2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumAccusations of Fraud and Theft Fly After Iowa Vote: HERE'S the LOWDOWN
by Steven Rosenfeld / AlterNet
February 3, 2016
........snip.........
A colorful report of a Des Moines Democratic Party caucus from the Los Angeles Times Kate Linthicum shows how passionate and unpredictable caucuses can be. She found chaos, lobbying, and even a little low-level bribery, but offering someone a free beer to switch sides is not a major conspiracy. A more eyebrow-raising moment was captured by C-SPAN, when a pro-Hillary Clinton precinct captain didnt appear to be accurately counting votes. Thats glaring, given the Democratic sides photo finish, but also is not a systemic issue.
Discovering that Clintons campaign may have recruited and paid non-Iowans to be precinct captains was a more serious charge, as that moves toward gaming the process, as some news organizations reported. I think this raises a very serious concern, Jeff Weaver, Sanders campaign manager, told Yahoo! News. Weaver assured Bernie supporters that hes not concerned specifically about this single out-of-state precinct captain, [but] he did insist that this could be a small link in a larger strategy by the Clinton campaign to have 'non-residents attempt to participate and be counted in the caucus.'"
That report, from UsUncut.com, shows how quickly bad behavior can be taken as the tip of a conspiratorial iceberg. They ended: Ironically, Clintons people also accused Barack Obamas team in 2008 with systematically trying to manipulate the Iowa caucuses with out-of-state people. Its now very possible that shes adopted such manipulations into her own political playbook.
Other eyebrow-raising antics occurred, raising alarm but it was inconsequential. When some caucuses ended in ties, yes a coin was used to decide the winner. But thats the practice in a dozen states, so that should not have caused alarmalthough the Sanders team later used a video of one coin toss to raise money. Reporters investigating that said it occurred perhaps two-dozen times out of nearly 1,700-plus Democratic caucus sites, benefitting both Sanders and Clinton.
The Des Moines Register reported on what was behind the totals from the very last Democrat precinct to turn it results, which gave Sanders two additional state convention delegates out of 1,400 awarded, cutting Clintons Iowa victory to two delegates. Apparently, a poor soul who volunteered to chair the caucusafter no one else came forthdidnt know he had to submit results, the paper said. While the whole world waited, he went home and next morning had an Oh My God moment. Thats what you get when poll workers are last-minute volunteers who are inexperienced.
However, that Register report raised the first substantial issue of magnitude: that Iowas Democratic Party would not release the raw caucus vote totals, but used a formula to award theoretical delegates to this springs statewide party convention. Whats even odder about that projection is that some 11,000 delegates, primarily divided between Sanders and Clinton, would first attend their county conventions. As NPR noted, this whole process doesnt produce a clear winner in a tight race.
TheRegister raised the obvious question, whether Sanders had won the popular vote in Iowa, adding, Sanders backers called for Iowa Democratic Party officials to release the raw vote totals. But the party would not lift its veil on the raw vote totals nor its arcane calculations.
That led Weaver to tell the Washington Post that his campaign would never know what really happened, for all the reasons already mentioned and one more: newly deployed vote-counting software from Microsoft didnt perfectly perform either......
Read in full~
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/accusations-fraud-and-theft-fly-after-iowa-vote-heres-lowdown
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Should be the number one concern & goal of every American, those of us who aren't enmeshed in the rigged game anyways.
Almost every problem we have can be traced back to this.
FrostyAusty
(57 posts)I saw some pundit on CNN yesterday say "Well one issue Bernie talks about all the time, that I don't think voters feel is very important is the political finance reform" So out of touch, that's how all this shit got so corrupted in the first place. It's like they think we are blind and will just listen to the crap that dribbles out of their mouth.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Bernie is the only candidate running who would be working for US if elected.
He's the only one without SuperPACs.
He's the only one who would even try to change campaign finance & lobbying rules.
Why can't they see this is the crux of his popularity???
Idiots
tarheelsunc
(2,117 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Last edited Thu Feb 4, 2016, 03:08 PM - Edit history (1)
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)eom
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Never let it be said that a Clinton was anything less than completely open and forthright.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)voter fraud part, or do I need to watch the whole thing?
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)The important problem is that the Bernie counters recounted everyone, while the Hillary counter was literally recorded telling someone else that she only added newcomers to the count she had before, and then when asked if she recounted everyone, she lied to the organizer and said "Yes".
This means that if anyone left the caucus site who was supporting Bernie, then they were removed by Bernie's recounters, but any Hillary supporter who left the caucus site was treated as though they were still there for the purposes of the recount.
Thus, artificial inflation of her numbers occurred unless everyone who left was a Bernie delegate, on top of the Hillary campaign surrogate lying to an election official to cover up her (negligent at best, malicious at worst) mistake.
And they left the recount up to a Yea Nay vote, which is just ridiculous.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)hello?
Or are our lying eyes & ears deceiving us?
randome
(34,845 posts)And I'm not sure undergroundworldnews.com is a site to use for impartial information. Not with breathless headlines like: BIOWEAPON! ZIKA VIRUS IS BEING SPREAD BY GMO MOSQUITOES FUNDED BY GATES!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Last edited Thu Feb 4, 2016, 11:18 AM - Edit history (1)
rigging things.
But if you want to talk about Hillary lying, here's a video for you~
OR
___________
And the C-Span video shows Clinton's captain lying about recounting. Because she says in the beginning she was just adding people to the count. I'm sorry, I really didn't think anyone could miss that. I assumed a level of comprehensive ability.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Confusion, sure, but calling this fraud is laughable. Evidently three people left and weren't counted, but even if they had been, it wouldn't have skewed the outcome either way.
There's not even a hint of deception or fraud. If I wanted to get silly, I could point to the fact that the Bernie counter first counted 222, then said "there's a guy at the table" to raise it to 223, and then at some point later the number went up to 224.
Fraud!
Umm, no. Just a silly caucus procedure.
jham123
(278 posts)watch again....when she finishes counting the folks, she adds herself, her co-chairman that is following her, and then the Sanders person at the front table.....
DanTex
(20,709 posts)counted the newcomers and added to the total. Not sure what the issue is.
Thav
(946 posts)If an official messes with the final counts, and no voters try to game the system, its election fraud.
Voter fraud is what the GOP screams it's trying to prevent when it commits election fraud.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)is messing with the final counts.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)who nodded in agreement, as well as the director. On top of that, the three missing votes wouldn't have made any difference to the outcome.
Of course, the Bernie fans had their chance to challenge, as per procedure. But the crowd, evidently understanding how silly it all was voted by a margin of about 10-1 not to have a recount.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Also, the recourse for the Sanders captain would be a recount, which the captain asked for.
As for the vote on the recount, the Precinct captain claimed it would do nothing, but we don't actually know that. We don't know how many Clinton supporters had left, because no one counted.
Would it change everything? Probably not. But why is it so awful to want to accurately win instead of "well, we would have won anyway!"?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)What she meant was "all the votes are now counted." And that's what the Bernie person at the front who heard the whole thing also understood, since she was nodding the whole time.
I appreciate that a few furious Bernie supporters there were passionate about trying to disenfranchise Hillary supporters, but the recount motion failed by a large margin, so even most of the Bernie supporters didn't share their conspiratorial views.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Now, tell me again how the Brooks Brothers riot in FL was totally local Floridians incensed at the idea of a recount.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)explained that she had counted O'Malley converts and added to the previous total. The closest thing to fraud was how Bernie's numbers went from 222 to 224, but like I said, I'll chalk it up to chaos rather than fraud.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)to 223 by counting "the guy at the table," who didn't have his hand up according to protocol.
And then that later the count went up to 224 because another Bernie supporter said "you didn't count me." A male Bernie supporter who happened to be sitting at the table. Does that bother you? That's the closest thing to fraud in the video, but I chalk it up to chaos.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Some of us actually like the idea of accuracy in elections. Even when the result might not help our candidate.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)if the counts were off by a vote or two (which is pretty much inevitable with that crazy system), and there's no chance it affects the outcome, then it wasn't worth spending another hour there.
There was a motion, and it failed. That's democracy, it doesn't always go your way.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Just like the SCOTUS ruling didn't change FL ballots.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)"I only counted new people"
"Did you recount everyone?"
"Yes"
Instead of desperately trying to deflect from this obvious lie, it would be a far better argument for you to just claim it would not change the result. Deflecting from an obvious lie, captured on video, demonstrates your position is disingenuous at best. Better to be dismissive than provably wrong.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The "yes" meant that everyone had been counted, in total. That's also what that Bernie woman standing there the whole time understood.
Well, the one real lie is your misquoting of the question. It wasn't "did you recount everyone" it was "you guys didn't just count the new people, right, you counted everyone". I guess you thought adding that little "re" in front of the the "count" would help the absurd argument you're trying to push. But like you said, it's on video...
jeff47
(26,549 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)Come on, show a little fight! You just got caught red-handed fabricating a quote in order to push a bogus conspiracy! You gotta do better than that!
questionseverything
(9,655 posts)she took the first count and added the new supporters to that count
if 9 people had left in between counts on hc's side, the delegates would of been awarded differently
clearly the woman counting (adding) wanted to make sure hc got credit for everyone wether they were there for 2nd count or not
sad thing is only the young blond woman stood up for what was right and no one backed her
<shrugs>
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Another thing that is clear is that rather than owning up to it, jeff47 decided to run and hide.
Beyond that, it's clear that there was no intentional fraud, and that when that woman said "yes", she misinterpreted the question, as did the Bernie captain standing right next to her, who nodded in approval. I'm not sure if the two-stage counting process is against the rules or not. If so, it was an honest mistake, and if not, this is much ado about nothing. But either way there's no fraud, which requires intention.
We also saw on film that two Bernie votes were counted in violation of the hand-up-hand-down protocol, and it's possible that both those votes came from the same "table guy." That's not fraud either, since the person who counted those votes did so in good faith.
Regardless, in the end there was a motion for a recount, and by an enormous margin, both Bernie and Hillary supporters were satisfied and just wanted to go home. The only real conclusion is that the caucus process is a mess.
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Time to move on.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)past irritating straight to irrelevant.
GAME ON.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Thank you in advance.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)jillan
(39,451 posts)On tape. You can rewind and watch a play over and over again.
If only voting had as many checks & as much transparency as a sporting event.
Next?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Here is the address of the IA Attorney General if you want to contest the results:
Tom Miller
Office of the Attorney General of Iowa
Hoover State Office Building
1305 E. Walnut Street
Des Moines IA 50319
Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Thank you in advance.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Time to move on, nothing to see here...no need to verify anything.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts).....Hillary didn't sweep the delegates by a large number.
Deal with it.
Thanks in advance.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)That being said, close only counts in horse shoes, hand grenades, nuclear war, and flatulence.
You're welcome.
Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts)...she didn't win.
I said it wasn't a mandate and it wasn't.
You're welcome!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)I do feel it is bad sportsmanship to begrudge the winner his or her victory, regardless of whether or not you like the victor, and whether or not the victory is a small one or a large one.
Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts)....to accuse someone of saying something that they didn't say.
Let's refresh.....I never said she didn't win. A comment on the .2% is correct.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)So take it up with them...tell them to let it be verified.
Only cheats are afraid of the light.
jaxind
(1,074 posts)When they're counting the hands, shouldn't those that have been counted at least move over to the other side of the room or something? It's so easy for someone who wants to cheat, to be counted and then sneak back into the group again and get counted again.
randome
(34,845 posts)So how would they know that the Microsoft app wasn't working properly?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)& it doesn't sound like a big deal.
http://www.winbeta.org/news/microsoft-blamed-for-iowa-caucus-website-glitches
HenryWallace
(332 posts)I was a precinct captain.... It was web-based and repeatedly failed when I tried to log in.
Eventually had to e-mail my Sanders campaign contact who was probably on the road by then.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)And thanks for volunteering in the primaries!
DURHAM D
(32,610 posts)A DUer from Nebraska proudly posted an OP about being a Precinct Captain for Sanders in Iowa and he even posted a picture of his official badge to prove it.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)zalinda
(5,621 posts)The Polack MSgt
(13,189 posts)Roland99
(53,342 posts)unbelievable.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)global1
(25,251 posts)in the country and having done this forever - one would think they would be able to pull this off flawlessly. Unfortunately they seemed to have too many problems managing it. This makes one wonder whether they were real or intentional.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)So very shady...
Gman
(24,780 posts)In fact it's butt stupid. It was written by someone who has no clue about the party structure and the process. I quit reading at the idiocy of non-Iowan precinct captains. What? They have a summer home in Iowa but don't really live there or something? A precinct captain is someone ELECTED by people in the neighborhood or precinct. They effing live there. Someone on TV miscounting votes? They're everyday people. I put up with this shit from the Obama people in 08. I chaired our caucus and I told some two bit lawyer for Obama who was threatening me that I'd have him arrested for disrupting my meeting because he was not a participant, just an observer. He did sit down and shut up when he realized I was serious. That's the way to handle idiots that don't have a clue.
The whining, crying, bitching and moaning are hard to stomach from ignorant people.
Jarqui
(10,126 posts)if they're honestly concerned with getting accurate results.
Evidently, they're not.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Stevepol
(4,234 posts)It's not enough that every Republican Sec of State in the country can oversee elections where the results are regularly shifted red (when compared to the exit polls), but now people can't even count the votes in the caucuses.
Have our math skills degenerated so much that we can no longer be trusted to hand-count paper ballots and do it in a fair and impartial way?
dpatbrown
(368 posts)couldn't the Dem party clear this up straight away if they did released the raw vote?????
What other conclusion can one make if they refuse, other than they are very concerned that the count was played with.
The DNC has a horribly time being honest and transparent.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Like a mirror.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)She &/or her campaign is unscrupulous and we are supposed to ignore it because its reported on fox.
Got it.
Just ignore facts then, go along with FOX and keep posting ridiculous conspiracy theories. It probably makes quite a few people here feel better, so good on you for that.
jillan
(39,451 posts)shireen
(8,333 posts)Iowa needs to switch to a primary system. These caucuses are a crazy way to pick a nominee.
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,760 posts)Anyway, there isn't even enough support in this country to challenge the "proprietary" voting machine software and other such issues which make our vote-counting process far from reliable.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Blog February 3, 2016 12:18 PM EST TIMOTHY JOHNSON
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/02/03/fox-resorts-to-bogus-voter-fraud-claims-to-down/208352
FOX NEWS is trying like hell to make Bernie the winner.
Gee I wonder why FOX NEWS would do such a thing?????
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)jham123
(278 posts)....I want to cry foul as much as anyone, but there isn't anything in this video...
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)Were you also an out of state Iowa precinct captain?
A). My time on this board is irrelevant [as if you are the arbitrator of time spent = fucks given]
and
B). I hale from Texas yet been in SoCal since 1988 so.....any more assumptions you'd like to share?
then
C). I'll claim ignorance here (to show that I am not beyond showing reality) how and why do you "Recommend a single thread"? What is that supposed to mean? I signed up (here and other places) after years of just reading to participate for Bernie (just like Millions of other Dems in our great country during these trying primaries) but I am not sure why one would recommend a thread or what that is supposed to do for oneself or anyone else.
Any other suppositions you have about me?? Please ask, I'll tell you....Or you could just go with "jham is a baby killing, thief that runs over stray kittens and clubs baby seals for fur all the while demeaning all women and groping them when possible along with abusing children and cheating on Taxes"......I'd go with all those suppositions if I were you.
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)No kidding.
jham123
(278 posts)but thanks for playin'
INdemo
(6,994 posts)and probably the reason for her self declared victory speech.
So then is Debbie Wasserman Schultz the Katkleen Harris of the Iowa Caucus?
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)There was a time when Democrats believed in open and fair elections. This slide into by-any-means-necessary territory is undemocratic, bullying behavior. Let the sun shine in!
LS_Editor
(893 posts)They should be replaced by primaries.