Don't worry, Hillary fans. The SCOTUS is sure to rule Iowa in her favor.

[mhatrw]

We don't actually need to count up all votes. All that matters is who the corporate media says won on election night.

[JTFrog]

1. Don't worry, it's always the hardest the morning after.

It will get better.

[redstateblues]

2. The votes have been counted. Hillary won.

[KingCharlemagne]

12. The coin toss, I think you mean. Had the coin tosses gone 50-50, Sanders

would have won.

That's an impressive victory for Camp Weathervane.

[bettyellen]

20. Not even close to the truth- this article gets into it as good as any:

coin tosses had no measurable effect, as per the Des Moines Register.


http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/02/02/sometimes-iowa-democrats-award-caucus-delegates-coin-flip/79680342/

[Bobbie Jo]

25. WRONG

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511123143

[lunamagica]

3. And the scotus had nothing to do with it

[Darb]

4. It's a caucus and was pretty much a tie.

Can you head to New Hampshire and beyond, or do you want to go to court?

[Tess49]

5. How old are you? Ten?

[comradebillyboy]

27. You are being too kind

[Satch59]

6. When is a win not a win?

I am just about at the point of no return to this once loved site... The immaturity and hatefulness that abounds from a lot of the Bernie supporters here is making this political process seem anything but democratic... Bernie deserves better....Hillary deserves better.

[Big Blue Marble]

7. I could not have said it better.

[jeff47]

9. When it results in the same number of delegates going to the convention. (nt)

[Satch59]

10. Still a win....

Clinton's victory means she will collect 23 delegates and Sanders will win 21.

With her advantage in superdelegates — the party officials who can support the candidate of their choice — Clinton now has a total of 385 delegates. Sanders has 29.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1eaf312b263445608036a9114ebe7349/campaigns-turn-new-hampshire-cruz-ascendant

[jeff47]

11. Counting superdelegates this early isn't a terribly honest thing to do.

Especially since so many switched from Clinton to Obama in 2008.

[DanTex]

18. 23-21 is without counting superdelegates.

[jeff47]

19. Can't read all the way to the second paragraph?

With her advantage in superdelegates — the party officials who can support the candidate of their choice — Clinton now has a total of 385 delegates. Sanders has 29.

[Codeine]

8. There there. nt

[brooklynite]

13. Um, what votes weren't counted?

All precincts have reported.

Clinton came out on top, and got more pledged delegates.

[mhatrw]

15. What was the final tally of votes from actual people?

You know, people. Voters.

[brooklynite]

16. Votes have -never- been reported

They may know the number of voters who showed up, but they don't tally the actual votes.

[mhatrw]

22. So they threw those numbers in the garbage?

Somebody knows. And the rest of us would like to.

[bettyellen]

21. Another person who does not understand how the caucuses have always worked. Wow.

I know they suck, but it's a bit late to complain now...

[mhatrw]

23. I know how they work. What I want to know is how many Iowans wanted Clinton

vs. how many wanted Sanders.

How is it that Republicans can have caucuses that include individual vote counts but Democrats cannot?

[brooklynite]

28. Variety.....

FWIW, until recently, the REAL votes that the Republicans cast were a meaningless beauty contest exercise, and had no bearing on the distribution of delegates.

[John Poet]

14. The supreme court always comes through

for members of the Bush crime family.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/11/18/bush_my_sweet_daddy_a_wonderful_father_to_bill_clinton_and_me_124685.html

To me, the Clintons' closeness with this family of criminals completely disqualifies any of them for future election to any high office, much less the White House again..

[Agschmid]

17. Unrec.

[hifiguy]

24. DUzy!

[quickesst]

29. I'll just leave this here...

.. as to the title your op, and the body of your post.
SCOTUS and the corporate media are two different things. Glad to help.