Sanders Beats Clinton 49-49: The Real Story Behind the Iowa Numbers

[UglyGreed]

Hillary Clinton’s razor-thin margin was actually a defeat of a well-financed, highly organized, experienced Clinton campaign, and the Democrats ought to be worried about it.

In 1968 the Harvard Crimson ran the poignant headline “Harvard Beats Yale 29-29!” Yale and Harvard were undefeated going into their matchup that year, with Yale a heavy favorite. As expected, Yale got out to an early 22-point lead. But in the last few minutes, Harvard scored 16 unanswered points and bested (tied) the prohibitive favorite. The event and the pithy headline are indelibly etched in history.

Much like football, politics is a tough business. Presidential politics, in particular, is a highly demanding, high-stakes endeavor. So, watching Hillary Clinton lose to Bernie Sanders in the Iowa caucus was indeed both a hard thing to observe, but it was also just a part of the game. The only harder thing to watch this political season has been the slowly engulfing irrelevance of Jeb Bush (but more on what his fate tells us about the current political season a bit later).

Some of you will no doubt insist that Clinton got 49.9 percent of the Iowa vote and Sanders got only 49.6 percent of the vote, making the former secretary of state, in some numbingly technical sense, the winner. She lost. Let’s be clear.

Clinton is one of the most prominent figures in Democratic Party politics in the last two decades. She is the wife of a popular two-term ex-president, a former New York senator and a former secretary of state. She is supremely well financed and possessed of unparalleled networks in politics, media and business; she also boasts an enormous number of endorsements. She is as skilled and experienced as anyone on the presidential campaign trail could be. As such, plain and simple, Hillary Clinton should have performed like the prohibitive favorite she is supposed to be.

But that is not what happened. She effectively lost to a 74-year-old Vermont senator with no prior national profile; who had openly declared himself a socialist; who had no super PAC funding or Wall Street money behind him; and who couldn’t call on a veritable Maginot Line of endorsements and cronies and ambitious toadies to grease his path.

http://www.theroot.com/articles/politics/2016/02/sanders_beats_clinton_49_49_the_real_story_behind_the_iowa_numbers.html?wpisrc=topstories

[thereismore]

1. She literally won but figuratively lost. nt

[metroins]

2. Who got more delegates?

That is who won.

[UglyGreed]

3. Well there are things like

moral victories, and momentum...... Read the article.

[leftofcool]

7. In the end, only delegates count. Moral victories won't mean a thing.

[aikoaiko]

15. Yes, that is the Clinton political philosophy in a nutshell.

leftofcool
7. In the end, only delegates count. Moral victories won't mean a thing.

[basselope]

20. Not really.. the number of delegates in Iowa is small.. it all about PERCEPTION.

[pangaia]

22. Maybe. Just maybe, that is the difference between the Clinton canpaign and the Sanders campaign.

[TIME TO PANIC]

35. Totally.

[TIME TO PANIC]

32. And that's a problem, no matter who's side you're on.

[HubertHeaver]

51. What really counts is delegates to the national convention and

what those delegates do when they get there. The Feb 1 caucuses were only the first step.

[pocoloco]

53. Wrong!! No way to place a value on Bernie's victory!

Hillary should have allowed the recount, if for nothing else to
show a little bit of honesty, and save face!!

[LiberalFighter]

101. How do you have a recount in that caucus?

[pocoloco]

105. LOL

Don't have to, just look at the poll numbers!

[pnwmom]

88. I read the article. It's all spin. Nationally, Bernie and Hillary

are tied in white voter support. That's well established. Iowa, where 93% of the Democratic primary voters were white, reflected this.

However, the Democratic party, outside of heavily white states like Iowa and New Hampshire, contains 40% minority voters. And those minority voters, also according to current polls, greatly prefer Hillary.

This is Bernie's last stand. Once Hillary gets out to primaries in large, diverse, states, she will be in her stronghold. The vote in Iowa is not predictive of how she will do there.

[UglyGreed]

93. Well I just heard on MSNBC even

the hardcore supporters in the Democratic party are starting wonder if picking Hillary as the front runner was a huge mistake..... People would laugh at me when a few months back when I said some Hillary supporters were getting nervous, now it seems to be nothing to laugh at.

[pnwmom]

94. If that happens, it happens. But I doubt it. The other thing about her stronghold,

which is largely in the South, is that those voters are more conservative and more religious than Democrats overall.

Bernie's young white crowd of supporters is going to have their work cut out appealing to older, have-seen-everything African American voters.

[UglyGreed]

95. Only time will tell

I think we can both agree Bernie has been shocking a lot of people.

[thesquanderer]

6. She won the delegates, but lost her inevitability. (n/t)

[TxGrandpa]

50. Her 'winning' could lead to her losing. Especially

based on her attitude of superiority......sort of the tortoise and the hare situation...in my opinion.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

89. Unevitability?

[stonecutter357]

12. Hillary Clinton !

[liberalnarb]

28. Yes.

with a coin toss.

[dbackjon]

34. You still beleive that disproven bull?

[liberalnarb]

37. DISPROVEN? I watched the video. In several different caucus spots

the precinct captains flipped coins. A pathetic way to decide? Definitely, but thats what happened.

[dbackjon]

59. Yes, there were coin flips, Bernie won the majority of them

Why is it pathetic? Most local elections have rules similar - card draw, coin toss, etc.




That something like this happens being a surprise to most means that you are woefully uninformed, and bitching about nothing.

[dbackjon]

62. From 2012

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/when-a-state-election-can-be-literally-determined-by-a-coin-toss/265413/

It's not what people have in mind when they say money wins elections.

"After all this work," Joanne Ferrary says, "It could come down to a coin toss."

Ferrary, a Democrat running for New Mexico state house in the 37th district, is deadlocked with her incumbent Republican Terry MacMillan. Nearly two weeks after Election Day, the votes have all been counted, and each candidate has received 6,247 of them.

It's one of the weirder traditions of American democracy: In many states, if a race is tied, a "game by lot" -- cards, straws, or most often, a coin toss -- determines who goes to the house and who goes home. Months of campaigning, committee assignments, the fortunes of careers, the possibility of political change -- it all comes down, like possession in a football game, to heads or tails.

Allowing chance to enter the core of a democratic system seems counterintuitive, although it's widely recognized today as an electoral tiebreak. In fact, the roots of election by lottery stretch back to ancient Athens.

[pnwmom]

91. There's no dispute that they occurred. But they had no affect on the outcome.

There were more than 11,000 county delegate positions in play.

[pnwmom]

90. No. The Iowa state party explained that they split the coin tosses and that

even if Hillary had gotten them all (which she didn't) all those tosses for county delegates wouldn't have added up to a single state delegate equivalent. They were a handful of tosses for 11,000 seats.

[Puglover]

40. Just when I thought your posts could not

get any more inspirational; you surprise me.

[NurseJackie]

64. Whew! What a relief! (So this is just another BS OP it appears.)

[mindwalker_i]

21. Willful ignorance of the main point of the article

you are just pushing the "Hillary is great, and she's winning, and it's all wonderful" alternate reality that most Hill suporters are pushing. It's like anything that challenges your safe space must be beaten to an utter pulp before it gets away.

[metroins]

47. Or....it's just a fact.

In the end, the winner wins.

[mindwalker_i]

52. No, it's ignoring the whole point of the article

to push a preferred "reality."

"Hillary voted for the Iraq war," and, "Hillary received a lot of money from the financial industry," are facts. "Hillary described herself as a centrist," is a fact.

[metroins]

54. Hillary won Iowa, is a fact.

She got the most delegates.

You can try to go off topic if you want, but i I'm staying on topic.

[mindwalker_i]

58. You are staying on the topic you want to stay on

... and ignoring the whole point of the OP. It's what you do.

[demwing]

71. The sky is blue, it's a fact!

But just because it's true doesn't mean it has relevance. You sound like you're trying to convince yourself, or to upset the competition - neither of which are the actions of a winner.

[mindwalker_i]

86. Thank you, you said it a lot better than I did

Hillary's supporters here seem to be despretely shouting "she's winning," all the time, like if they stopped, reality would implode. They don't talk about issues because those would hurt that "reality." They can't make a case for Hillary other than platitudes, like "she's strong and stuff," and "she's a woman." But of course everyone not bowing down to Hillary is sexist.

Support for hillary is a religion.

[demwing]

87. Not at all, your post inspired mine.

you rock

[ybbor]

96. Exactly

For months it was polls that they published on her behalf, but that started to turn so that went away. Then the attacks began. Now it's "she won, get over it!"

Never do they talk policy, only Bernie is bad, unelectable, racist/sexist. Why should I vote for her? I have no fucking clue, it's never been presented. Just it's her turn bullshit.

Fuck that! I want change! My daughter and her cousins and friends deserve it. I'll get by. Don't need much. Lord knows I don't have much, but I've lived very well so far. Better than most, because I live for now. But I'm married now with a kid. She deserves what I didn't have.

Bernie is our last best chance to get our country back! We owe to our kids! Come on people lets get it right. It won't change overnight, none of us expect that. But if not now, when?

Go Bernie go!

[mindwalker_i]

99. Ther argument that Bernie and/or his supporter si sexist

... is just a cheap way to get people to stop criticizing their beloved candidate. For instance, when quoting Hillary saying she was a centrist was a "low blow," it's a shift from what she actually said to imply that Bernie or his supporters were behaving badly. The original question - is Hillary a centrist - not a progressive as she occasionally decides she wants to beknown as - is still a critical question.

"Centrists" in this case are people who want to, basically, keep things going pretty much like they have been. Unfortunatly the trend for the last 30+ years is to put more and more of the tax and financial burdens on the middle class and poor, and away from the affluent. That can not go on forever. People will soon have nothing left to lose, and that makes for a very unstable society. Hillary is not what we need.

[Duval]

82. Right on, mindwalker!

[PatrynXX]

60. ask us in March

then we can answer

[metroins]

63. Ok. Nt

[frylock]

72. Looking forward to it.

Man, am I looking forward to it.

[gyroscope]

4. I find it a bit suspicious

how Sanders was closing the huge gap very quickly and appeared he was about to surpass her then all the sudden stopped just .02 % shy of tying. As if they panicked watching Hillary was about to lose and hit the emergency button to stop the count before that could happen, which might explain the missing 90 precinct votes.

[UglyGreed]

8. I wonder why caucus sites

were running out of forms for new caucus participants and those who wanted to change parties? It was reported fairly early that night on CNN. Who is suppose to supply such forms?

[gyroscope]

16. Votes from 90 precincts still missing

Last edited Thu Feb 4, 2016, 07:06 PM - Edit history (1)

Voter Fraud and 'Missing' Precincts: How Clinton Stole Iowa

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/voter-fraud-and-missing-precincts-how-clinton-stole-iowa/ri12583

[UglyGreed]

29. The link is bad

but I really would like to know why they were short on the forms....

[gyroscope]

49. I think its working now.

nt

[PatrynXX]

65. short on the forms too

New voters got the wrong form at our precinct only an eagle eyed new voter who was probably about my age 40. noticed the error. And thats why I think there should be a recount. ie oh great the hanging chad alert X_X hillary being compared to Bush Jr is not good looking no matter how you look at it.

[UglyGreed]

68. Thanks for the info

do you know if the Iowa democratic party was to provide the forms?

[firebrand80]

9. The votes are counted as they come in

Candidates aren't actually "pulling ahead" or "closing gaps"

That would be like saying if the Sanders-heavy counties happened to be counted first that it was a "come from behind" victory for Hillary

[gyroscope]

18. Votes from 90 precincts still missing and unaccounted

the DNC still refuses to release the records. what are they hiding?

[firebrand80]

24. That was true at one point

All of the votes have now been counted

[gyroscope]

25. Really?

Care to provide a link?

I did a google search just now but couldn't find anything showing the issue has been resolved.

[firebrand80]

36. Look at every news outlet that's reporting caucus results

They all show that all 1,681 percents have reported

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/primaries/2016-02-01

[gyroscope]

48. Thats not the issue

The Sanders campaign wanted a recount of those 90 precincts, and asked the DNC to release the raw voter data from the 90 precincts. The DNC refused to comply. Given there was a huge problem with those missing votes, it is not an unreasonable request. Anything could have happened while the votes were gone, someone could have doctored or altered them while they were missing. It is a very suspicious thing, even more so since the DNC will not cooperate in releasing the information. Why would they not?

[monicaangela]

31. And,

the impromptu, rushed, unexpected declaration of victory by the Clinton campaign before dashing out of the room.

[Karma13612]

76. Reminds me of Karl Rove not accepting the results for Ohio

and Romney/Obama in 2012.

Why did she know with 10% of the precincts not reported?

Anything could have been in that last 10%.
And it turned out to be a razor thin margin so her announcing prematurely was not only bad judgement (again), but bad form.

And it has left one hellofa bad taste in a lot of voters brains.

[monicaangela]

100. My question is:

Was it a signal for the democrats to close up shop and stop the count? I wonder...

[Karma13612]

102. gawd, I shudder to think that was the case

but you might have a point.

[monicaangela]

103. The way they described

her appearance without notifying anyone, without allowing the cameras and her entourage to prepare for her appearance was not the act of someone who is as versed in politics and political procedure as the Clintons are, I believe something else was going on, and that was the only thing that makes sense to me. I of course could be wrong, but I don't think so.

[EdwardBernays]

5. Lots of things were at stake...

And she lost pretty much everyone. The thing she did win was wildly inconsequential and the damage to her campaign will be long lasting.

That - on balance - is a huge loss.

[stonecutter357]

10. Is this what happens when Everyone Gets a Trophy ?

[UglyGreed]

11. Or when the coach only

plays his kid

[grasswire]

13. Iowa was proof that she is just yesterday.

And the old Senator from Vermont is very much today and tomorrow. The future; a BETTER future.

[UglyGreed]

14. .

[Karma13612]

77. OK, this is totally cool!! +100

[UglyGreed]

78. We feel the Bern

but Bernie keeps his cool

[Karma13612]

80. Lol! very true! eom

[Gothmog]

17. Iowa was a must win for Sanders

Sanders is only polling well in four states where the voting population is 90+% and if Sanders can not win in Iowa then he is in trouble in South Carolina and the Super Tuesday states http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/01/iowa_caucus_stakes_for_hillary_clinton_and_bernie_sanders.html

For Bernie, meanwhile, a Hillary victory would be an undeniable blow. With the exception of New Hampshire and his home state of Vermont, the Hawkeye State—with a Democratic electorate that skews white and liberal—represents the friendliest terrain on the map for Sanders. If Bernie can’t win in Iowa, Clinton and her allies will have no problem brushing off a Sanders win in New Hampshire next week as little more than the result of the senator being a near-native son in the Granite State. Sanders, then, would be in need of a win elsewhere to reset the race—and soon—but won’t have any obvious place to turn.

South Carolina and Super Tuesday will be fun

[Karma13612]

79. Give me a break, Hillary and Bernie tied in Iowa.

shaking head,

Yes, Hillary got a couple more delegates.

But, here are the facts:

the difference in % won was less than one half of one percent

Bernie was still behind in polls coming in to the Iowa Caucus

and the Iowa DNC doesn't want to analyze/recount/validate the votes

As ALWAYS, when it comes to the Clintons, we find ourselves in one more situation where the facts are shrouded in mystery.

I am utterly sick of things being hidden, and confused, and grayed-out.

We need sunlight.
Bernie believes in sunlight.
Hillary believes in keeping things as confusing as absolutely possible.

[Gothmog]

98. Only 2% of the delegates come from states as white and liberal as Iowa and New Hampshire

Sanders is not polling well in states that do not have 90+% white voter populations and so Sanders has to do very well in the states where he has a chance. Sanders is starting out down over 350 delegates due to the Super Delegates. When you then add the fact that Sanders is polling poorly in South Carolina and most of the Super Tuesday states, it is easy to see why Sanders had to win Iowa and win Iowa big to be competitive

[Gothmog]

19. According to the Cook Report, Sanders needed to win 70% of the Iowa delegates to be competitive

According to one of the experts for the Cook Report, Sanders needs to win big in Iowa to have a chance http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sanders-needs-more-than-a-win-in-iowa-to-beat-clinton

As David Wasserman wrote in the Cook Political Report last week, "98 percent of pledged Democratic delegates will come from states with lower shares of liberal whites than Iowa and New Hampshire." That is a big problem for Sanders who has yet to prove he can expand his base....

Yet, even then, delegate allocation is proportional, which means that Sanders would have to begin winning by major margins to make the race a serious contest.

Wasserman estimates that according to his models, Sanders would "need to win 70 percent of Iowa's delegates and 63 percent of New Hampshire's delegates" to even "be on track" to stay competitive with Clinton in later states where demographically speaking, Clinton has shown she has more support. And in a states like Florida and South Carolina, Clinton leads in recent polls by 36 points and 19 points, respectively.

"It is not merely the delegate process that favors Hillary, it is the voters. She has earned the loyalty and support of communities of color, women, the LGBTQ community, environmentalists, and other vital parts of the Democratic coalition," says Democratic strategist Paul Begala, a Clinton supporter. "Bernie's coalition - so far - is more narrow. It is impressive in its energy and its passion, but it is, I think, more narrow."

The Cook Report has some good analysis.

Sanders did not come close to the 70% number

[senz]

55. Iowa showed Sanders' viability and Hillary's vulnerabilty. That's a big win for Sanders.

[Gothmog]

61. Denial is not just a river in Africa

[senz]

66. Don't have an answer, do you?

[frylock]

75. Is that what the Cook Report told you?

[Gothmog]

97. It is what math and demographics tell me

[NurseJackie]

67. "Sanders did not come close to the 70% number"

That seems to be something that his hardcore fans are overlooking. I wonder why. (No I don't, not really. I just said that for emphasis. It's actually pretty obvious why.)

[Number23]

73. That is an excellent analysis. I kept seeing from lots of sources that he needed to win Iowa to be

considered competitive. It's good to see the actual numbers for both Iowa and NH.

[SoCalMusicLover]

23. Bernie May Not Be Able To Win The Whole Thing

But at least he will energize his Democratic supporters, and possibly bring in the young vote. The question mark is the African-American vote, and sadly I wonder if that has to do with his religion rather than his policies.

Hillary, however, will lose if she is the nominee. She will not energize any but her loyal followers, and will turn off far too many voters to have a chance. Oh....it will be a horse race to an extent, the media could not live without that. But the anti-Hillary movement is far too strong to be an aberration.

The repubs can't wait, and are salivating at the chance to go after her. They could certainly attack Bernie, call him a socialist constantly and say how his plans are unrealistic. But at least they won't easily find lots of skeletons in his closet. Some perhaps, but not a boatload like Hillary. It will be non-stop Benghazi & EMails if she gets the nomination.

[UglyGreed]

26. You are right this may be

just a start to shift the balance of power to the left from the center right position.

[SoCalMusicLover]

38. Bernie Makes Me Feel Optimistic & Energized

Hillary makes me think, "same shit, different spokesperson."

They're both Politicians, no doubt, but to me, Hillary SCREAMS Politician. Bernie seems to genuinely care what happens to this country. Unfortunately, I think Hillary cares what happens to Hillary and the Clinton brand. It's an ego thing for her, but I truly believe that for Bernie it's the opportunity to get something done. Hillary brags about how she was the first to work on health care reform, and she therefore deserves some amount of credit for Obama's work. Bernie seems more like the type who does not demand credit, he just wants to get stuff done.

[UglyGreed]

45. Nicely stated

I want to feel better for my kids' future and Bernie has given me some hope.

[dae]

74. I sincerely feel Bernie has the best shot at winning.

GOP will scream Commie, many voters will recognize the lie outright while many others could care less. What they cannot do is attack Bernie's integrity or sincerity.

With Hillary the GOP will really go nuts. I do not understand the Repubs visceral hatred of all things Clinton but it is real and it seems they hate Clintons worse than Obama.

[UglyGreed]

30. Thank you for

taking the time for a such a deeply thought out reply

[UglyGreed]

39. Like my mom use to say

would you jump off a bridge if the other kids did

[Karma13612]

81. until the convention, Bernie or bust is the only way

to be.

Bernie is in it to win it.

His supporters will continue to support him and play like this is the real thing because it is.

Go ahead and stop Bush.

I am too.

But, I am doing it with the Better of the two Democratic candidates.

[zappaman]

41. He sure did!

And he has the ribbon to prove it!

[Gregorian]

42. Great article. That seemed like a levelheaded, accurate assessment of this election.

I like this line- "Democrats should quickly have some serious conversation about Clinton’s durable weaknesses. "


Using Jeb as an indicator, I think is what makes it accurate.

[sadoldgirl]

44. And the DMR is still waiting for the raw count.

[leftcoastmountains]

56. Thanks for the article. As for the rest of the

discussion on this thread, why argue? Nobody is going to change their
mind here. I guess if you think it's fun way to pass the time then so be
it.

[tecelote]

57. It's a capitalist's view but...

Who got the most votes for the least spent?

[wyldwolf]

69. Feb. 1 2004

Underdog Carolina Panthers lost to the favorite, New England Patriots, by 3 points in Superbowl XXXVIII.

But the Panthers REEEEAAALLLYYY won, because... well, their fans cheered the loudest?

[MisterP]

70. technically 50-50

[pnwmom]

92. Technically 23 to 21 on the only measure that counts: delegates. n/t

[Bleacher Creature]

83. Sanders started off with a huge SD deficit. He did NOTHING to help himself in IA.

The actual numbers suggest that anything that doesn't change the dynamic of this race is a win for HRC.

Charlie Cook put out a chart last week showing how much Sanders needs to win each state by in order to catch up with her when you factor in super delegates. He needed to do a hell of a lot better than 50/50 in IA.

Feel free to argue over whether it was a tie or an HRC win (although I always learned that the person with the bigger number wins). Bernie needed a blowout and he didn't get one. That's a win for Clinton.

[GoneFishin]

85. And the DNC has had it's thumb on the scale for her from the beginning.

[BigBearJohn]

104. Wow, I wish I said that. Love it.

[Orsino]

106. Silly-ass framing, but the larger point is valid.

A virtual tie was an important win for Sanders, with extra points to him for doing so at the very first primary.

But no, Clinton didn't "lose" anything but mystique. She won her first delegates of the primaries, and won more than did Sanders that day.