per week during election year. Step 3. Repeat this process every four years so that no state holds the "first in the nation" status.
7
@BK - No. The Federal Election Commission has nothing to do with political party caucuses. They the arbitrary construction and sole responsibility of the parties.
Because the caucus system is so byzantine and basically a form of voter suppression, it should be abolished and replaced with primaries, preferably a national primary.
6
@BK - No. The Federal Election Commission has nothing to do with political party caucuses. They the arbitrary construction and sole responsibility of the parties.
Because the caucus system is so byzantine and basically a form of voter suppression, it should be abolished and replaced with primaries, preferably a national primary.
4
What we need:
Six regional primaries -
rotate who goes first
one regional primary every ten days -
finished in two months
regionally you'd get cities, suburbs, rural areas and diversity of voters -
the only ones benefiting from this system are folks who own TV stations in Iowa and NH and these obsessed over voters
if we can dream let's add
1. automatic voter registration the day you turn 18
2. all election days on a Saturday
3. rank choice voting
4. end of electoral college
10
All primaries, all on day one. This Iowa (and soon to be NH) farce has been going too long.
I have watched this nonsense since 1968. Time to bring this into the 21st century.
11
Things change. Iowa's time has passed.Six decades ago.
9
Back Off -
Iowa Haters.
As a grandson of two native Iowans
I will remind you that actual democracy is
an unkempt affair.
So the vote returns will take a day to be made public.
Learn a little patience.
You are the type of people who, if you car goes into
a ditch on a snowy day, floor the accelerator and wonder
why you made the situation only worse.
Iowa gives the candidates time to fine tune their campaigns
and time to determine that they are not ready to run for president, or perhaps even qualified.
Less reliance on technology and more footwork by the
The New York Times, via having reporters visiting the caucuses in Des Moines, Dubuque, Council Bluffs, Ames, Iowa City
Davenport and four small towns, would have sufficed.
A little statistical analysis based on that collected data would have given a fairly accurate approximation of what the Caucus results would have been like.
Meanwhile my Cousins tell me that they Caucused for me,
so I would like to announce with 17 votes announced, I am
the front runner coming out of Iowa and now it is on to
New Hampshire.
John Brown is on you way in 2024 !
4
This is quite apt. At this point, we should be asking: Why are we even bothering? We have a wanna-be dictator in Trump. Let's just give it to him! What's all this nonsense about democracy and voting etc. etc.? Look at all the time and money this democracy business consumes. The country is run by the rich and the Republicans are all fine with his criminal behavior. That's half of us. Maybe it would all work out.
1
Iowa needs to join the 21st Century and just dump this caucus absurd nonsense.
Hang on to paper ballots though!
Obviously electronic voting machines are easily hacked and manipulated (Mississippi), so paper ballots must be retained to insure each vote is accurate.
Tell me why Ivanka Trump got a trademark for "voting machines" while visiting China in November 2018 with her daddy?
A new fashion accessory, no doubt?
3
How much more evidence of malfeasance do we need? Even the most skeptical observer of the DNC must now conclude that the Democratic Party Overlords that control this entire nomination process are either:
a) Hopelessly incompetent bumblers.
b) Power mad Machiavellian schemers who scorn voters enough to perpetually deny us any real say in the outcome.
7
Watching MSNBC’s coverage of the caucuses last night made me mindful of Walter Cronkite’s 1950s-early 1960s “You Were There” show where reporters dressed in contemporaneous garb went through gatherings at historical events like the signing of the Declaration of Independence and waded into a crowd of the signers asking them what they were up to.
MSNBC reporters were walking up to caucus-goers as they were deliberating and butting in to their conversations. The camera-struck locals all seem to embrace the interruptions by reporters.
At one point, a moderator had just begun a presentation to a caucus group and Katy Tur walked up and asked him a question. The elector went googly eyed and broke off from what he was doing to chat up Tur.
Later, Tur drew loud crowd reactions and cheers from the various caucus teams as she roamed across the huge voting space where caucus members were huddling hither, thither, and yon.
Participatory journalism, television star style, with reporters as adjunct caucus members.
1
There's an easy answer. If the party is too weak to remove Iowa as the first contest, whatever date Iowa chooses, a state with many more delegates and more diversity picks the same date. At the last convention, Michigan, for example, had 81 delegates to Iowa's 30. It's more diverse and is critical to electing a D. Iowa is out of the picture in the general election strategy. This is a total disgrace.
3
Enough already.
Iowa: lead, follow or get out of the way.
4
One wonders if the Iowa democratic party cannot handle its caucuses, why should the public have faith in the Democratic Party to run the government. Even worse is the so called quality control new. If so, were all the prior Iowa caucuses questionable because of no quality control. Is the U.S.A. a first world country any more? should we send observers to India to learn how to run an election? The Iowa caucuses would make a great entry into Soviet anti-American propaganda. Whose is being fired because of this gross incompetence? Iowa is the laughingstock of the U.S. if not the world.
4
Iowa's caucus mess up highlights the need for NYS officials and officials from around the country to review the integrity of our current election machines. Are our election machines in NYS hack proof? Can they malfunction? Many people think they can. The American people need to trust the integrity of our election results.
Election mess ups could happen in NYS and around the nation. PAUL FEINER, Greenburgh, NY Town Supervisor
4
I’m married to a brilliant tech guy, who informs me that this disaster should not have happened had people running and organizing the caucuses been properly trained AND had had a Plan B “just in case.” Tallying up the votes is a simple task.
Haven’t we learned, after 2016, to have a paper trail?!
Lastly, DNC must end the reign of Iowa, I like Iowa, great people, but We, the People are diverse and ALL of us want a say! Primaries are the only way to go, period!
4
The real problem is the DNC, which has foisted this unrepresentative, undemocratic caucus on us for too long.
The DNC needs to put the interest of all Democrats first, for a change. With the whole world watching, the DNC failed.
4
@Bruce
When one continually see this kind of stuff going on in democratic elections, one has to wonder who is actually the democratic voters worst enemy, republicans or, the corporate/establishment wing of the party that in its desire to maintain the "status quo" is seemingly hanging on for dear life not really caring what its voters think?
1
I already know who won the Iowa Caucuses: Bernie Sanders. He's the only guy in the race who isn't a Democrat who has been saying all along that the system is broken.
Guess what the Iowa Democratic Party just did. Prove his point.
Thank You, Iowa!
3
@Walter Bruckner - What you are saying is Bernie feels the Democratic party is part of the broken system. So why isn't he "true" to himself and run as an independent?
@Walter Bruckner
Wrong - Bloomberg is the winner in a landslide! At this point, the DNC should just sell him the entire franchise and get out of the election business as fast s they can.
Iowa Republicans are laughing. Did you really think that Iowa is going to be able to select the person who can beat Trump from that crowd? None of them have what its going to take to beat a popular incumbent President. Half of them won't give up the ghost and nearly are ghosts, and the other half clearly know this is a practice round and they have zero chance, they are just trying to get their name out there for next time. Is Bloomberg going to try to come out as the big savior that is the only one capable of bringing down Trump? New Yorker to New Yorker?
5
Let's hope the last events will lead to the end of this childish political show.
1
This is not an Iowa problem. It’s a democrat national committee (DNC) problem.
DNC refused to allow Homeland Security to test and verify the App that DNC chose to use.
Big turnout for the Republican caucus, which worked flawlessly. Point proven.
Perhaps investigation of DNC is in order before they figure a way to steal victory from Bernie.
6
Is it true that the mayor was an early investor in the "app"? This should be independently investigated.
We all know this is an arcane ridiculous process.
2
Dear Iowa, is that the best that you can do? Perhaps it is time to pass the torch? I would say yes. Next time, let's do this in California where there is a far greater diversity in the population that better resembles America.
3
We need not worry about the Russians hacking our elections and voting booths. We have met the enemy and it is us.
5
3 points, 1 comment.
1) to say this is a mess is an understatement.
2) Dump this process everywhere- VOTE
3) the DEM's will never beat Trump if they can't get organized, unified,-- closer to the American "center"
Most reasonably educated folks--even in Texas despise Trump-- but if the DEMs go full "socialist" they will loose.
5
Please let's get rid of the Iowa caucus. It is unfair, biased, unrepresentative and now--broken. Iowa is not politically special and should join the rest of the country. Let this be a lesson to all of us.
3
What a mess! Shades of Obamacare launch. This is the party that wants to run Universal Healthcare, our Financial System, Immigration, National Security. Just thinking of that makes me scared that one of them will actually win.
3
Give me Excel and email, and I'd have this done, tested, enhanced for test comments, done again, retested and deployed in less than a week. For way less than $60k. Yeah, it would be a laptop application, apparently not cool enough for Iowa.
Bring in the clowns.
3
If this is a foretelling of how the Democratic Party will fare in November, it is too crushing to conceive. We needed a glorious race to the finish, instead we sputtered at the start. Worse, Mr. Trump will have every right to gloat as he delivers the State of the Union. The Senate is set to acquit and Iowa fails-its duty. We will continue to stumble in the dark, for we need a leader and I for one fo not see one. Very depressing.
1
Why is a minor (population 3 million), mostly white (91 percent) and mostly Republican state allowed to have such a key role in the Democratic Party's nomination process? Just asking.
9
Donors should demand a refund of the contribution they made that was blown on campaign advertising in a place like Iowa. Whichever candidate whoever comes out supposedly on top there gets to wear that honor like an albatross around their neck.
1
While we dint yet know who won, we know who is the biggest loser: the Iowa Caucus. Second biggest loser: voting via apps! Let’s hear no more of either one.
5
'Bunch of old white people with the same ideas, doing the same things, over and over again. Non reflective and ignoring a huge majority of America and voters. I'm saddened by the Democratic party. I feel hopeless –perhaps this is the point.
2
For those who advocate for the elimination of the Electoral College system and for the elimination of the Iowa, N.H primaries as the 1st in line, you must tell us how is the country between the coasts to be represented in any meaningful way. That's right, it won't. That's a non-starter. The founding fathers were immensely wise in establishing the Electoral College system. It can not be eliminated without great peril to the country's unity. The middle may not be as populated as the coasts, but it holds the agricultural and not-only wealth of the country. It can't just be sidelined.
4
Pat, the agricultural core of the USA happens to be California, at least as far as food is concerned.
1
@Pat
Every state elects two senators. That massive over-representation should be quite enough to end this whining.
1
It's time to make California the first state to vote in the primaries. With the worlds 5th largest economy, a diverse population living in big cities, medium and small towns, farms, ranches, and an economic mix of farming, manufacturing, high-tech, the entertainment industry, tourism, etc., California qualifies as the most representative state in the Union.
2
I guess for the candidates to request a recount in light of last night's debacle is out of the question?
2
I blame Android smartphones...If all Iowans used iPhones there wouldn’t have been problems
It's one thing when your system doesn't work, but even the BACK UP system failed.
When asked to do a trial run, Iowa Dem party said "no".
Is that because if results were not favorable (Bernie) then system and system back up failures can be blamed?
Does Hillary own the app?
And these are the people who want to run the country?
Trump 2020
5
I hope all the candidates sue the Iowa Democrat Party to recover the costs they incurred when campaigning in Iowa. The candidates relied, at a minimum, on the state party to run a fair, efficient election. The state party failed miserably, to the end that the results will never be trusted and have become irrelevant. What incompetence.
1
Thank goodness my state, Maine, rejected the caucus.
Because, my state realized that caucuses were just another name for mob rule when unwitting caucusgoers were browbeaten to death to vote the way paid activists told you how to vote. In other words, the type of voting we see in tinpot dictatorships.
It is about time the DNC put a stop to the caucus system of mob rule at the voting booth and bring true democracy and its freedom of choice to all primary voters.
3
It Has More Undemocratic Aspects Than Democratic Ones
Kill off this insane, undemocratic, non-representative process. Designed to give the "little guy" a voice is has been the secret potion of polarization. Four regional (or lottery selected)primarties over 2-3 months ending in May will require coalition-building. Coalitions are the best disinfectant for polarization and extremism because it requires thoughtful compromise and team building. Most importantly it is far more reflective of the national voter.
2
It is way past the expiration date for Tom Perez to step down as Chairman of the DNC. Did he have more important things to do than ensure a smooth caucus in Iowa?
3
Imagine how angry the candidates & their staffs are after spending up to a year & $millions campaigning in IA. Then think about Booker, Harris, Castro, et al who dropped out for lack of funds when now NH is really the first primary state. Why not save a lot of wasted effort & money, and just start with a Super Tuesday, except hold it on a weekend day.
2
Maybe there isn't an app for that after all.
4
Iowa needs to die as a bellwether. I live in a demographically similar area, though in a blue state overall. There is no way such a demographic such have such a voice. I don't know the answer, but it isn't "Iowa."
2
Does any other democracy do elections as poorly as the United States?
1
I’m an Iowa democratic caucus participant. I hope for the last time. The process is not easy to participate in even at its best. I hope this ridiculous situation causes a change to a primary, first in the nation or not. How embarrassing.
8
Not only is Iowa a terrible choice for a first primary contest as many readers have commented, but this caucus debacle with so many candidates points to the necessity of ranked choice voting. Any time there are more than two candidates, there is a greater chance of an unpopular candidate winning more votes than any of his/her opponents. In theory the caucus system prevents this scenario but at the expense of voter turnout. Most people simply don't have hours to spend at a caucus. No other democracy uses this arcane method (along with delegates and conventions and the idiotic electoral college) to select a president or prime minister. It's time to change!
3
I live in a city with ranked voice voting. The machine puts up a gang of candidates on one side of the spectrum who then gang up on the one or two running in the middle. People trade favors and dangle appointments. It ends up taking weeks for votes to be counted. After giving it an honest chance for many years I believe we are better served by a 50 percent plus 1 system.
1
My husband would say that he belongs to the disorganized party, aka the Democratic Party. Unfortunately so so true! Also to give this Republican state the importance it does not deserve is outrageous!
1
This situation is unbelievable and unacceptable, but also shoddy and unprofessional.
The eyes of the country were on DEMOCRATS last night and everyone suffered a black eye.
This occurrence does NOT bode well for the November election.
1
The damage done by this fiasco will be far reaching. For example, this will encourage the subset of Sanders people who are prone to overindulging in conspiracy theories. Besides being untrue, their conspiracy theories are divisive and counterproductive in that they will almost certainly discourage Sanders voters from voting for the nominee no matter who it is. On this site yesterday alone we were able to read the following tripe time and time again: "The media is underreporting the size of the Sanders caucus crowds." "The media hates him." "Sanders was winning so they stopped releasing results." "The establishment will never let him win." "The chaos was engineering by the DNC because Biden was losing." "They cheated Sanders out of delegates at my caucus in 2016." "Buttigieg hired the same app developer in order to do who knows what to the app, to disadvantage Sanders." "Clinton people worked for the app company, and she did who knows what to the app in order to disadvantage Sanders." Good grief. Let's please all pledge to vote for the nominee no matter who it is. And let's please all promise to stay on the fact ranch.
6
The entire caucus process is idiotic and over complicated. It gets in the way of a wider participation and the inclusion of all potential voters. I am not sure why in the 21st century we have to wait on hickville Iowa to tell the rest of us which of the Democratic candidates is viable! Beside the process, neither Iowa or New Hampshire represent the demographics or the economical fabrics of 2020 America. Time to move on past Jimmy Carter's success in Iowa and let's open up the first round of the primary process.
Tom Perez and his staff of so called DNC leadership failed to show foresight in this critical election by retaining Iowa and New Hampshire as the leading primary states. They speak of voter inclusion but yet they select the least diversified states and with one of them still living the past with this caucus process. They should resign and hand this over to someone more competent.
Bloomberg is the smart one by ignoring Iowa and New Hampshire all together. Let's move to a first round primary with a handful of states on the same day with enough cross section of representation and please include one of the bigger states like N.Y and CA on a rotational basis.
1
Life again mirrors art. T.S. Elliot's Hollow Men. Even the title is perfect.
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
1
What a joke. What a debacle. Are we actually going to ever do this again. It would be the definition of madness. iowa Democrats are not representative of the Democratic party as a whole so why do they have an outsized say in the nominating process? This is a shoot in the foot experience every time and the campaigning there lasts for two years - make that four years...endless. Meanwhile, candidates spend mere weeks in large, diverse states. Iowa is insanity. We must say "good riddance ".
2
So, in light of last night's caucus data debacle, I guess a recount by the candidates is out of the question?
1
And the winner was ... Donald Trump. With or without this fiasco, he will win in 2020. This just reassures this fact.
2
By all means let Iowans do their weirdo thing but stop giving this state that’s totally unrepresentative of the US the outsized influence it has. Just treat it and the caucuses for what they are. A rural statelet with some quaint habits.
1
The unpredictability of technology exemplified
2
Please get into a booth and vote. This debacle is a good thing. Let it end this nonsensical process that was manipulated by Ted Cruz in '16 (can't blame him!) which forced Iowa to change the rules...once again. In fact, let's have six Tuesdays from February through March to decide who gets the nomination. Let's move closer to what the Brits do.
2
May this also spell the end of lip-service to ethanol subsidies.
4
Amusing to watch the state party apparatus try to delay their TKO of the Biden campaign. Onward.
1
The heck with all these arcane voting methods: caucuses, electoral colleges. I am for ONE “MAN” one vote, period!
If you stay home, then don’t complain about the results of the vote.
1
They should pick corn in Iowa, not presidents. And New Hampshire is even a worse venue for a representative cross section of Democrats. Enough!
4
Gee - It is barely 12 hours since the end of the caucuses and everyone is upset and excited that they do not yet have the results. It is kind of like the press is standing in front of a microwave yelling HURRY!
The press wants something to report and draw readers so, as they do not have results, 12 hours after a caucus, they make a story out of the delay and overdramatize its significance as the have over dramatized the entire Iowa primary. The results will come in, Iowa's relatively few delegates will be allocated, and the will not be the big "MO(mentum) that the press loves to report on. Big deal!`
2
Why has no one asked Bernie what he thinks?
2
Republicans are shaking their head. Smirking. If (Iowa) Democrats can’t run their first primary (an archaic free for all caucus) how do you expect them to run a country?
3
I stopped reading at "Why should a state so disproportionately white take such a leading role". I am afraid this proportionality problem may be difficult to solve: California is disproportionately asian, Florida latino, Mississippi black, Utah mormon, etc. Would somebody care to give me example of a state that is purely diverse? Thank you.
1
Come to Queens, New York for the most diverse population anywhere outside the U.N.!
1
@Gordan Can you support your claims of proportionality in the states you cite? Doubtful.
Epic OK Boomer fail as aging precinct captains REFUSE TO USE THE APP! Calling results to a service line not designed for this purpose. OK bye Iowa!
Throughout this entire primary process, Bernie has been consistently on the losing end of happy accidents by this newspaper, MSNBC, and every other part of the Democratic establishment apparatus. How am I not to believe the Iowa caucus is another of those? My candidate won it, so it appears the Democratic establishment cancelled the results. I'm not saying you are corrupt, but will you please stop appearing corrupt all the time? Drink your wine in the open and out of a box instead of in a cave surrounded by billionaires, for once.
1
I hope it does break the Iowa caucuses- not only from the perspective of the process itself, but also because we need a state that is more representative of the country to lead off the primary season. Actually i think it’s idiotic that one or two states-no matter which ones they are- should have so much weight in influencing the selection of the ultimate candidate. I’d much rather have at least 4 or 5 states hold the first primary elections on the same day to kick off the primary season.
3
Every presidential election cycle, we grin and bear what Senator Durbin rightly calls the “quaint” Iowa Caucus. The only thing missing are powdered wigs.
Fast-forward, America!
3
Mr. Buttigieg's premature victory speech will go down in history as his Howard Dean moment.
2
@thebigmancat maybe not if his prediction turns out to be true (it was apparently based on internal data gathered by people from his campaign who attended the caucuses). And if it doesn't, then his campaign would be pretty much done anyway. The way I see it, he risks very little in making some vague promise of victory, given the expectation of several "categories" of winners.
We've ignored the de facto racism long enough. This needs to be the nail in the coffin for Iowa going first. Enough is enough!
2
America’s first presidential election in 1788 took 3-4 weeks. If the Founders knew we had to wait a paltry 24 hours for these Iowa results, they would yawn and say “So?” Seems like the media is creating drama where there shouldn’t be any. Oooh wow... one whole day...
1
@Jim It’s a matter of failed execution of critical dependencies. Not a clock issue.
An app designed...with the DNC's approval...by Hillary & Co.
I wish that I wasn't highly skeptical about the "confusion" in Iowa.
I wish I didn't suspect that the DNC's elite aren't, as in 2016, doing everything they can to skew the results toward their candidate of choice.
3
Who cares who Iowa picks in the Democratic primary? It is a red state that voted for Rep. Steve King, one of the most racist individuals in Congress. It also received billions of dollars from Trump in farm "subsidies" so they will support Trump no matter what he says or does. Yesterday's votes were irrelevant.
3
No more of this nonsense. Iowa's time has passed and we need early real primaries in states who have demographics resembling the country as a whole as well as the Democratic Party.
4
So ridiculous! The democratic party should not count the results that will come from Iowa after this fiasco. The results will be tainted, there will be no clear unquestionable way to establish that the results will be accurate.
And, why are we continuing to put up with Iowa and New Hampshire as being the first states to vote? It's absurd. That has to stop.
2
Really strange development in Iowa last night. A couple of years ago the Oscar for best picture was initially given to the wrong picture because the wrong envelope was handed to the presenter. How about that Superbowl a few years ago. It took 2 and a half hours for some fans to get on a train after the game ended. The estimate for train use was way off and buses that were available were not used. It is not that computers are making us more stupid. It is that computers are making us less cautious. E.G. If you leave out a word on a page you are writing it used to be really bad on a typewriter. With word processing it is nothing.
Iowa gets enough welfare support from farm subsidies. Time to stop the months long feeding of precious campaign dollars to the folks of Iowa!
This ridiculous caucus show is not even remotely Democratic. Each person should get a vote, period. And with ample time to cast a ballot that fits into their work/life schedule.
Hopefully, more candidates will take the Bloomberg approach to Iowa in the future and simply ignore it.
2
I'm watching this on TV and thinking, "Why are they talking to voters in Florida?" God, it is over yet?
Heaven help us--the Democrats are the fools who want to run the country and they cannot even run their own caucus. When you think of every major city with major problems the Democrats are the ones running them. Vote for America--Vote Republican.
1
Iowa and New Hampshire our first primaries? Oh, please! Have one Super Tuesday and be done with it. And while you're at it, repeal Citizens United and the Electoral College. Make mandatory public funding of campaigns such that each candidate gets the same amount of money. And for heaven's sake, limit campaigning to two months. The present procedures are idiotic, antidemocratic, wasteful and an embarrassment.
3
Please break Iowa, the place the democratic party goes to die (except for right wingers like Obama and Clinton)
2
And the Democrats want to lead the Country? GMaB
New Hampshire uses paper ballots with optical readers — the prefect balance of an auditable paper trail and enough technology to deliver reliable results. Why so many states have gone for unreliable and non-auditable electronic voting or apps is beyond me.
3
The Democratic Party should demonstrate its support for voter participation by replacing the caucus with a ballot that can be mailed or dropped off at a polling place over a voting period, not day. It should recognize the diversity of our country by holding the earliest primaries in states with diverse populations like Georgia and New Mexico or Arizona.
Perhaps then we might see a more diverse list of candidates.
1
Looks like the Russians will not be needed this year. Who is the DNC going to blame in November?
5
I am truly discouraged by the lack of political acumen exhibited by so many commenters here. “Ugh! Iowa is too white! It’s not real America! It’s not diverse enough!” People, if you EVER want to win back control of the federal government, you need to accept the fact that 2/3 of this country is white, and older people vote in much larger numbers than younger people. Even if the population density of a few blue states can muscle a Democrat back into the White House, you will NEVER win back the Senate without appealing to more majority white, largely rural states. Imagine never again being able to get a Democratically nominated justice onto the Supreme Court... because that is where this mindset is leading us. Yes Iowa is whiter than America on average, that doesn’t mean it is invalid, anymore than South Carolina’s primary is invalid because of its 30% black population. If we don’t embrace ALL diversity (rural and urban, white and black and everyone else) we are doomed.
9
@Jim So your argument is, essentially, that we need to do more to cater to older white people? Seriously??
Let’s move forward. Forget Iowa. Never look back.
3
@Dissatisfied
This would be such waste. Think of all the time, money, resources and human involvement that went into these Iowa caucuses. The intense focus and political activity there works like a microcosm for the whole country. It's important and we invested a lot into it - we can't just walk away from it. IMO, we need to know what transpired and to learn from it. Our society is disposable enough.
This feels like an episode of Veep where candidate Selina Meyers is heard saying that a bunch of pig farmers who can’t use an iPhone are deciding who becomes the next nominee... except it’s not fiction but reality. I simply don’t understand why a tiny fraction of people decide who gets to run for president.
2
You can hear the laughter from the Kremlin,Ukraine the taunts about how they defeat themselves senselessly with baseless and faux impeachments we have using their countries as a pawn in our games.They were ruined by 8 years of their President who never legislated ,yet skirted the auspices of congress at every chance foreign and domestic,so that the Dems have lost touch with governing and with legislation having proved in every failure including impeachment.Now their due is firmly processing,they will not lead.
The Iowa straw poll does not in any way represent the American people.
The caucus is quaint, like the Electoral College born from catering to the slave owners and white supremacists.
California or Massachusetts needs to be the earliest election event.
3
Brad Pascal is already dancing. Please remind him about “ORCA” the failed GOP app that costs Romney thousands of votes. Now the nano second news cycle will benefit the DNC, as we forget Iowa and are in rapture listening to POTUS tonight.
1
So predictable. The Democrats are so incredibly inept at every turn of the election cycle. Trump will use this disaster to portray the Dem's as incompetent and unable to govern-and he may be right. I say this as a committed Liberal and Anti-Trumpster.
3
What a bunch of clowns. The Democrats are going to do everything possible so the U.S.A. has to suffer through 4 more years of Trump. How sad!
6
It is obvious there are a good number of Russian/Republican trolls trying once again to reduce the Democratic voter turnout.
They miss no chance to put out unproven conspiracy theories.
The flawed app was designed by a private company.
1
And bought by the DNC. And used by the DNC. And untested by the DNC. And not validated by the DNC.
2
I have an innate distrust of any vote that can be swayed by cookies. The news commentators on CNN were laughing about people moving to another group just for the cookies.
I find it disturbing that those voting for candidates who have spent weeks and large amounts of money chasing so few voters would be so cavalier. I don't know if this really happens, but, it appears to be a standing joke that people offer others incentives, like cookies or snow shoveling, to join another group.
Next time, choose blue California or purple Texas, anywhere with enough people and electoral clout to deliver a significant result.
4
We could eliminate this problem entirely by having more diverse states hold their primaries first. That we are collectively held hostage to Iowa and New Hampshire is anachronistic and does not serve the needs of the moment, let alone the future.
5
Maybe the order of primaries (and I mean primaries... caucusing is needlessly complicated) could be rotated every election cycle so that every state gets a chance to be first, and therefore foremost, in the selection of candidates? Crazy idea, I know...
3
Makes more sense than what we have now.
These point-of-pride caucuses have finally outlived their usefulness. Not only has their complexity finally caught up with the organizers and participants, but Iowa is an absurd place to start the winnowing process process. The state is not at all representative of the US as a whole.
I well remember newsman and Iowa native Hugh Sidey defending the process and waxing eloquent on the "Agronsky & Company" TV program over the alleged wisdom and diligence of his fellow Hawkeyes until moderator Martin Agronsky, and most of us viewers, were about to become ill.
1
Since caucuses limit voting, so only hard core folk usually show up, it seems to me they could so easily be affected by GOP voters who change their party affiliation just for the Dem caucus. In order to disrupt the outcome.
I’m not saying I have any proof of this. But any process which reduces the voting to a much smaller number because your choice is done in public and it involves a couple hours of your time could be so easily skewed by people crossing party lines to do so.
After all the Trump caucuses were a foregone conclusion. So some people could have done as I suggest above. Nothing illegal about that. Even if nefarious.
1
Unreal. Hopefully this debacle will serve as the catalyst to reform the entire primary system, relegating Iowa to the end of the voting queue.
2
This debacle is just an example of how the whole process of selecting a nominee has become grossly outdated. There must be a national primary date, just like a national election date, where voters all around the country have equal opportunity to shape the course of the nomination process, without a ridiculous focus on 41 delegates from a farm state, which unjustly empowers a few people to chart the course of the selection process. At least there should be a nationally recognized date that no state can preempt, and allow as many states to stake on that date as desired, or allowing some states to delay if they choose to. I remember when Iowa, South Carolina, and others seemed to be in a race to see who could jump start the primary season. It is unjust to the entire system to allow one state to wield that much power and influence. It's time to fix the system, starting with a standardized voting system that avoids unreliable technology, and then by establishing a date for earliest primaries.
2
Our national governmental institutions are irreparably broken. Let’s address all of them or we will lose democracy to an autocrat like Trump sooner or later. Her’s my list of glaring inequities that cannot continue much longer:
1). Letting a rural, non-representative state like Iowa have an outsize influence on candidate selection.
2). Citizens United. Those with money (often undisclosed sources) have way more say than the average citizen.
3). Electoral College. The person who gets 3 million fewer votes than his opponent wins. Could happen again in 2020 by an even larger margin.
4). The Senate. Fully one-half of the US population is represented by 18 senators. The other half has 82! In what universe is that remotely fair or democratic?
These glaring inequities will lead to the end of this great national experiment in self-governance if not addressed before it’s too late. Now!
10
Why any state has the power to weed out primary candidates before other states get to weigh in is wrong.
Is there any reason why there is not a national primary day and use popular national vote results to then rank the candidates? This would be fair to all states to have a full slate to vote from and not give any state more impotance by voting before any other.
4
There is something very deeply wrong with a voting system whereby a President is elected by a minority and primaries are set by a minority, non-representative State. This entire system need to be reworked at the Federal level, to ensure security, fair and proper representation all the way from voting registration to primaries to election. The flaws and vulnerabilities of our system have been indelibly exposed and must be fixed! (Repaired, as opposed to manipulated!)
1
On the Iowa debacle, I pass along these thoughtful observations from a friend:
“This is what happens when a bunch of activists in their 20s- 30s design an app, not realizing that the average precinct captain in Iowa is a retired person in their 60s or 70s. The activists simply projected their own way of life and their own preferences onto others.
Many of the precinct captains didn't even bother to download the app. Others tried downloading and gave up because of the difficulty they encountered entering information in tiny type onto forms on their smartphones with stiff fingers and aging eyes.
It is likely that many of these precinct captains don't even have broadband cable access at their homes or businesses. (I now live 90 minutes from Washington -- and we don't have broadband cable access.)
This was entirely predictable. Worse, it is a harbinger of how enthusiastic activists (think Sanders or Warren supporters) assume they know best how the rest of us should live our lives, while they do not have the experience or wisdom to understand those others' lives. This is what brought us the debacle of the ACA launch. It will frighten away many people from the Democratic Party.
I have five brothers, all of whom are hard-working taxpayers raising families and contributing to their communities. All of them hate Trump. But they equally fear the Democrats, who they see as incompetent managers promoting a "nanny state." I think we just lost their votes.”
1
Yet, hundreds of millions of Democratic dollars will continue to roll out without any hesitation to the family and friends of the candidates and of the DNC who provide polling, technology, advertising, political consulting, etc..
1
I hope this is the last time Iowa has such an out sized influence on the election.
2
This all comes down to the outdated electoral college that will never be changed. It's a joke that Iowa wields so much "Power".
2
As long as there is a caucus process to pick nominees, we are in trouble. In 2016, when I caucused in Minnesota, the Bernie people had taken over my precinct. I was not alone, obviously, because in 2020, Minnesota voters now get a primary.
As long as the party is in charge of the process, it will have leaders with dogs in the fight. And those leaders will know the opposition and will work to disqualify the opposition. A primary involves a secret ballot and the protections that accompany it. This is far more fair and reliable -- there are ballots, not verbal assertions-- than the caucus system.
1
Well, we know one sure way to get rid of some of the messiness of democracy.
Do what the GOP is doing, and just don’t have primaries at all.
There is not much to do in Iowa, and I say this respectfully having been born and raised in Wisconsin. There is no other state in our nation where people will take the time and effort and responsibility to choose candidates. All this Iowa-hating is silly. People in California might pick candidates based on Facebook posts or physical appearance. Is that really how you’d prefer to proceed?
The only way Iowa has national influence this year is if the caucus results are so overwhelmingly in favor of one or two candidates that the rest withdraw. The same can be said for NH. Even so, because of the number of delegates available in this year's Super Tuesday, just around the corner, it is doubtful that anyone would withdraw. Super Tuesday, which is truly a national primary because of the demographics, makes results in Iowa and NH, even overwhelming results, look like the mouse that roared.
For example, I can't imagine that Biden would withdraw even if he finished last. With his national brand, he's got as good a shot, if not better, at winning California, Texas and Virginia as anyone else.
If Bloomberg, who is as cunning as they come, thought Iowa and NH were important, he would have gotten in the race much earlier. Instead, he is putting his money where it will do the most for him. In the meantime, during the last year everyone else has locked themselves up in what I can only call the outdated Iowa caucus prison.
1
I am a French citizen. I'm also an American citizen. I was born and raised in the U.S., and yet I've never understood why voting here has to be so complicated. Iowa seems to have taken it to a whole new level. When we vote in France the candidates' names are printed on small pieces of paper. We choose the piece of paper with our candidate's name printed on it and place it in an envelope and drop it in the voting box. After the polls close, all the envelopes are opened and the votes counted. Whoever gets the most votes wins. Caucuses, and the Electoral College, all seem so complicated, archaic, and silly to me. One would think that we could find a simpler and more straightforward way of electing a president. After George Bush in 2000 and trump in 2016, and this ridiculous fiasco in Iowa last night, it seems we would have learned our lesson.
5
I'm glad this is all resulting in more scrutiny of the Iowa caucuses and I hope all will finally all see what they really represent--a form of voter suppression perpetrated by the Democratic Party itself. Starting the primaries there (and then following with New Hampshire) gives white voters a disproportionately large voice early on in the contests. That's partly because Iowa is one of the least ethically diverse states in the country. But its compounded by the caucus process itself, which requires people to come at a designated time for hours and hours. Of course lower income citizens will have a much harder time doing that. Yes, the ineptitude exposed by the broken and app and sloppy paper trail are troubling. But the real problem, I think, is the institutional racism that this system perpetuates. I implore the leaders of the Democratic Party to think about who we are as a party and what we're supposed to stand for. Then ask themselves the hard questions about whether or not starting in Iowa serves our goals.
2
Sheer insanity. Candidates criss-crossing the tiny state of Iowa for a year, with a non-diverse population, in order to wing the big prize. Turns out, Iowa made it much more complicated, and now the focus is on the failure of the nation's first primary to deliver. Get rid of the Iowa caucus!
2
The Iowa caucus is a complete embarrassment and waste of years. No more for goodness sake!
3
Moi? This insanity has to stop. Six-week, publicly-financed campaigns. Nuf said.
5
I hope this is the end of Iowa and New Hampshire's ridiculously stupid position in the primary process. No reason a few thousand voters should have such an outsize influence on the process. Start on Super Tuesday. Have primary groupings the first month of every month from March to June and be done with it. Stop the madness!
4
Since when is it news that the Democrats are confused?
7
Let's hope this puts an end to this Iowa caucus nonsense.
And yes, it will play nicely into Trump's conspiracy theories regarding the Dems as well as making them look stupid and inept.
Great start to your march to the White House!
9
Iowa has proven itself to be what most politicians and voters around the country already know...charmingly irrelevant.
Please pass the hot dish...
3
Is the just generally dumbing down at all levels.
From President to Precinct
1
They have only themselves to blame. California First
2
Comrade Putin must be delighted to see our democracy take hit after hit. Romney was correct, Russia is our most concerning problem.
1
Thanks, Iowa for doing Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin's work for them.
5
This debacle didn't need Russian trolls or Republican voter suppression to sow confusion and doubt. Democrats used their traditional circular firing squad to damage themselves. Again.
5
@larry bennett
I was waiting for someone to bring up the very à propos circular firing squad !
Looks like we need to jettison the caucus, and count ballots. See, 1,2,3,4. Not that difficult.
4
The incompetence is mind blowing.
3
First what should have been a slam dunk impeachment case against Trump blown and now this Democratic clown show in Iowa, I guess it's pretty fair to say that you really can't fix stupid. Even MSNBC's prime time lineup last night didn't know what to make of the reality of what just hit them.
3
Caucuses are stupid, anyway. I tried to show support for Obama, over Hillary, in the 2008 election. The event was so poorly designed, with Hillary's group shepherding people into "her room," without clarification of "If you're supporting Hillary, go here; if you're supporting Obama, go there." That didn't happen. It was simply, "Walk this way, everyone." It wasn't clear where one was supposed to be, until it was over. Not Iowa, no. But just "really messed up" then. They were capitalizing on general confusion and they knew it. It was embarrassing and it made me feel foolish that I'd shown up to try to support one candidate and simply followed the crowd into the wrong room. I'm confident I wasn't the only one. But that's how stupid a caucus is.
5
Seems like a mess in this modern age. Iowa should no longer be the first state and neither should New Hampshire. We need a more representative State, one that reflects the composition of the Nation.
4
The media, entertainment and business classes of New York and California already have there fair-share of influence on the primary process. To give lowly Iowa a bellwether influence for one night, is fine. For a year we've been influenced by the chattering classes of the coasts. To dismiss the views of middle America, is to fall into the same trap that blindsided the pundits in 2016.
6
Isn’t it super convenient that the moment Bernie looks like he is going to take the win the Democratic Party find “inconsistencies” in the voting system? If I were a Bernie supporter I wouldn’t be too happy based on what the DNC has done to Bernie in the past.
3
Bernie is the one who called for reporting three counts. I’m having a hard time blaming the DNC for this one. And now he’s declaring victory before the counts are in.
2
@Tanner Gallagher
You are a Republican, right?
@Tanner Gallagher
God point. Easy to "have suspicions".
1
After not being able to provide a professional caucus process for the second time in a row, it might be a good idea to have another state as the frontrunner in the Democrat's primary election.
2
My greatest fear is another four years of Trump, yet with only 8 months remaining until the Presidential election my fear continues to grow. The country cannot survive another 4 years with Trump. I am hoping the DNC and Democrats truly begin to galvanize to defeat Trump because I am getting a sense with all the in house attacks/disagreements and fighting it’s not happening.
2
Here I am in the middle of the Pacific Ocean awaiting the Iowa Democratic caucus results. I blame that state's Democratic party leaders for messing up Big Time. Perhaps it is time for another state to start up the race to the White House.
5
The whole nomination process is so clearly flawed at both the state and national levels. The DNC should initiate a complete modernization and overall of this broken and tired process. Most would agree that Iowa has no business being in the position they are in. Their caucus system seems dated and exclusive. By the way, does anyone else notice that the DNC Chair is always MIA? It’s definitely time for new and fresh leadership.
4
This debacle should at last be the final nail in the coffin of this atiquated primary process.
Every one except the people living in Iowa and New Hampshire hate this nonsensical process.
We need a nation wide primary system where every state votes at the same time for the nominee. This should take place over a few days so the turnout can be maximized.
Every vote should have the same weight regardless of the state.
The notion that any state should go first or second that gives them outsized influence is just wrong.
No state should have more influence than any other state regardless of size or region.
The national primary should occur in May. That gives all the candidates plenty of time to make personal appearances in all states.
Let's make the primary process a sane one- finally.
14
Why caucuses? I sadly doubt that 1 in 10,000 people could present either a clear value for why we have caucuses or how they represent a national choice. — I'd rather libraries throughout the nation offer 2 months of information on 20 national & 10 international issues. — Then, add clips of candidates’ 2 minute statements on each issue.
Maybe we could allow our sacred and wise Delegates to somehow present their voted opinions on any of the issues. (Maybe).
1
Between the Russian interference and Debbie Wasserman Shultz's meddling in the 2016 primaries and election, my 25 year old son believes that all of this delay in Iowa is an attempt to rig the caucuses and prevent Bernie Sanders from winning. I can't say that I blame him.
4
Okay....but actually, it’s human error!
1
Iowa has worked very hard to help destroy what little is left of the Democratic Party. No candidates, no viable agenda, no viable response to trump, and an inability to count votes even within its own party. Iowa has done much to prove a new party is needed. LOL.
1
Bernie speechwriters have been given golden material here early on. They can now complete the outsider narrative.
Oh, there's not the right way
About the Iowa way to count you,
When we count you
Which we may not do at all.
There's an Iowa kind of special
First-in-the-Nation attitude.
We've never been without.
That we recall.
And we're so by God stubborn
We can sit counting caucus votes
For a week and half
And never see eye to eye!
1
@Buster Bronx
But what the heck
You're welcome
Join us at the Caucuses
You can cast a vote
for any ballot you can count yourself
Way to go Iowa. The only thing Trump knows how to do is throw shade. This just gave him enough fuel for the rest of the primary season.
4
Enough. Quaintness doesn't cut it as an excuse for giving a handful of people such a huge amount power in determining the eventual candidate for President of the United States from each political party.
We need wholesale primary reform. Something like the following would work far better
- blocks of states setup with variability of size, demographics and region of the country taken into account
- each block would contain 10 states and have their primaries on the same day
- primary dates separated by 2 to 3 weeks
- the order of voting for these blocks would change every four year
Doesn't have to be this exactly but something like it would be a huge improvement over the current system.
Also, the ability to register as a candidate for president and the holding of the first debate should be no earlier than one year (maybe nine months) before the first primary. This endless running for president routine is ridiculous.
5
if this is the last straw for Iowa's "first in the nation" primary, then it truly is a gift from god. oh how I loathe all the attention on iowa. Why should an iowa voter count 40 times a NY voter? Why should the price of methanol be of paramount importance to the entire country? And these self-important people weren't even voting for the one they believe in, they were losing sleep over how best to make their vote important, i.e. how to pick a winner. The Iowa-first thing is a scam to benefit their tourism industry; a pick-me-up for flagging self-confidence; and a scam to benefit the methanol industry and all its components. good for Mike Bloomberg who skipped the whole farce. If I never see a tv report from iowa again it will be just fine with me.
7
Nothing like a rubber-band-and-string primary voting system in a state with relatively few people to churn the presidential politics of the USA?
When will the nation get serious and reform our embarrassingly antiquated, inviting-hacking and manipulation voting system? Some beacon of democracy and democratic processed!
9
"... uncommon power to set the course of national politics as the first nominating contest."
Nonsense. That's a myth. Look at the list of winners in recent decades and see among them:
Ted Cruz;
Rick Santorum;
Mike Huckabee;
Tom Harkin;
Richard Gephardt.
In 1992, Bill Clinton came in 4th, with under 3%.
Please stop perpetuating this myth.
14
This is a very good outcome. The caucus system is ridiculous, and I have at best a minimal interest in who wins.
Second, maybe we'll agree this should never be done again.
3
Don Jr. is touting that the Iowa caucuses were rigged. Do not carry Trump's water for him by furthering conspiracy theories.
4
Hmm, just like initiation of Obama care. Republicans are laughing all the way to the inauguration of Trump in 2020. So sad. And I’m a Democrat
2
Don’t bet on it!
This is the party that wants to run your healthcare. They talk about Republican election rigging, Russians, etc and look what we have here. Beautiful example for democrats to show how trustworthy they are right at the very start of the election cycle.
1
It's time for the Democratic Party to try something really radical... Democracy.
One primary date for the entire country.
Paper ballots only.
If no candidate gets 50%, a runoff two weeks later between the top two.
Dan Kravitz
2
This is a timely blessing and a wake up call for the Democratic Party and to the candidates.
How can a party and the candidates be progressive and still hold on to this archaic process?! Mike Bloomberg is showing that he is smarter and the right candidate for this huge battle against the republican machine and its hard knocks.
2
No one should pay attention to the Iowa caucus.
It’s a republican state with a small democrat populous. The republicans must love it. It derailed Hillary Clinton in 2008. GOP’s biggest enemy. And it ushered in Obama eight years too early. It should of been Hillary and then Obama. But Iowa and the far left messed it up for the Democrats.
If Hillary would have won in 2008 Putin wouldn’t have taken Crimea. And Obama would be president today. The far left has a way to mess everything up.
They did it in 2000 and gave GWB the White House which cost trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives and a catastrophe in the Middle East. And then topped it in 2008 and gave the world Donald Trump.
2
The Iowa caucuses have added 'inept' and "wasteful" to their ongoing epithets of "undemocratic" and "anachronistic".
Enough!
No more single state "first in the nation" primaries drawing a ridiculous amount of importance and attention.
"First in the nation" should include four or five states that broadly reflect the country. That would allow candidates to really get a sense of whether the country as a whole will respond to their policies and permit time for adjustment. Perhaps Georgia, Minnesota, Nebraska and Washington could go first, followed in two weeks by another clutch of representative states. States' orders should be changed every presidential cycle.
Iowa being first has given Iowans an unfairly bloated chunk of the Farm Bill and ongoing federal support for ethynol, a substance whose manufacture and transport more than exceeds its environmental benefit.
Perhaps this debacle will finally provide the push to get rid of Iowa's unfair and absurd position.
Blaming an App. They know what you are going to do before you do-they are that good in todays network. It's a convenient blame because Middle America will totally believe it.
A rising chorus of voices wants Iowa's "first" status undone. Then, new rules, new technology, and chaos ensues. Coincidence obviously. But mighty convenient nonetheless for the anti-"Iowa First" contingent.
So this is the party that wants government to take over healthcare because it can do it better and cheaper than insurance companies? The party that couldn't even get the ACA sign-up website to work after a year of advance notice!
This is the party that wants to break up Amazon and big tech? The party that can't put together a simple app that works as well as the app developed by a 13 year-old for my local pizza place!!
To paraphrase Abba Eben: The Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
2
Who cares what Iowa thinks? Should Iowa have so much influence just because they scheduled themselves first on the calendar? Let's move on.
1
Our entire presidential election system is broken. Other countries can manage elections in WEEKS. With the parties themselves selecting the candidates. Then they use paper ballots. And count them by hand.
Our elections have become never ending! They consume too much time, too many debates, too much money.
Can we please redesign a system that means politics has taken over our lives?
Can we not reclaim our lives?
3
Nevada plans to use the same app for their caucus results. I hope they get it fixed before February 22 or I may not show up.
1
Let’s be clear whose making this is: Bernie Sanders’ and his supporters’, with their unfounded claims to have been treated unfairly in 2016. Which forced Iowa precincts to only report vote totals but also every vote in each round of voting in each precinct. Which overburdened the local Democratic party.
This guy and his fanboys and girls are really a bomb thrown into the Democratic Party, which creates nothing but destruction. The only beneficiary l is Donald Trump.
3
@HenryK Those extra counts are needed to verify viability and delegate allocation.
This MUST be the end of the Iowa caucuses being the first go round for Democrats. Sheer madness, the whole thing. We either say good riddance to the Iowa caucuses or say good riddance to democracy.
Having never participated in a caucus, I spent a little time watching the network coverage of the Iowa caucuses for curiosity sake. Aside from the fact that they resembled at time an SNL skit or a Quentin Tarantino movie, it left me with the impression that the process must have originally been designed for a constituency that was illiterate and could not vote in writing.
Someone should remind the people that keep this antiquated system alive that we are in the twenty first century.
This process and its venue make everyone, candidate and caucus goers alike, look like incompetent amateurs.
Mr. Trump can sleep soundly.
1
I'm an Iowan who caucused last night, and who couldn't care less whether Iowa goes first or not. But it is kind of amazing to hear all the complaints about white non-diverse Iowa going first when the same Iowa picked Barack Obama over Clinton and John Edwards in 2008. And to the extent that Iowa is "non-representative" of the rest of the nation, what it decides should be irrelevant to everybody else. Candidates don't have to come to Iowa and spend time and money to get an infinitesimal share of the vote. Mike Bloomberg didn't bother. The media doesn't have to build the caucuses up into something they aren't, distorting their importance. Now they're making fools of themselves with hyperbole and histrionic nonsensical claims that some kind of disaster has occurred. What they're really upset about is that they've got all those talking heads sitting around on payroll with the clock ticking and nothing to talk about--so they invent something. The party officials had to do something different and time consuming this year that they've never done before--count individual paper ballots for first preference--and it turns out they weren't as prepared for that as they no doubt thought they were, and should have been. Stuff happens. But whether the results come in at noon today or noon tomorrow or came in at 10 last night really, actually, makes no difference whatsoever to anything, except how much the media has to pay its talking heads.
7
This was all avoidable. The system in Iowa is outmoded, outdated, and just plain chaotic to begin with. And whoever thought an new, untested app was the way to go knows nothing about technology. Why Iowa has for so long had such an outsized role in the Presidential primaries is a travesty. Thanks, Iowa, for damaging the Democratic party's initial step in ousting Trump. Let's get on with a sane, fair system. Smarter heads need to prevail here.
2
This is an embarrassment to the Democratic Party. The GOP will get endless mileage out of this. The caucus is an institution best suited to politics in 1860, maybe 1920, but not 2020. We no longer use the horse and buggy; let the caucus follow suit.
2
@Brad -- But the caucus is so quaint, such a pleasantly rustic throwback to a simpler time. And Iowa (and New Hampshire) are lovely and integral to the American mythos. Haven't you heard?
Before writing the obituary of the Iowa caucus, keep in mind the person happiest with the outcome is Donald Trump, and he will definitely have a say in the matter.
I don't mind that Iowa is small and not demographically representative of the nation. The smaller size means less funded candidates still have a shot. And anyone who thinks older white folks all agree are misguided.
But the inability to report timely caucus results is a deal breaker.
I guess there's something to be said for the "old fashion" was of doing things. In this case, manually counting paper ballots in front of people as witnesses.
Let's face it - Iowa had four years to get this software or app or whatever up and running but it was only tested two months ago? Where the heck is the oversight? The test and retest and retest again mentality?
3
@Marge Keller
So sane, Marge!
Too sane for this nation, I fear.
1
@Marge Keller -- Agree with TheraP: your advice is far too sane. America doesn't do sane.
1
The complete and utter irony of this is not missed by I or my friends. The Democratic party have spent the last 3 years telling the American people the 2016 election was hacked, rigged, etc; all of which was completely false.
But yet here they are in one sparsely populated state with huge election issues and a system rigged to essentially discredit the Bernie Sanders campaign once again. This is a prime example of the nonsense and inaction by the Democrats to level the playing field and have a fair election.
2
@Nature
The Bernie campaign itself insisted on keeping the caucus system, but making changes which resulted in 3 figures having to exit each caucus. So the Bernie folk are partly responsible here. Not the victims.
If you look at Sanders’ partial numbers, which are validated by Buttigieg’s own partial numbers, it’s clear the liberal wing as represented by Sanders and Warren scored a decisive victory. Biden totally floundered and Klobuchar has little hope beyond Iowa (though I personally hope she gets a big bounce in other states).
This is what the Democratic Party does not want to report. So they obfuscate and delay. I mean how is it they haven’t reported ANY precincts at all???
Another replay of Florida in 2000
election. There also democrats created
confusion with ridiculous design of the ballet paper creating confusion. In a liberal county most votes went to conservative Pat Buchanan and we got George Bush.
1
This debacle makes clear that we need to move to a nationwide, balanced system of primary voting, that starts later in the year, has states build upon one another with their size and diversity, rotates the order of states from one election cycle to the next, and uses ranked-choice voting, so that the candidate who prevails has the solid support of a broad spectrum of the party. The Democratic party can contribute solidly to the growth of democracy by working to put this in place for 2024. It would be great if the Republicans could do the same, but given that party's direction during the past few years, I'm not so hopeful.
Mayor Pete already declared victory and, despite not one vote being counted yet, said the results, "shocked the nation." What dishonest spin - where's the MSM calling him out?
2
Dear Iowa,
You had one job. Congratulations on your last "First in the Nation" caucus.
Sincerely,
The American Voting Public
7
So after all that money and time spent by the candidates and their supporters in Iowa, it turned out to be completely irrelevant.
If the DNC in its stupidity keeps the Iowa caucus in its spot in future elections I can only hope that the candidates refuse to participate.
3
Why should a few thousand people in Iowa who go through a ridiculous process every four years have such tremendous influence? Iowa is rural, mostly white, mostly conservative, older than the general population, and completely unrepresentative of today’s America. The only beneficiaries of this first-in-the-nation absurdity are the restaurants and hotels in Iowa. This is pathetic. The system is broken.
1
Is there anyone who wants this to remain (besides Iowans)?
2
This is truly a disgrace. Talk about shooting ourselves in the foot! With all the evil afoot, we seem headed toward defeat by mere incompetence.
2
Time for a third party, Democrats just too corrupt and embarrassing.
2
@Duke
We’d have to change to a parliamentary system first.
What a farce. Is this supposed to instill confidence in Democrats for 2020? Bunch of amateurs could learn from the bumbling crooks in the White House and the Senate. (Don't ask me what they could learn, but the crooks are in power...)
2
Thanks, Iowa, for picking up where the Russians left off.
1
The Iowa app is the digital hanging chad.
3
The whole caucus process is idiotic.
Let's stick with primaries, where people can vote in private and vote for one candidate and not feel pressured to vote for someone else.
And let's have the primaries in larger, more diverse states!
Iowa and New Hampshire are not reflective of most Americans.
329
@KR
And could we please just use paper ballots? Hand counted?
Like most other advanced nations. Which seem not to encounter these nightmare scenarios.
Those other nations also limit the entire election to just a few weeks. Something like that would end the torture of never-ending political campaigns. Not to speak of the outrageous costs!
62
@KR Nevada has the same APP used in Iowa so let's hope they had the critical thinking skills to get them loaded on their phones and tested before the caucus.
13
@KR Darn right. Everything should be inclusive and anonymous, no pressure, no convincing last minute. People get swayed by charismatic individuals. Iowa a very small biased sampling plays an unfair influence going forward. This caucus thing is idiotic as stated. How has it ever lasted so long? That’s what should be studied now. How can we learn to break free of idiotic traditions?
19
Give Mike Bloomberg great credit for skipping Iowa and NH. All the items in the post mortems were certainly part of his vision. He won this round and deserves some serious recognition,
6
@Harpo
He won the round without even entering it? Well if that ain't like a billionaire...
2
I caucused for the first time last night. From my perspective everything went well. The process was clear, well laid out, and efficient. I only found out about the issues when I got home.
I still can't believe that the part expected a bunch of people who are as old as my father to use new technology. My Dad has a Ph.D and got his Master from MIT and I wouldn't trust him to install an app and log into that app.
This is probably the last time Iowa is first. Oh well, I am glad I was part of the process, even though it ended last night.
12
@Hypoteneus
Speaking as an older person (75, with a Ph.D, retired), I am in total agreement with you. I have to work myself up to trying new technology. And even then, I may need some hand-holding during the learning curve process. Some place to seek help.
And it appears this Ap had no assistance or even understanding that the users might be very old. Plus, it also appears the Ap was never adequately tested. Or may not really tested for its intended purpose. With 1700 users simultaneously logging into it. Many of them elderly.
No wonder many of the elderly simply refused to have anything to do with something they knew from experience might be nightmare to use “for the first time.”
4
Bingo! This is exactly what I was just telling my husband, who is a tech guy extraordinaire! I was telling him, that people our age (66) and older, especially the older ones are afraid of technology. And while many of us, feel comfortable using it many don’t!
2
What has given small states like Iowa and New Hampshire an outsize importance in picking a Presidential candidate is the media's insistence on treating the campaign season like a horse race.
Voters elsewhere shouldn't care who is in the lead after these first 2 states; it should not affect their vote. But it is the media that constantly talks about "momentum" as if it is the only thing that matters. Meanwhile, voters who are just trying to find information on where the candidates stand on issues are left to read about polling data and money raising instead.
11
Mayor Pete said that Iowa would shock the nation. I am definitely shocked to see the mass chaos of the caucuses in action.
3
This vote was not going to bring clarity to the race. The only noteworthy moment would have been if one of the leading candidates bombed completely. I am expecting that the votes will be widely divided with someone taking a small advantage. Unless one of them turns out to really stand out, we will have learned little from the caucuses. But even if this were to happen, no one is going to drop out. The frequent statements that Iowa has enjoyed undue influence given its demography, have diminished its influence.
2
It's a good thing that there is a paper trail to fall back on. There should be in every election that is being held in this country, between the 'Russians ' and problems with voting machines, the process is flawed so we need paper ballots 'everywhere'.
I am not quite understanding though how Caucus leaders were allowed to take it upon themselves to decide that they were not going to use the new App, that for me is an issue .
The Democratic Party machine in Iowa clearly needs to step up their game. Most of these Candidates have been in the state campaigning for over a year now' frankly they deserve better than this'.
All that been said I do not favor taking Iowa out of the equation as being the first state in the Primaries . I like the feeling of open democracy in play when they caucus , I like that the candidates really do have to campaign and knock on the doors and attend events in small towns . Yes Iowa may not be representative of the Democratic Party too old, too white etc. I have heard a suggestion that South Carolina should be the first state. I have also heard that fifty two percent of Democrat Primary voters there are African Americans. How is that representative of the Democratic Party, it seems there is no easy answer .
I suppose the DNC needs to find a state that has a true demographic breakdown as to what the party looks like , if they do so I really hope that they can find a state that caucus's rather than just votes in a ballot.
1
@Alec The caucus chairs were given the choice of using the app or calling the results in the old way by phone. I don't think the party anticipated that so many results would need to (or be chosen to) be called in,
Let's see if Democrats, who complain about Trump and the Republicans tearing down democracy, can create a more democratic primary system in the wake of the Iowa fiasco.
An unrepresentative state with a confusing voting system should not be going first any more.
There are many proposals floating around to reform the primaries. The DNC should debate and choose one.
7
It's time for a new primary system. Four to six multi-state regional primaries with voting on Saturday and a robust early voting and/or absentee ballot alternative. The order in which each region votes alternates from election to election.
1
Let's hope this debacle leads the Iowa Democratic Party to make change for the better. A ranked choice vote would be a vast improvement on their caucuses, which are getting a great deal of well deserved criticism today.
1
Much is made of Iowa’s ability to predict the ultimate Democratic nominee. As a statistical matter, the Democrat winner of the Iowa caucuses often gets the nomination of his or her party. (Of course, the same cannot be said of the Republican caucuses.)
Recognizing just how Red (and White!) Iowa is, it may be that the Democrat’s cart has been put before the horse.
It’s not that Iowa PREDICTS the Democratic nominee; it’s that Iowa gives a bit of a leg-up to the nominee most similar to White, Farm-based, somewhat Republican-leaning voters, and that boost greatly aids the Iowa winner’s Presidential aspirations in other states.
Stated differently, shouldn’t Democrats instead seek the input of a more diverse, Purple, or even Blue state to help them pick their early front-runner? I don’t know if it’s New Jersey, North Carolina, Colorado, or Virginia, or several others, but there are many states that have both a more obvious Democratic presence as well as a far more diverse history of both Democrat and Republican leaders and legislatures.
It’s bad enough that we have the gang in Iowa that can’t count straight. Why are we having a state far better known for its foxes decide which chicken should be the early leader in the hen house?
5
@Forrest Milder Iowa is a swing state. People, if you don't know what you're talking about, you should be able to figure out a quick google search, right?
1
The Iowa result will now be forever in question, which is appropriate. After all, do we really want the state who gave us Representative King, to kick off the Democratic nominating process. Nate Silver is reporting that because of its position in the nominating process, Iowa gets about 20 times the influence of its 41 actual delegates.
What makes it worse, is that those who complained of an unfair process in 2016 did nothing to eliminate the very undemocratic caucus process in 2020. Why? Because the caucuses worked in their favor.
Ignore the first four primaries. Super Tuesday is where we should start. And even then we should be looking for the most representative block of states to start things off in 2024.
1
We caucused last night at the school a few blocks away in our Iowa college town. It was a mess. First our group was viable, then it wasn't, then it was, and this has nothing to do with the realignment process. Buttigieg, Warren, Klobuchar, Sanders and Biden were all viable. Biden's crowd was older and more blue collar, Warren's had the most women, Klobuchar had a very nice turnout and the most demographic diversity, Sanders pretty much all twenty and thirty-somethings, fashionably dressed and all white.
3
This debacle is the moment to fix our antiquated primary system. One Primary Vote - One Day - Everyone. Let’s stop pretending that the preferences of Iowans and New Hampshirites are more important than the rest of the country. ALL of our voices should be heard at the same time.
1
Time to end this farce. Caucuses and primaries in Nevada, Iowa, South Carolina and New Hampshire should be rolled into Super Tuesday in early March, and candidates should have to show viability across a wider, more representative cross-section of the country on Super Tuesday before assuming the mantle of front-runner.
There is no reason on earth that many promising candidates - who may be preferable to far more voters - never make it past the little sand traps that are Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. Some never make it past Iowa, even though they would be far more successful in areas without Iowa's non-representative demographics. That is practically a crime against common sense.
9
This seems to be a result of programming and testing errors. Human errors made at the state party level. It is a minor problem in the scheme of things- including the coronal virus pandemic underway. Still, it is enough of an embarrassment to scrap the undemocratic caucus system designed for frontier days.
Well, it seems to me that Iowa just gave the presidency to Trump again. There will be no way to recoup any sense of integrity among already-suspicious voters, Sanders supporters, or Republicans who were fed up with Trump and were willing to consider going Dem. Even if they conclude Sanders won the caucuses, Warren supporters will be (fairly) concerned that votes were changed or buried because she's a woman. There's no way for Iowa out of this one.
One of three things happened: The DNC didn't like the results; the Republicans had already hacked in and thrown a spanner in the works of this lovely new app; or the DNC really is utterly incompetent especially where tech is concerned.
Even if Iowa graciously offers to withdraw their results or rerun the caucus, absolutely no one will believe that there wasn't interference from one agenda or the other.
People like me will still vote blue, but the Dems just lost everyone they've been lecturing at for four years.
2
I wouldn't expect anything less from the 'greatest nation on earth'.
Every single time I go to my local voting station, I am stupefied and wonder 'how can anyone truly say if our votes are tabulated and counted correctly?' It's like the blind leading the blind. You'd think we never held elections before. It's always confusion at the polling stations, no one taking charge. Every election it's a 'new and improved process'.
For something this important, the entire process needs to be much more professionally executed and managed.
1
The best solution to the current problem is to report the Iowa results after the primary season is over...that will put into perspective how Iowa only matters right now because it's first.
1
My parents are both from Iowa. The people I know there are wonderful human beings but if there was ever one more reason needed to show why the presidential process SHOULDN'T start there.....
1
It's striking and unfortunate that the two candidates who had the most to gain from good showings in Iowa's caucuses book-ended the "victory speeches" last night. Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg gave stirring speeches on a night that had many hints of a really good night for them. If that turns out to be the case, they will have lost the boost their campaigns would have gotten, though they did get whatever national stage was left when they spoke as positively and passionately as they did. But at the same time, wasn't it refreshing to see our fellow Americans in all those precincts gracefully, with good humor, go about the process of deciding who would be the best standard-bearer? Then, as the results didn't come in, I began to think, "Oh my God, is this election interference from the Russians?" Or if not, could this be a scenario of what the Russians will do when November comes around? After all, we have a president who welcomed foreign tampering in 2016, and whose administration does not a thing to prevent that happening in 2020. In fact, he has solicited foreign interference for the past two years, and now that those efforts will be given a whitewash by the Senate, yes of course he'll keep doing it. What a nightmare that, like all those spirited Iowans who just turned out to vote, all our votes in November might be trumped by any number of devious means.
My students came in to school this morning, having been reared in an environment that makes them ambivalent
(at best) toward our government. Their collective theory is that Biden did so poorly that the Party has some "inconsistencies" to clean up. This is where the heads of some of our not-so-distant voters are today.
2
Whether Iowa remains first in the nominating process is of secondary concern to me. What is of principal concern is that Iowa utterly and completely dropped the ball and failed to insure that their result reporting procedures would work smoothly. You might think the Iowa Democratic party would understand the profound necessity of getting this right. But apparently not. It is beyond me to understand how they allowed this to go off the rails. It is also unforgivable
1
Folks who claim this wasn't hacked don't understand the variety of tools that can be employed to gain unfair political advantage in our elections. Confusion at the polls is certainly one of them.
2
Both Iowa and New Hampshire should never have been able to dictate anything, they are not in any way shape or form congruent to the makeup of the electorate.
Let me take this opportunity to again recommend Mailing In (or dropping off at the local library) ballots like we do up over here in the northwest. You get a few weeks to vote, you can do it in your jammies, there are no lines, and it’s on paper.
Love you, Iowa, my dad grew up in Tama, but the caucuses are undemocratic, and you shouldn’t get to have this much sway over the rest of us.
2
The diversity argument doesn't cut it. Iowa helped nominate Barack Obama. And Harris and Booker didn't drop out because of Iowa. They were polling badly nationally.
1
At this point the Iowa caucus results won’t be trusted and there is no choice but to cancel them.
Likewise New Hampshire should be set aside. It’s a small unrepresentative state and it would be best now for the nomination process if it was considered a “warm up lap.”
This is a debacle.
What would be most fair now is that the election of convention delegates only begin to count with the South Carolina primary.
One person / One Vote.
Three "sets" of data to declare one winner is making my head hurt.
When 2024 arrives, let's hope that all candidates, regardless of party, just decide to skip Iowa.
2
The sad thing about this debacle is that politically it has been forgotten. Maybe, next time, Iowa should be pushed into some mid campaign stretch and call it a day.
Presumably a caucus is like a town meeting type vote? Our town has this antiquated town meeting format. You cast a vote prior to the meeting so that the topic can be discussed and then voted on in person at the town meeting after hours of debate. So incredibly inefficient and not representative of all the constituents who can't sit through hours of mundane discussion. Many metrowest towns in the ivory tower of greater Boston have this.
Should the Iowa caucus be abandoned....YES! But one furrowing one's highly educated brow in tsk tsk'ing Iowa should also have self reflection on the arcane and ineffective town meeting.
The problem is not with the caucus software.
The problem is with the political junkie reporters who have puffed this event up into such a big deal.
Let the Iowans (and people in NH) meet the candidates discuss, choose however they want, do it without all the sports reporting,
Instead of slicing and dicing the electorate, spend all these column inches on what Democrats as a whole support (ie follow the legislation passed under Pelosi's leadership in the House) as opposed to what Republicans support (McConnell's obstruction).
That is the choice in the election.
Time to disrupt the primary process.
Start with the most populated and diverse state, my how state of California.
Adios Iowa.
1
This is disappointing. I was hoping for more secret dirt about Trump to be revealed by Democrats today and for the news media to downplay anything good Trump might say in the State of the Union address. Instead, the big news is Democrats failure to choose the candidate that is acceptable to the Democrat National Committee. There is no way that the delay in getting results is due to technical difficulties and of course, the only persons who complain about hacking are the apparent losers.
2
When it looked like results were delayed by several hours last night, that was a big mistake.
The fact that they're still not available the following morning is absolutely unacceptable.
Iowa should vote LAST next time around- after Northern Mariana, Guam, and Puerto Rico. This is a dumpster fire. Every single person in the State of Iowa Democratic Party's office needs to be replaced by someone younger and more competent. What a disgrace.
3
Yes, it's unfortunate. No, it isn't good. But it's not the end of democracy. It's the Iowa caucus, for heaven's sake. The coverage of this (not just the NYT) is borderline hysterical, "failed", "chaos," "shock." Calm down, people.
1
Iowa. Really Iowa? You talking about Iowa? Nobody should pay any attention or give any listen to little clownish Iowa. Same as it ever was. Just move Iowa on out and fly on over.
2
Well, the Russians will never let is forget this.
1
Scrap it. Cut it loose. We finally got rid of the caucus system here in Washington. It’s indefensible.
Move the first states around. This is not working.
And you want these people running our nation?
1
Iowa first. Why. Lilly white demographics, unimportant economy, small towns and cities. Urban nothing.Iowa first? How about after Super Tuesday.
The system is silly. Iowa is one relatively small and rather white state, as is New Hampshire. Yet we keep trying to give them outsized influence.
Time to stop buying into the nonsense.
Keep calm and, above all, vote blue no matter who.
Why are the rest of us held hostage by one state, any state.
2
Go back to pen and paper ballots. Apps and computers are fake. Trump will be reelected because of faulty computers and a criminal electoral college.
1
The Dems shouldn't have asked Boeing's engineers for an app.!
1
Obviously, the issue with the caucus
is that it’s a voting system so quaint that it truly sounds like a joke from a rural TV comedy. For almost fifty years, our nation’s future has been put into the hands of a process that would otherwise sound like a plan for a barn dance.
The Iowa Caucus is praised for its democratic ideal of bringing candidates to the people. And who can argue the merits of that? But how about the rest of us? Don’t we deserve the same access to candidates?
Moreover, what happens after the election? After the election of all offices? The elected disappear behind closed doors with no forum built in for voters to ever communicate with them again. Donald Trump holds rallies but not public question sessions. Mitch McConnell makes decisions that affect the nation’s democracy and future but is required to answer or explain to no one, not even those in his home state.
And after Iowa, the candidates are off to New Hampshire, a state with a better process but just as white and non-urban voters as Iowa.
The Iowa caucus system must be ditched for the good of that state alone. And Iowa and New Hampshire need to be replaced with Pennsylvania and Ohio, two states with the nation’s mix of urban and rural, blue and white collar, academia and agrarian, and mixed cultures and races. They are the best representation of our nation as a whole.
But it’s all for naught if we don’t require public forums giving us the same access to the elected as when they were candidates.
1
It’s time, past time, to have some fairness in the all-important first primary states.
They get disproportionate candidate time in our lumbering nearly two-year presidential election mechanism.
The difficulty in choosing representative early primary states may well necessitate a rotating schedule. But something must be done.
It would also be nice if the campaign season were restricted to one year. It would begin in November of the year before the election. That should be plenty of time.
2
Caucuses are a nostalgic exercise. States should feel free to keep theirs but they shouldn't play the outsize role that Iowa's does by being the first selection process in the country.
Throw in this mess and it's past time to make some adjustments to the primary process.
This really isn't hard. There were only about 170,000 people that participated in the Iowa caucuses last night, but they still can't tabulate and communicate the results because of problems with the new app. For comparison purposes, the Domino's app handled several hundred thousand pizza orders last night, all without a hitch. And those pizza orders were a lot more diverse than Iowa.
19
@GMooG
Delightful comic relief !
If we abolished the electoral college, the candidates would be forced to focus on all of the American people. I've grown disenchanted with the entire process. One state shouldn't carry more weight over another. State boundaries are artificial and arbitrary. If we really believe in the notion of "every vote counts", then let's create a process that elects candidates based on the number of citizens that vote for them ....period.
This Iowa caucus fiasco is a prime example of how broken the system really is.
15
@David F
State boundaries are not artificial or arbitrary. The laws from one state to another matter.
But otherwise, YES. A state line should not erase the value of its own minority.
The vote of one person in Oklahoma should not matter less than one person in New York or New Hampshire, or California. I have always felt disenfranchised if/when the electoral college goes against my vote, in any of the states I have voted in. (California, Oklahoma, New York, Tennessee, Indiana, Texas. Okay, I might not have actually voted in Indiana, but I lived there for a year, and if I'd voted, then that vote should have counted for something.)
@David F
"If we abolished the electoral college, the candidates would be forced to focus on all of the American people."
No, that's totally wrong. If we abolished the EC, candidates would focus only on the most populous states. That's why we have the EC, to prevent 'tyranny by the majority.'
2
@David F - Actually if just by an act of Congress the size of the House of Representatives was increased to restore proportional representation between states, you could keep the Electoral College and it would be functional and representative again. No need to modify the Constitution, just pass a law. The House has been increased in size many times in our history; it’s part of the design. I feel like I am screaming in the wilderness because NOBODY seems to understand this.
Iowa bores me. Any state that elects Grassley and Ernst has very little relevancy to the rest of the country. The media should share some blame. All they talk about is Iowa for months.
18
@Annie Chon I couldn't agree more about Grassley and Ernst not to mention King! Hopefully all will be gone next round.
@Annie Chon - It’s not Iowa’s job to entertain California. I’m fairly sure they don’t care about your level of excitement.
Tom Perez, innocent bystander.
6
For my entire lifetime the primary process has been distorted to enable two small, mostly white states to have a significant and inexcuseable impact on the presidential elections. Could this distortion of a true democratic process be resolved if New York, California and a few other states that better reflect the diverse population of our country were to hold their primaries in January?
9
The glitches in reporting results from the Iowa caucus sites are, in and of themselves, of little significance. However, from a larger perspective they emphatically reinforce why Iowa (whether or not they use a caucus system or a standard voting system) should not be first.
Supporters of the Iowa caucus, against those who object to it on the grounds that Iowa is not representative of the country, point to the fact that the Democratic winners of seven out of ten of the last caucuses went on to secure the Democratic Party nomination. That argument reinforces reasons why the Iowa caucus should not hold its exalted position in the pantheon of state primaries leading up to the National Convention. That statistic, seven out of ten, demonstrates the outsized influence Iowa has on the process of selecting a candidate by downstream voters in other state primaries. For a candidate, winning the Iowa caucus creates a false narrative in the larger voting public’s mind that the Iowa winner must somehow be best and therefore deserves their vote. Voters, being perfectly human, are deeply influenced by outcomes generated by a crude process that is uncritically assessed for its reliability in evaluating the qualities of a viable candidate.
2
I lived in a caucus state during the 2000 election. While the caucus experience was fun, it didn't feel like a serious endeavor. Electing a candidate, especially this year, is deadly serious business. I cannot understand why the DNC is still using this "fun" exercise in one of the least diverse, least populous states to drive the outcome of the primary.
18
@Heidi A lots of misconceptions about Iowa on here. It is not one of the least populous states. It is in fact 31st so right in the middle, just behind Utah and Connecticut and ahead of Nevada and Arkansas.
1
Reform begins at home.
If the Democratic Party is serious about being inclusive, in representing the young and communities of color, then we need to start this process in a state that reflects the diversity we want to see in the Party. It's time to elevate Nevada or some other larger more diverse state to be the first primary in the process.
This election season has focused on things that are broken. Let the Party commit to making the system more equitable and reflective of the whole country.
16
@historyprof Good luck with that. There's something standing in the way of Hope and Change: Republicans.
1
Maybe this says something about me, not Iowa. One of the news channels did a segment on how the caucus system works. After a minute or so of watching, I turned it off. The system seems quaint, but overly complicated and definitely open to manipulation by candidates with the resources to lure voters with non-political inducements.
And clearly, Iowa (no criticism intended) is not and has not been representative of a cross-section of American voters. Yesterday’s voting catastrophe was surely caused, in part, but the complexity of a system that seems to have survived by tradition, but is of very limited usefulness now.
25
@John Vasi - I live in a red caucus state. Our turnouts were routinely miniscule, which meant a vanishingly small number of voters participated.
Then we came to 2008, when in my district 1800 people showed up in a snowstorm, and voted 92% for Obama (the normal turnout was 75 people). Then in 2016, 1200 people turned out and voted 75% for Bernie.
When we have candidates that inspire the voters, we get reasonable turnouts. That said, I tend to think a normal primary would include a lot more voters and thus be more representative of the population.
7
I'm not happy that this happened, but I hope it is finally the catalyst needed to fix the Democratic primary process. Most Democrats are disenfranchised twice in the presidential election process: first by the overemphasis on Iowa and New Hampshire in the primary process, and then again by presidential campaigns that focus almost exclusively on battleground states. I'm tired of my vote being taken for granted, and I applaud Michael Bloomberg for opting out of the game. Yes, he has billions of dollars to spend on TV ads, but his choice may eventually help level the playing field for all states, and all candidates.
32
@JDalton
I have a feeling about Bloomberg and just a few days ago he was barely on my radar.
Regardless of what you think about the concept of still using a caucus in this day and age, the main take away of the 2020 Iowa caucuses for me is the hubris and incompetence of the Iowa Democratic Party. As a Democrat myself, I am completely appalled at the lack of preparedness, nonexistent training, and terse press statements throughout the evening.
I am an election judge in Olmsted County, Minnesota. I have been particularly impressed with the quality of the training and the on site documents provided to the judges. That being said, at 52, I was the youngest judge in my precinct during the 2018 primaries, and despite it being my first time, I took on an outsized role, being the only one to register new voters, call into the main office with any questions we had, prepare a lot of documents for the head judge to sign, and take the head judge’s place in driving (along with another judge) the results to the county headquarters. Being an election judge is not as simple as it would appear from the outside. Regarding adding new technology to the process, in our most recent election, a school board referendum, we had iPads with the voter roster, which worked reasonably well, but we all had to take detailed training in advance and every precinct was provided with a Wi-Fi puck to ensure a good connection. Actual voting procedures stayed the same.
It appears that the election judges in Iowa were not similarly prepared or supported.
15
As a former election judge, it’s wonderful to feel your enthusiasm for your well-run primary election process. It sounds like Minnesota has it together! For many years, I served in the Chicago Board if Elections and was amazed at how much training and on-site supervision was afforded us and how well run our “Election Central” helped us if matters needed solving. If we must do this primary process for elections, wouldn’t it be terrific if every county and state followed our processes instead of antiquated and partisan methods found in places like Iowa and Texas.
2
Why not focus early attention on the states that will likely determine the outcome of the election? Beginning the primary process in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and/or Ohio would send a strong message to their Democratic voters by allowing them a voice in picking a viable candidate for the general. Unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, the above swing states are highly unionized and have a much more ethnically diverse electorate.
23
@Brian - I am endlessly surprised by the number of people here who don’t recognize Iowa and New Hampshire as swing states.
2
How about no.
This is in-part a new app that was not properly tested, that's on the app developer.
It is also in part a new set of procedures - which is a challenge regardless of the level of technology.
They did not have enough registration lists last year - they were using pizza boxes and paper towels as attendance lists last midterm.
They had too-few preference cards (ballots, of a sort) last midterm. They did not prepare properly for that.
This is a quaint tradition, it makes everyone feel warm and fuzzy, but this is a state of 3.2M people and it's 2020. Like New Hampshire, it's no longer the 19th century currier-and-ives, buffalo-plaid handful of hamlets that the press loves to portray every four years. And if some of it still is, why on earth did they think a sudden plunge into cellular technology in rural places was going to work?
Have a primary. Printed paper ballot sheets that are machine-scanned and retained. It works.
13
Just as an issue of technical assurance, the software that drives electoral counts must be pretested with the citizen electoral workers who show up every few years and are not techies and often have to unlearn past procedures. As political assurance, the Democratic Party should rotate its initial primaries.
3
The serial nature of the primaries would seem to lend itself to bias, in that results from one state start to color voters' perceptions of whether their choir will ultimately count.
What if the primaries were "packaged" into groups of four or five states at a time? They could represent a mix of small and large, of predominantly homogeneous, like Iowa, and more heterogeneous, like South Carolina or Georgia. More agricultural and more industrial.
Instead of a single "Super Tuesday" we could have a somewhat more balanced and less strung out process - say 5 per week for 10 weeks.
No doubt there are other alternatives, but it's clear there's both great dissatisfaction with several relatively small states setting the tone for the primary season. Who do we have to ask - or tell - to make it happen?
7
Just like the entire electoral college, this early caucus system of a non-representative state is long overdue for a complete overhaul. The DNC should move all early primaries and caucuses to occur on Super Tuesday and start the race with that day. It would be a substantial number of delegates, it would be representative of the country, it would test campaigns to hold out longer (or fold), spread the presence of candidates over more states, and it would be a sharp censure for the whole process, allowing the poor performers to get a clear signal to drop out gracefully, if they end outside the top 5 or so.
28
The the Federal Election Commission declare that there shall be one "1" primary in the United States, which will be head on the first Tuesday in the month of June. Prior to that single primary, which would aggregate all the votes of all the voters in all the states, the candidates would be required to campaign all around the country and to spend a specified amount of time in each and every state. Every state, large and small, would hear from, and interact with, all the candidates. The primaries would count for two thirds of the total votes needed for a candidate to be nominated and the remaining third would come from everyone in elective office in America from that party. That would be fair.
5
@Joel Friedlander - Parties have sole control over their own primary process. They could literally pick names out of a hat and the FCC would have no authority to stop them. In fact, four state Repub Parties have outright canceled their primaries in order to protect Trump from any challenges. The general election is another story, but even then the details of those are controlled by the states.
2
So I guess the DeMoines Register Poll was accurate after all!
Seriously though, the primary means a lot to the economy of Iowa. I don’t want to punish them more in an economic climate that is leaving farmers and manufacturers aside.
But it would be nice to have a process in which 4 or 5 states representing regions get to vote on the same day - as in take Iowa, SC, NH, and Nevada and vote/ release results on the same day. Follow this up with high population states in each region.
11
The entire Iowa-first process is ridiculous for the democratic primary. Candidates spend a fortune and enormous amounts of time in a solidly red state, ignoring the huge majority of other voters.
I live in Connecticut. I would love the opportunities Iowans have to meet the candidates and hear them up close. I would also like equal influence upon who is finally chosen as the democratic candidate.
I would also like it if candidates could choose where to focus their efforts. Warren might need to campaign in the Midwestern states that democrats lost to Trump. Perhaps Buttigieg could better spend his time at town halls in the southeast and large American cities listening and responding to the concerns of racially diverse communities. Biden may need to visit university towns to connect with the young. Etc.
The bottom line is this: we need an equitable system in which voters get to know the candidates and they get to know us.
510
@Valerie L.
Why can't we have regional primaries? Candidates campaign in all states in a region, then the region votes on a single day? Four or five regions in the nation would do it. Rotate among regions to pick the order of regional voting in a particular election year. Too simple?
46
@Valerie L. - How is a state that went for Obama twice and for Trump with only 51% “solidly red”? Have Democrats given up on ever winning again?
21
@Valerie L.
But think of the diner owners!
13
Iowa caucuses look like musical chairs. The debates are also inadequate. How is the mainstream of the Democratic party supposed to influence the agenda and come up with a candidate that is not too "progressive" to win a general election? The promise to forgive future student loans and worse "free" college and healthcare are empty giveaways from a politician trying to buy votes. Seniors will not compromise Medicare, it would not answer the need for a Government option health plan. We can only offer a better rate on school loans. Skewing the party's message to a utopian ideal w/o Congressional votes is meaningless.
What we need now is experience and trustworthiness to restore a broken Presidency and get the Nation on track. We need Biden and a VP, with potential to step up to the Job in the future. We need new Senators that will pass the Bills before them. Work for that.
7
Possibly, the Democratic primaries should pick the VP candidate from those that just need more experience for the big job. We could eliminate candidates, like Lieberman, that could never pass the smell test.
These are good Iowa people trying to make it all work. The tech failed. This Type of tech is still very new to many people over 60 and the people of Iowa did their very best. I applaud them for trying their darnedest! I’m guessing it was the Russians that messed things up anyway.
5
Confused as how you blame this problem on technology. Where was the planning and trial of the app in the many months leading up to this? Who made the decision to use this particular app? Why didn’t everyone have it downloaded a week before? So many questions and so little forethought.
1
Lots of takeaways here:
1) Iowa should lose its 1st in the nation status. Why not states like MI or PA which are much more diverse but remain purple.
2) The Caucus system needs to go and straight up private ballot primaries need to be enforced nationwide.
3) This helps Biden immeasurably. We'd all be talking about his failure in Iowa, but now the eventual winner is a footnote to this fiasco. Sanders and Pete have to be (rightfully) upset. It's a life raft for a foundering campaign. It helps Warren too.
4) This helps Trump. When the focus could have been about a surging Dem candidate, we're again talking about an dysfunctional and divided party. It's bad press for the Dems at a moment we can't afford.
I want to see Trump gone more 5hsn anything, but the DNC could yet again find itself on the losing end.
44
just because they're considered "purple" today doesn't mean they're going to be purple tomorrow. And no, we shouldn't get rid of caucuses. If you'd ever participated in one you'd appreciate the lie unique benefits for the participants and for democracy.
Iowa is a solidly, permanently-dyed red state. It is old, white, rural. Tuning in last night to CNN and MSNBC to witness a bunch of retirees milling around or making laconic, under-articulated defenses of their choices was, honestly, just as depressing--maybe even more fatally depressing--than watching Trump's lawyers spew pontificating smokescreens. This is our great democracy? What a pathetic shambles. How in heck did anybody ever think that giving a minority faction of elderly Iowans a lock on the Democratic presidential nomination had anything to do with democracy? It is possible to suspect that less democratic intentions may have prevailed in the design of this system. Whatever, witnessing the chaos and utter lack of conviction last night was enough for at least two viewers to turn off the TV in despair. When will the DNC concede that it is playing to lose--not just the will of the majority of the people, not just the election, but very likely all life on the planet?
70
@Fantomina - Dyed red? Permanently? Iowa went for Johnson, Carter, Bill Clinton, and Obama. So after one election in which Trump squeaks out a 51% victory it is now “permanently red”? Your comment is a monument to preemptive surrender.
4
@Jackson I see no bigotry. There appeared to be a dominant number of older Americans, of which I am one. A preponderance of any demographic is not representative. Fantomina was reporting what she observed. And I think she got it right. Yes, 'fatally depressing.' Few seemed to truly understand the caucus process, and the whole of it looked like - not the messy vitality of democracy - but simply a mess. Embarrassing.
This will be a great week for President Trump and his supporters. All we need to do is point at the Democrat incompetence in tabulating the results of their own caucus when they want to be the party leading the government takeover of healthcare. SOTU speech tonight where our President will have the hard facts stating that this is the best economy in recent memory with the lowest employment rate ever for blacks and Hispanics. Wednesday, Trump will be acquitted in the Senate and will most likely have the highest job approval rating of his Presidency. Life is good
11
I was an Iowa defender until now. This caucus system is too unreliable and dates for the always on national scrutiny it gets today. Gotta move to a regular vote or move the first state. Iowa deserves first in nation status taken from it for this
But keep it to a rural state first pls. Dems already win big in cities, we need rural appeal in general election
1
@Brian Brennan Agreed. I like the idea that there’s a state or two out there (Iowa and New Hampshire) where primary voters could reasonably expect to come in to personal contact with most every candidate. That should count for a lot. But Iowa isn’t very representative and apparently they’re not up to the task either. Now it’s important you get a nominee that can do well in the “heartland” but there ought to be a re-examining of which states are getting that distinction and why.
'Three data sets'..
Whatever for?
2
I bet many, many of the undecideds just stayed home. Rather than go out and endure having to admit their confusion and anxiety about making a choice.
1
Two observations-
1) of course Iowa’s outsize influence on the nominating process is ridiculous. The caucus system is moronic (there’s a reason everyone else everywhere gets to vote in private). It would probably help at least if news organizations like the Times were to report on campaigns more substantively and be less horse-racey, and to reports on the results of a flawed caucus system less seriously.
2) this idea that somehow because the candidates who are people of color have dropped out has left the Dems with little diversity is a bit goofy. The party that elected a black president twice and then nominated a woman in 2016 now is presenting us with a choice between two women, a gay man, and two ethnically Jewish but probably atheist men. And Joe Biden. That’s over 80% of the field as members of communities that have never been considered to have a chance in a national election.
28
Record turnout in the Republican caucus, quick, efficient reliable results reported. This isn’t an Iowa problem....it’s a Democrat problem, self inflicted and entirely representative of their thinking. Now, let’s bring on Medicare For All! The Green New Deal! Gun control! Good gravy!
3
It’s all about the gravy. Always.
Only 170000 people showed up to caucus in Iowa. The Iowa Democratic party had years to prepare for this and did not test the software before rolling it out. The caucus format is confusing and actually insulting to candidates. All that time and money spent by candidates in Iowa ... for what? Time to move on to a better system.
17
Iowa has wasted our time and money. There are very few democrats in this state. Why should it have so much voice? Candidates have spent precious money and time talking about soybeans and cow dung. Good people were knocked out of the race because they couldn’t connect with people who frankly don’t have much say in the country. Let’s face it the electoral system established back in the 1700s no longer reflect the world that exists today. As for paper or technology? Technology can’t be trusted because there are many ways to tamper. Paper and quill pens is the way to go!
32
@MB you are aware the Iowa is a swing state, aren't you?
Also Iowa has led the nominations only for the past 50 years. In the 1700s it wasn't even a state yet.
1
An untested vote reporting app failing on election night? You could've counted on that.
8
Follow the money. The polls showed Bernie was winning easily, so they needed to create chaos. These are "Democrats" who see Bernie as more evil than Trump
Via @TheGrayzoneNews
“Pro-Israel Buttigieg backer Seth Klarman is top funder of group behind Iowa’s disastrous voting app”
“The bizarre scenario was made possible by a mysterious voting app whose origins had been kept secret by Democratic National Committee officials. For hours, it was unclear who created the failed technology, or how it wound up in the hands of Iowa party officials.”
“Though a dark money Democratic operation turned out to be the source of the disastrous app, suspicion initially centered on former Hillary Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook and his Russiagate-related elections integrity initiative.”
15
@steve Plus there was a phone backup system and yet NO RESULTS released at all??? How come we haven’t seen any results from those counties where they were able to submit results by phone? It is extremely fishy and I hate to say it because I know conspiracy theories just play right into Trump’s hands.
1
@steve Hard not to wonder about this. When choosing between conspiracy theories or incompetence, I will tend to favor incompetence as it is more common. Nonetheless, given what happened to Senator Sanders last time in 2015/2016, one must wonder if the powers that be were concerned about the results, and therefore it was easier just to let the whole thing blow up and move on to New Hampshire.
2
@steve Please remove your tinfoil Bernie hat. This was incompetence, not conspiracy at work. But Trump and Putin will be pleased with your unsubstantiated plot mongering.
3
I’m trying to imagine how this article reads if it were the GOP caucus that had a glitchy app. Headline: Interference Could Already be Affecting the 2020 Race. Hacking and corruption would be the leading paragraphs of the story. What a puff piece this is for a disaster for the Dems. And these people want to run our healthcare??
4
Time to join the present. Just vote.
3
You can’t make this stuff up! None of the possible explanations for this debacle (election chicanery, incompetence, etc.) makes one comfortable with voting for a Democrat in the general election. I thought the Democratic machinations in 2016 were bad, and they were, but this beats all. I can’t even think of a euphemism for this disaster that the NYT would publish!
6
At every level, Democrats are incompetent.
11
Caucuses are ridiculous, lets vote by blood letting. Whichever candidate received the most fluid ounces of blood wins!
1
Bury the Iowa caucuses already. This is nearly as silly as it can possibly get. We're not throwing any baby out with that bath water. Dump it.
4
The confusion must be the result of the low quality candidates in this monkey race! No wonder Pelosi is so scared of Trump that she tried to get the old dude canned!...
4
Russian hackers are relaxing now because they don't even have to try -- in 2020 these dolts can't even implement an app properly.
8
Why not play spin the bottle at every caucus in Iowa and use that to guide the election process? Iowa is a joke and DNC is letting Iowa make the
Democratic election process look like a joke because Bernie said it was unfair in 2016.
Regional primaries over two months and let Iowa be a footnote in history. This is what happens when the reformers get to make the rules.
9
One commentator on MSNBC said the Iowa process was democracy in action. Another replied that rather than that, this was politics in action. I don't know why the Iowa Democratic Party had to come up with a "fancy" method of taking votes. It was clearly over their heads and an embarrassment. They should just keep it simple like the other states and they should not go first. They are not representative of the sense of the majority of Democrats in the country. I like the idea of one day (or days) for a national primary - just like the general election - and let the candidates campaign around the country, just like the general elecrtion.
2
'The app was quickly put together in the past two months and was not properly tested at a statewide scale, according to people briefed on the matter.'
This situation is not only unbelievable and unacceptable, but a simply lazy, shoddy and unprofessional attitude at work.
The eyes of the country were on Iowa last night and EVERYONE suffered a black eye this morning.
This occurrence does NOT bode well for the November election.
74
@Marge Keller, too bad there wasn't any Russian interference in Iowa yesterday, it might have helped a great deal.
Hard to believe this is just a one-off event, a blown tire on the airport runway, and not a sign that the whole creaking Democratic aircraft is in need of a long-overdue inspection.
6
1> Iowa as everyone agrees is not representative of what America is today. What's Ohio or Michigan stopping them from resetting theirs ahead of Iowa's? Ok, not so easy but doable.
2> Let's all return to paper ballots in caucuses, primaries and during presidential election to ward off an uninvited pests like Putin and other creeps against our electoral process and our way of life. Ok, may be easier said than done but Trump is going to cheat again or create some problems to question the results likely aided by his Russian handler. if results says he lost.
1
Everyone is beating up on poor Iowa. Yes, it’s overwhelmingly white yet Iowa gave Barack Obama the boost he needed to gain momentum in 2008. There’s a long storied history to the caucuses and I think that’s great!
Democracy is a little messy and the caucuses remain a remarkable demonstration of eager, enthusiastic citizenship. Iowans have always voted responsibly so why shouldn’t they be worthy of our trust? As a Connecticut Yankee, I’m happy to see them kick off the primary season.
Go Iowa! (I’ve never set foot there but I still love them)
6
I have never voted for a Republican in my life, but I am reluctant to call myself a Democrat. I do not want to be associated with such incompetence. Iowa is the latest example; can't count the votes with people lined up in clusters. Notice the way impeachment was handled. Notice nominating Hillary because it was her turn. Notice Bernie as the front runner. I can keep this up. Are Democrats ever going to learn how to play the game? The country really needs competent opposition to the evil Republicans.
20
Iowa Democrats were supposed to lead the way in selecting the best Trump-beating candidate for president. They have failed. Their complex and not well organized process was not up to the challenge of advancing the Democrats case for taking back the White House. The IDP, and for that matter the DNC leadership, should resign. But of course they won't as they are as clueless a bunch of hack bureaucrats as exists anywhere in the world of politics. Trump emerges triumphant from the impeachment hearings and Democrats counter counter with an Iowan debacle. VERY depressing.
232
@Leo
A private company designed the flawed app.
Another argument for NOT privatizing everything.
Remember, it was another private company that designed the original ACA program.
18
@Leo Oh chill. The outrage is being driven by the obsessive media that wants immediate results and the babies can’t handle less than real time data. And then there are the campaigns that wanted to raise millions based on the results. Guess what? Neither of them are the voters.
8
@GI
Um, not sure if any political parties have in-house software development teams.
5
I feel sorry for the candidates, particularly those who have limited financial resources, having to spend precious dollars over weeks and weeks (and time!) appearing in settings where there are only handfuls of voters. While this process may be heartwarming and nostalgic, as beautifully depicted by Norman Rockwell in his iconic painting of democracy in action in small town New England, it seems more and more unsuitable in a modern nationwide process selecting the Democratic candidate for the presidency of the United States. Driving a Model T in an era of electric vehicles.
271
@John Grillo
Get private and corporate $$$$$ out of campaigning and limit it 3 months.
16
@John Grillo Sounds like Buttigieg is able to now voice his true feelings for Iowa. Monday they were his new best friends. Today he scorns them.
1
@John Grillo
Retire this archaic process already.
Just erect a "Remember the Caucus" monument in the town square for the old folk to gather around and swap their caucus days stories.
3
It’s over. I call it the Evergreen effect! An Evergreen Tree dies long before its foliage gives up the ghost, regardless of the best Tree Doctors on this planet.
Iowa is a skeleton of politics of the past, along with Term Limits and The Electoral College.
29
The idea that four of the least populous, and shall we say "removed" states in country narrow down our choices is antiquated, and never made sense. It's a populist version of the "smoke filled room". Honestly, you have to visit every county in Iowa to become president? I'm all for some rural balance, but this is ridiculous. Have 5-6 regional primaries and let's be done with it.
87
Maybe you are right the DNC should just pick their own candidate in advance, but go through the machinations of the primary to make it look fair. That’s right they have already done that in what was election rigging of a different kind.
Or maybe have the primaries start in California and New York and let them decide for everyone else. It would save a lot of time and money and get the “smart” elites the candidate they want.
2
@JimH The smart elites are all moving to NC to raise the prices on anything and everything!
@JimH
You have very strange ideas about CA and NY. The State of California is not just San Francisco, and the State of New York is not just Manhattan. California is one of the top farm states. Even in the cities, there are huge populations of working-class people.
Have you ever been to either state?
Hard to see this as just a one-off, just a blown tire on the takeoff runway, and not as a reason to take the whole ancient, creaking Democratic aircraft in for a long-overdue inspection.
4
In other words, a now very strong Sanders narrative, including against Trump.
1
What a joke.
“The underlying data and paper trail is sound, and will simply take time to further report the results.” So said Mandy McClure, the spokeswoman for the Iowa Democratic Party, after an improperly tested app failed miserably last night in Iowa.
Why was the app not tested properly? With so much at stake come November, who needs the Russians, the Ukrainians, the Chinese, etc., to sabotage our elections? We can simply employ American know-how to do that all by ourselves.
The people running for president have spent an inordinate amount of time and money in Iowa for the past year, getting an intense ground game oiled and running, holding events, knocking on doors, visiting all 99 counties, taking thousands of selfies.
And for what? I found the oftentimes breathless, gushing and even frantic coverage by media reporters as caucus captains counted people with raised hands difficult to watch. Holy Much-Ado-About-Nothing, Batman!
The only person who gained any momentum from last night's debacle was Donald Trump, while the candidates all piled onto their campaign planes and headed for New Hampshire, another small and white state. I am reminded of Einstein's famous definition of insanity.
64
@Len
"The only person who gained any momentum from last night's debacle was Donald Trump"
And Bloomberg. Sad.
3
@Len And pouring untold millions into the state’s economy. Where did that money go?!
3
@beth
Good point, Beth. I can fully understand the Iowans love the attention every four years, but it is so misplaced. Maybe what happened last night will be a springboard to change in 2024.
3
Iowa has a backup plan that it is executing now. It explained the problem, owned it, and the result is only a slight delay.
This isn’t behavior that should be punished. It should be praised. It’s evidence that Iowa takes its responsibility seriously.
3
The Iowa caucus system worked fine until the Bernie people, angry that they lost to HRC, got the rules changed to favor themselves.
Going from a single round of voting they insisted that the voters go through 3 rounds, each of which added more problems. The Iowa Dem party capitulated to this crazy demand and today we have the result.
The Socialist candidate got what he wanted and the nation is much worse off for it.
At least one candidate, not on the ballot, had a good rejoinder.
If they had used a Bloomberg terminal none of this would have happened, said his campaign manager.
As usual, Mike will get it done.
Depend on it.
10
That’s not the way I see it. God forbid that Americans have what citizens of every other first world nation have had for decades.
God forbid everyone have free health care.
God forbid our children graduate college without high interest student debt.
Gotta make sure Big Insurance and Big Pharma rake in 50 billion in profit.
2
This entire system is ridiculous.
Is there any reason that we can't just have a national primary on the first Saturday in March? Let's get a clear and comprehensive winner, and then move on to the general election.
35
Iowa has had more than it’s fair chance — let’s take this as a very clear sign that it is time for change in the way we choose our party candidates ...
It’s time to put bigger, or at the least more diverse and representative states at the start of the primary process ... and that “honor” should rotate every four years.
Next ...
7
Iowa caucuses reporting a disaster? It's curious and fell short of expectations about timeliness but not a disaster. Trump is the disaster.
Off-off-off-off-off Broadway production.
3
I don't know.
Using a new system that could not handle the volume, a phone app that did not work.
Good grief - this was only the Iowa Caucus. What in the heck can be expected come November 2020? Already the conspiracy knuckleheads are out there, conspiring away.
But in all seriousness, a hiccup like this does not bode well, especially after the 2016 election which continues have a cloud hovering over it in the background. No matter who wins the presidential election, question, concerns, accusations and doubts will flank and be voiced.
Of all the presidential election years for an "inconsistency reporting data" to occur, this is probably the worst time ever. Huge concerns if this stink will ever evaporate and if trust in a presidential election will ever reign again.
What occurred in Iowa last night and to call the issue "inconsistencies in reporting data" does little to inspire confidence or trust, if any at all.
These folks had four years to work out the bugs (no pun intended) and could have used the 2016 Iowa Caucus data as a sample run to ensure the new system could handle the volume of data.
8
2024, how about all the primaries, in 50 states, at the same time?
17
Iowa Caucus Chaos: A Parable for Our Time
There! I’ve written the Title.
It’s up to History or maybe Herstory to explain to us.
1
@TheraP How about hursestory, that is, if we want to get it right.
The Iowa vote tallying fiasco certainly is embarrassing but Donald Trump Jr. outrageously claiming that the vote has been rigged is the equivalent of falsely yelling “Fire” in a crowded political theatre.
2
Hacking from a foreign country or even a neighboring county is unnecessary. Democrats are masters of self-hacking, in so many ways.
4
>> After a midterm triumph premised often on the success of female and nonwhite candidates, the remaining roster of top contenders is older, whiter and more male-dominated than many Democrats had initially hoped.
The more I hear this, when a woman, an atheist Jew, and a Maltese gay 30-something are in the top four, the more I believe the left needs a reckoning as much as the right.
As a gay man, I find it especially baffling. All the empirical data—hard numbers based on objective criteria, including surveys literally asking people if they’d vote for a homosexual—literally proves that, because of an immutable trait no different from sex and race/ethnicity, Buttigieg faces a greater challenge than any of the other candidates. I don’t even support his nomination, though now I might just vote for him in protest.
If the media were consistent in its celebration of diversity, Pete’s rise would be framed as a stunning accomplishment. That it privileges women (but apparently not white women like Warren?) and nonwhites (itself a nebulous category that includes Jews, Asians, Middle Easterners, and even Latinos only when convenient) betrays identity politics as nothing more than another strategy for group dominance.
3
@Chris Pining I agree with you generally, but the midterm success was premised on running people who could win over Republicans, especially Republican women. The current primary has thrown out this premise in favor of the 2016 primary complainers, thinly disguising themselves as democratic reformers. These reformers allowed a overwhelmingly white, caucus state to have an outsized influence on the nominating process. Why? Because actual reforms would not have favored their candidate.
Instead, they produced a nominating process that further polarizes the party and has the masters of polarization, the Republicans, licking their chops.
I hope we can at least keep the house, but now I’m worried, even about that.
It's over for you Iowa. You've lost the credibility for those caucuses to ever be taken seriously again.
7
Iowa does not represent the racial diversity and makeup of this country. Too much emphasis is placed on the Iowa caucuses. It's 2020. The caucuses should go the way of the dinosaurs.
25
The headline teases an obvious question that is left unexplained - who decides that IOWA goes first. Who has the authority to change the ordering of our primaries and caucuses? Get writing!
10
We need to get Steve Harvey to announce the “winner”.
6
Our over reliance on technology will be the death of us. In Iowa, of all places, where people cluster in the corners of rooms like some weird human abacus, it is beyond silly.
2
Yeah, and the next fiasco that you’ll see is the 2020 Census!
4
I guess the Democrats want Trump to win.
6
Oy, Democrats--Are the next ten months going to be like this?
4
Does anyone else remember the caucus race in “Alice in Wonderland”? Where the characters run around in any direction they choose, and Dodo arbitrarily decides when it’s over? And they all get to declare themselves winners? Turns out Lewis Carroll was right, and a caucus race is silly nonsense.
10
Beta test? What's that?
1
Only proves to me the "Trump -Russia pact is still working?
Can we just imagine how Trump and GOP will use this failure to argue that the Democrats can’t even manage simple process like this caucus in a small, unrepresentative state! So, how can they even manage running the country?!
It’s hard to disagree with that conclusion.
I will continue my support for Dem candidates whom I prefer, but I will not support the DNC until they announce “never again” does Iowa “go first “ with this ridiculous procedure that puts the entire Democratic party and its candidates in such a terrible light.
10
Welcome to Medicare for all! The Green New Deal! Gun control! Why should the DMV and public education hog all the dysfunction?
3
It's the Russians . . . or the Muscovites. It could even be the Ukrainians. But for sure, none of this is the fault of any Democratic Party apparatus, strategy, or decision making process.
5
I love Iowa in Rogers and Hammerstein but now we owe it an unnecessary big mess. Btw, we are into the second decade of the 21st Century pals.
Oh, I know all I owe I owe Ioway
I owe Ioway all I owe and I know why.
I am Ioway born and bred
And on Ioway corn I'm fed
Not to mention her barley, wheat, and rye.
Let me get this straight. Democrats messed up the impeachment. Then they messed up the Iowa Democrat caucuses. But they want to run the country?
6
It's almost as if the entire system was designed to be as opaque and subject to manipulation as possible. But that couldn't be because nobody could benefit from that, right. Oh wait...
7
As a life long Democrat, I feel that Iowa gets a very unfair share of the spotlight every 4 years. As an engineer, I always believe in the KISS principle (Keep It Simple ..). The very complicated and archaic system of caucuses has to change to be more inclusive for the disabled (I am hearing challenged). It is time to give Iowa a rest and have another more diverse state lead the charge during the Primaries. A tremendous amount of time and money is needlessly wasted in Iowa. Iowa, you had your chance, you failed. Now please take you normal place anytime but first, during the process.
4
I am constantly frustrated by the new state of the world that relies on apps and the cloud. The world at large does not understand that there are still many people who do not have ready access to wifi and cloud based apps.
I am often in remote areas where there is no cell or internet service or service that is extremely slow, even more so when crowds try to use the service.
Let this be a lesson that it is unwise to rely on this technology for all aspects of our lives. It is increasingly difficult to access basic everyday functions without being told to use an app or the internet. And, many seniors are being left behind.
17
I'd rather they get it right. Come on folks. There are generations still alive who aren't alarmed at waiting a day or two for hand counts.
8
We can feel sorry for Democratic candidates who, along with their staffs, invested so much money and time in the Iowa caucuses, but there is a much larger question: Why on earth, just to satisfy the desire of politically active citizens of one state to be the center of attention during primary season, does the rest of the country tolerate the Iowa caucuses?
Iowans should have a primary election in the same manner as other states do. Each voter should declare his or her party affiliation, go into a voting booth and cast a ballot. If the Hawkeyes want to time their primary ahead of other states, who cares? Just do it the right way.
3
Want a simple solution? Give me 1 hour to setup an Excel spreadsheet on a non-internet link box (there would be zero outside connections possible) along with a check field for each voting location and a column for each candidate. Then I want the persons in charge of each voting location to call in their numbers along with a verifier. Each call in would take less than one minute and the accumulations would be automatic. Once the numbers for each voting location are entered this data file would be copied to a flash drive which then would be used to send the untouchable data file to whomever. Think about this approach.
6
Iowa has 2 million registered voters; 240,000 of them caucus. That is remarkably low if you look at it as voter turn out. Why do we put so much store in a state that makes it hard for people to participate in the electoral process? A state where a low-income worker who can’t get the night off is effectively shut out? That is not how our Democratic process is supposed to work, but we let it set the tone for our presidential election.
39
@Sandra Jezebel wrote a story last week about how the caucus format disenfranchises not only people who work nights, but the disabled, and people with children (Since you are expected to spend hours in the evening at the caucus, one parent would have to stay home.) Elizabeth Warren responded by offering free childcare services for anyone who needed it.
1
@Sandra,
Yes, but how many actually vote , half?
Iowa is dominantly Caucasian and rural. And this caucus system is chaotic and raucous. All true.
But it is also democracy as it seldom is practiced. Large numbers of people talk to all the candidates, make their choices and then, under the rules, try to convince others of the rightness of their choices. Messy, yes. But democracy is messy as we know. Ordinary people taking their views to one another in a (usually) friendly way.
And so it takes an extra day or two to get the results. We can wait. Count them up. Let's see who convinced the most. Democracy is worth the wait.
71
@cjg
"Large numbers of people ... try to convince others of the rightness of their choices."
Therein lies the second biggest problem with Iowa's outsized role (after the fact that it is not representative of the country): peer pressure and social factors should have NO role in choosing candidates. Everyone should have a chance to walk into a booth and privately choose the best candidate in his or her view.
81
@cjg - It's 'democracy as it is seldom practiced' because it doesn't work.
It's not democracy. At all.
The caucus participants are limited to people who can show up at a certain time and spend hours there.
That eliminates entire swathes of the population.
A small sample of people who are excluded: Medical professionals working in hospitals, the patients in the hospitals, on duty fire and police personnel, the cashier at the 24 hour convenience store, the active duty military members out of state, the shift worker at a factory, and so on.
You can call caucuses many things but what they absolutely are not is democracy in any form.
67
@cjg In these days of instant gratification, we no longer have any patience to get it correct.
Having said that, the caucus process, as done in Iowa, really is an outdated process. Perhaps they should adopt a two stage "jungle" process. Day one everyone votes their first choice. Day two (and it can be the next day, a few days later, or even longer) everyone votes for either the first or second place candidate (and there is no need to even identify who came in first)
7
Why are Americans always so impatient and in a rush to declare a winner? Where other countries focus on accuracy, Americans focus on speed and are driven by the media circus to be the first to announce results. Democracy is about having every vote count. So let’s do it right and count the votes. So what if it takes an extra day or two? Americans’ mindset needs to shift toward doing things right. Stop acting like impatient children when so much is at stake, when our nation’s future is at stake.
6
Iowa has 2 million registered voters, barely more than 10 percent of them caucus. People who work at night or have kids to care for or are immobile are effectively shut out from a system that requires everyone to show up at their high school gym at 7 pm. How is this a good example of representative democracy?
74
Look at all the people heaping scorn on Iowa, the primary process, the Electoral College and low population states in general. First of all, the Unites States, as the name implies, is a federal association of states, each with different needs and priorities. The Electoral College is a bulwark against the imposition of the will of a small handful of populous states on all states. As for the primary process, the fault is not with the process or with Iowa but with the people in charge. The Democrat Party blew this one.
5
@Larry - So, instead of the populous states being in control, it's the low population states that are in control.
That's called the 'tyranny of the minority.'
We've had two elections in just 16 years where the popular vote winner has lost.
If that doesn't show that the Electoral College system is broken, I don't know what does.
3
Iowa has made itself irrelevant. Whatever results they report will be suspect and ignored. The truly sad results is that several good candidates went all in on this caucus process, burned through their cash, and had to drop out of the race. The Democratic party needs to take a cold, hard look at that before allowing this to happen again.
42
Conducting any part of a national election using the Iowa caucus system is akin to putting out a national newspaper using stone tablets, chisels and hammers!
The caucus system is - and always has been - hokey and backward and should have no place in a modern presidential election process.
Neither should the Electoral College!
We need all election processes to be conducted according to the same FEDERAL laws.
As long as I’m dreaming, let’s do away with political parties while we’re at it.
4
@PeterW - I would say no on eliminating political parties. They do serve a purpose.
But, I would propose a non-partisan ballot for the primaries all the way through the process.
All candidates from all parties on one ballot. Pick one.
After the primary process, have the top 4 have a run off.
Then the top two. Person with the most votes, wins.
No more third parties. No more popular vote winners actually losing.
CA does this with their primary process, save for the run off, and it works just fine.
The main thing such a process does is push people to a more central position.
A Republican can't make it past two reasonable Democrats if they are Far Right and scare the voters.
Same for a Far Left candidate.
The primary process now allows for extremism, especially in a district which is majority GOP or Democratic.
I do agree that the primary process should be run on Federal rules with all candidates being equal. And everyone allowed to have an actual vote, no more of this caucus nonsense.
1
@Roger Binion
The only apparent purpose of political parties seems to be eliminating independence and smothering opinions that do not march in lock-step with those established BY the party.
It works even better when there is only ONE party - - or haven't you noticed?
2
@PeterW - Aren't you just a tad overly dramatic...
The parties exist to support candidates with like minded agendas.
One party might be more doctrinaire than the other but both allow for a fairly broad spectrum of ideals.
1
There’s only like 10 people in the state and 9 of them are republicans, so really, how difficult can this be?
No more Iowa. California and Texas and New York and Florida come first, all in one day. Based on population, region, demographics. That would be fair and much more accurate in terms of the sentiment of the Democratic party.
8
@Matthew Having those four monster states all vote first on one day would be blindingly expensive.
Only the best funded candidates would do well.
We should be working to get money out of politics, not make people raise even more.
2
If a close relative our current system of democracy- where certain voters have far more power than others- were in place in an oil producing Southwest Asian country like Iran or Iraq, the US would use it as an excuse to overthrow their government.
2
I think that it's time for the caucus system to be history. In fact our whole primary system--at least on the Democratic side--could use an overhaul that brings more fairness to choosing our presidential ticket. This is not working and it hasn't for years. How about a national primary day for each party that gives both sides a big picture look at what he we all prefer? This is nonsense. How about putting in the hard work to get something worthwhile done? By the time Ohio has its primary in mid-March it will be all over but the shouting. Our state's voice will be too little and too late.
3
Maybe it’s nice that we don’t know how our neighbors voted before we do. Isn’t that one of the benefits of secret ballots?
5
If there was ever a clarion call for Presidential primaries to be controlled and executed from the Federal level, this debacle in Iowa is it. The country can't run its electoral process untested or inconsistently like this. It's complete amateur hour in Iowa at a time when we needed disciplined voting. And, there shouldn't be a single state given so much prominence in this, especially given its abject lack of diversity or the many other ways it doesn't represent the American electorate in general.
The first set of primaries should represent America, and should be done in a way that works, and is faithful to our Constitution. This mess in Iowa can't be repeated. They have lost whatever right they had to lead off the election season.
Let's get it right the next time. No more Iowas.
312
@Max Dither The Constitution pretty clearly vests the conduct of federal elections with the states:
Article I SECTION. 4.1 The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Article II 2. Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Personholding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
So running primaries logically falls to each state and the party in the state running those primaries. That said, Iowas caucus system (and other states that use such systems) is a poor substitute for a primary run by the secretary of state in each, together with a board of elections. And I agree: no more Iowas. It's just not a good starting point, and neither, for that matter, is New Hampshire.
If we conduct primaries all on one day, it makes it impossible for the many candidates to campaign effectively.
18
@Wiltontraveler "The Constitution pretty clearly vests the conduct of federal elections with the state"
This is true. And what I suggested about changing this would require a Constitutional amendment, which is hardly likely given today's partisan environment. But that's no reason to not pursue it. Life is difficult at times, but the benefit here would outweigh the difficulty in making this change.
12
@Max Dither
Why can't we have regional primaries? Candidates campaign in all states in a region, then the region votes on a single day? Four or five regions in the nation would do it. Rotate among regions to pick the order of regional voting in a particular election year. Too simple?
24
I spent several hours last night at my local caucus in Iowa. My vote won't be discounted because of the paper trail that backs up the failed software.
A caucus is a very inefficient system if all if what you want to do is tally existing voter support for different candidates. Perhaps they should be done away with.
But they do bring neighbors together and foster some face-to-face discussion between supporters of rival candidates, And a caucus is a team-building exercise. We had over 500 people show up where about 400 were expected, and the long line of Democrats - quite a few at their first causus - was very heartening.
So, when we discuss whether they should be done away with, we need to use this as an opportunity to think about other ways to bring people together for political purposes, besides rallies where everyone has already decided who they support, and which by their nature foster an us vs. them attitude.
16
Great defense. Anything that brings people together to talk rather than fight is worth saving. If you don’t keep the caucus alive despite last night’s undeniable disaster you will be swallowed up in the same large state electioneering where only money and media count.
3
@writeon1 Then have a caucus before an actual vote.
And of the 500 people who showed up, I wonder what percent that is for the registered voters in that precinct.
I bet it's very, very low.
Not everyone has the time, or inclination to stand around a middle school gym for however many hours it takes.
Caucuses need to go away so that everyone who wants to can actually vote and not just those who can show up at a specific time and hang out for hours.
But, I suppose we could empty out hospitals of medical staff and pull the police and fire department personnel from their stations so they can caucus. What could go wrong with that?
3
@writeon1 I like the idea of bringing people to discuss their differences. I don't like that the caucus system seems to leave a great deal of people out - people who have to work or take care of their kids during caucus hours, people who are disabled and have trouble traveling to the caucus location, and people who are more private and even though they have strong feelings, do not want to express them so publicly. That's where the caucus system fails for me.
3
Regional rotating primaries is the only thing that makes sense. Iowa is a rural state that ranks 30th in population and 46th in diversity with a long, confusing, primary. Hardly a true representation of the country. By the time of my states primary (PA) there is no choice... I'm stuck with what the Iowa's and New Hampshire's of the country have decided. Individual states should not have the power to narrow my, or anyone else's, ability to choose a primary candidate.
This is a form of voter suppression. Tradition is not a good reason for the Democratic party to move forward with this arcane primary system.
355
@Mark Carolla fyi, just went to Pittsburgh for the first time pursuing a career move. Within ten minutes, I turned to my wife and said ‘this is a MIDWESTERN town’, and I know, because I was born and raised in Iowa. So I don’t know if PA has better quals for going ahead of Iowa in the primary process, but the career did NOT go there...
3
@Mark Carolla agreed. Iowa and NH holding a lot of the political sway makes no sense unless we go back to a time where the country was 85 percent white.
26
@Mark Carolla we need to weight rural areas high for our president candidate bc of electoral college in general skewing towards rural areas
PA goes late but it mattered a lot in 2008 AND 2016 so I dont agree we are having our votes suppressed.
2
Hopefully, the ridiculously outsized importance of the Iowa caucuses is now over. The Democratic National Committee should either use a process in which a diversity of states begin the process, as suggested by Mr. b fagan below, or, better yet, there should be a national primary on a holiday in, say, the third week of May.
We have to move past clumsy and unrepresentative processes when nominating and electing those who will make, execute or interpret our laws. We must also act with greater rigor to protect the integrity of elections. To this point:
The electoral college should be eliminated. One person, one vote.
Citizen's United has to be overturned by constitutional amendment.
States are constitutionally in control of elections, but such important processes should pass strict audits. Any experienced auditor or project manager, if they had authority to intervene, would have seen the need for testing and refinement of the new Iowa vote-gathering processes well in advance of caucus day. The backup process should have also been tested, with uniform training of personnel being a key point of standardization.
We simply have to start getting better at a lot of things in this country, as the Democratic presidential candidates have stated, loudly. Creating a fair process for electing representatives of the people is near the top of that list.
142
@Scott Emery The issue with a national primary is it doesn't allow for dark horse candidates like Mayor Pete to build up any momentum.
Additionally, it doesn't strengthen the candidates by going through a grueling primary season. Warren in her speech last night thanked Iowa for making her a better candidate. It's actually true of all the candidates.
5
Do we really care what a state with 41 measly delegate votes that sends the likes of Grassley, Lee and Ernst to Washington really think?
No.
Do we think Iowa should be a make it or break it state for national delegates with its non-diverse, mostly old and conservative population?
No.
Do we think the caucus system has seen its day?
Yes.
Do we think a more representative state should lead off the primary season with a private vote for all delegates?
Yes.
It couldn’t be simpler.
556
A more representative state? New Jersey doesn’t get to vote till AFTER Super Tuesday!
But, seriously, folks, what we need is to vote on the same day, with automatic run offs and ranked choice voting. It’s the only way to make party politics into democracy politics.
86
@It’s About Time. This dismissive atittude of those with difference views is what got T elected. Amazing how this simple message has not yet been learned by so many who post here.
17
Don’t forget Iowa’s worst representative: the openly racist and white supremacist Steve King.
120
Paper ballots administered in normal voting booths, ranked choice voting that awards delegates proportionally. Why is that not a solution?
I am a committed voter, but I would feel uncomfortable participating in the process I observed last night on CNN. Not sure I could bring myself to do it. Felt like everything I am glad to have left behind in high school—peer pressure, rooting for the "team," high school gymnasiums. Extroversion should not be a qualification to vote. Willingness to be herded should not be a qualification to vote.
All this apart from Iowa not representing voter demographics anyway, let alone among those who choose to participate in this pep rally.
I like staggered primaries that allow candidates to develop a real ground game and have the face-to-face interactions that I just heard Pete Buttigieg praise. But where was this vaunted experience that supposedly means only Iowans should have the honor of voting first? I would rather see South Carolina and a swing state in the Midwest jointly go first in February. Then the Super Tuesday lineup, with California. Then a third and final round with everybody else a month later.
99
@C Wolfe
Why is that not a solution?
Excellent question?
Maybe because some people WANT the system to be flawed and subject to question, or even rigging?
Or maybe because some others own companies with $muti-million contracts to run these gimcrack systems?
Or maybe because our "leaders" are too embarrassed to admit that the former "beacon of democracy" to the world has an antiquated, Jerry-rigged system that's symbolic of the shambolic, flawed, and rotten nature of our political system as a whole?
4
Since the popular vote doesn’t determine who becomes president, we should take the names of presidential candidates of the November ballots. Placing the names of presidential candidates on state ballots only serves to empower political parties, which the Constitution assigns no role in government. If we did away with the popular vote for president, presidential candidates would no longer need political parties to finance multi-billion-dollar campaigns. They could limit their campaign to stops at the 50 state capitol buildings, where they could address the legislators who appoint electors to the Electoral College.
The 538 votes cast in December by electors at their state capitals determine who becomes president. Iowa has six electoral votes. Tallying its presidential election votes should take Iowa less than five minutes.
7
@William Case
Ouch! Eliminate "We the people" and leave it to the state legislatures? Ouch!
1
@William Case Great idea!
Let's party like it's 1789!
1
@bse
We do leave it to state legislatures.
1
This could have been the year where Democrats led the way for weekend voting, since no one really cares about the Republican process this year. Even in Iowa, not everyone is able to participate in the caucus process, so it’s still not a fair measure - beyond the lack of racial diversity.
Let’s really change how the nomination process goes forward with radically new ideas.
69
@M b Here's a radical idea...
Only accept results from primaries. No delegates from a state that only has a caucus.
That would change the process real fast.
3
It isn’t just Iowa that has these problems. Election boards have years to prepare for these elections, yet are frequently unprepared to handle them. It calls into question whether there is a better method for selecting elections officials and particularly whether they should ever be chosen through elections. How about giving that responsibility to nonpartisan commissions, with members chosen for their expertise and subject to being dismissed if they mess up?
27
I see 2 silver linings here:
1. Iowa will drop a peg or two, and phps. the primary process will undergo some needed reform.
My preference is that after a vigorous campaign season, ALL states conduct ranked voting over one Super Tuesday (or better yet, a Super Weekend), a bit later in the year.
As a resident of a state, whose population is more diverse and 2.8 times larger than that of Iowa, I'm tired of a primary process that reduces me and my fellow New Jerseyians to latecomers in a buffet line.
2. At least there are paper ballots. A late count is better than a wrong count.
223
@D Price It really is ludicrous how little say we have in this process given all the taxes we pay to subsidize states like Iowa.
49
Please, for the love of God, let us move to ranked voting!! It's unbelievable we don't have this yet (case in point, Bernie may win even though a larger majority towards biden/pete/Klobuchar probably thinks he's too far right).
2024 - first round of results in the Democratic campaign should show how the candidates fared in at least five states, and the states should include at least one or two of the larger, much more diverse states in the country.
2028 - do it again with a different set of states.
169
@b fagan Yes, maybe this will finally led to a fairer, rotating primary system in the future.
10
It’s not quite that simple. NH has it written into their state law that they be the first primary in the nation.
2
Or rather, most populous 4-5 states and change that when/if population shifts occur.
2