BREAKING: Sanders campaign releases its internal counts (40% reporting)

[brooklynite]

First Round
Sanders 24,496
Buttigieg 18,187
Warren 16,906
Biden 12,086
Klobuchar 10,115
Yang 4,165
Steyer 1,296
Gabbard 145

Second Round
Sanders 23,476
Buttigieg 19,464
Warren 16,814
Biden 9,789
Klobuchar 8,709
Yang 709
Steyer 192
Gabbard 9

Link to tweet

[Zolorp]

1. Sorry, but those numbers cannot be trusted

[FBaggins]

2. As opposed to which numbers?

This appears consistent with internal numbers from PB’s campaign.

Has Biden released something indicating different data?

[Lancero]

10. Hate to admit this, but with Bidens popularity...

It is suspect that he came in 4th. Most people would have been expecting Biden and Sanders to be jockeying against each other for 1 and 2, not for Biden to take a solid loss.

[thesquanderer]

15. I trust the numbers, but have to take them for what they are.

The numbers are probably right, and seem to be consistent with what other campaigns are reporting (see https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287473529 ) ... but it's still only a 40% count, and as large as that is, we can't assume that they are necessarily representative of the whole (they could be skewed rural or urban, or any other parameter)... it's not like polling which is speciifically designed to try to be representative... this is essentially a "random" 40% that might or might not be scattered to cover all demographics, etc. Still, all indicators so far do bode well for Sanders.

ETA: results also basically consistent with this... https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287472002

[Baclava]

3. No wonder Biden campaign manager was on questioning integrity of whole Iowa caucus process

4th place!

[booley]

8. hearing peopel report in last night

Pollsters from Iowa called into the political various shows on youtube. Time and again I head Biden not having any delegates, even in precincts he was expected to do well at.

[thesquanderer]

14. CNN had live reports from a variety of caucus locations... Biden was not doing great. nt

[wcast]

4. You mean the multiple threads and comments about Democrats wanting a Centrist are wrong?!

I'm a Democrat and I am not scared of nominating some one who is not a so-called Centrist. We need to have a compelling message. I can beat Trump as the only qualifier is not a compelling message. Hillary won the popular vote but lost the electoral college on turn out.

[brooklynite]

5. Buttigieg is a centrist...

[obamanut2012]

6. Pete IS a centrist

[booley]

9. And Pete came in second

Pete also doesn't' seem to have much place to go after New Hampshire.

[obamanut2012]

12. I'm not a Pete fan, but you literally have zero real proof of that

[Kentonio]

13. Well between him and Biden, Joe polls much, much better in the south

Even the momentum from a good Iowa showing will fade if Joe wipes the floor with him in SC.

[democrattotheend]

7. I was watching on Twitter as people tweeted their precinct results during the caucuses

And this seems plausible based on what I saw, although it was really hard to keep track. But it seemed like Bernie was viable in the most places and had the most people going in, although that could be Bernie's people using Twitter more than other campaigns. But it seemed like he was viable/leading in the most places, followed by Pete and Warren, followed by Biden and Klobuchar. Overall it seemed like Bernie and Pete were having the best night, and Warren was doing pretty well too.

[BlueIdaho]

11. These numbers may be right...

Or they may be wrong. It really doesn’t matter. Let’s have every candidate release their numbers and see what chaos really looks like.