"...Great News for Hillary..."

[yallerdawg]

The Iowa caucus system is completely absurd — and that's great news for Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz

Source: The Week by Paul Waldman

Before we get to those polls, let's take a look at what goes on in Iowa. While the idea of voting as a communal act requiring you to gather with your neighbors in order to fulfill your democratic duty has a certain archaic charm, what it is most of all is a huge pain in the behind. It's a little more reasonable on the Republican side, where voters come to the caucus site, spend some time listening to local apparatchiks talk about the party's business for a while, and then are finally allowed to vote with a secret ballot. Democratic caucuses, on the other hand, are a more complex enterprise, where representatives of the candidates make speeches, then everyone arranges themselves into different corners of the room depending on which candidate they support, then the supporters of candidates who don't meet a threshold of 15 percent support in that caucus have to find a new team to join. What ensues is then a period of fevered negotiation, until everything finally gets sorted out and the votes can be tallied. It takes hours.

When turnout is that low, the people who do turn out are going to be an unrepresentative group; among other things, they'll be older and more likely to have caucused before. This is where the difference between the candidates' supporters comes in. As Nate Cohn of The New York Times recently noted, Iowa polls that use lists of registered voters as the universe from which they draw a sample tend to show Clinton in the lead, while polls that use random-digit dialing — surveying everyone, whether they're registered or not and independent or not (registered independents can't vote in the caucuses) — show Sanders leading. Trump's situation is probably similar — his unusual candidacy is bringing in people who are not party regulars, but that also means they're less likely to turn out.

Here's another interesting data point. A recent CNN poll asked whether respondents had participated in their party's last competitive caucus (2012 for Republicans, 2008 for Democrats). Among the whole sample of Republicans, Trump led Cruz by 11 points, but among those who caucused last time, Cruz led by 2. On the Democratic side, the effect was even more stark: Sanders led Clinton by 8 points among all respondents, but among those who caucused in 2008, Clinton led by 17.

[72DejaVu]

1. Let the whining begin!

"Waaaa, I'm not a Democrat and the Democrats won't change their rules to make me happy!"

[workinclasszero]

2. I can't wait to see if Bernies Revolutionary Millennial army

actually gets off the couch and goes to caucus for him in Iowa.

[quickesst]

3. Since your OP....

... did not even hint of anointing Bernie a saint or condemning Hillary Clinton as the epitome of evil, this must be another conspiracy plot to undermine Sanders campaign. I don't think they've ever met an anti- Hillary conspiracy theory they didn't like, approve of, or condone.

[Dawson Leery]

4. Granted that we are in different times, those who have caucused before will do so again.

Bernie will need to replicate Obama's 2008 performance. Against him is that the ambulance chaser (Edwards) is not in to run interference against Hillary. If he were, Bernie would easily win a plurality.

[Dawson Leery]

5. Did Obama really bring out a tidal wave of youth in 2008?

Bernie Sanders might say, that's OK — I'm going to bring out all the young people who support me, and even if they haven't caucused before, their enthusiasm will carry them to the caucus site. Which could happen. But consider this. That youth-driven Obama campaign? In 2008, it did indeed succeed in bringing out unprecedented numbers of young voters, and those under 30 made up 22 percent of the Democratic caucus-goers. But four years before, when John Kerry won, young voters were 17 percent of the caucus-goers — a little less, but not an enormous difference. The reason the increase was only a few points was that everyone turned out in larger numbers in 2008, young and old alike.

Even though Sanders is unusually dependent on young voters, he might mount a turnout operation that would bring them to the caucuses in numbers they haven't shown before. But if Barack Obama's 2008 effort — probably the most skillful presidential campaign in American history — could only boost youth turnout in Iowa by a few points, it would be truly remarkable if Sanders could do better.

[yallerdawg]

6. Iowa is critical to Sanders.

If he doesn't win - meet expectations, even though he has been tamping them down lately - he will be on the path of a Howard Dean campaign.

No one is anticipating turnout like 2008. Sanders would need that, and this is why he is backing off, even to the point of saying losing Iowa will not be the end.

That would be South Carolina!

[Treant]

7. Even SC and NV aren't the end.

I expect Sanders to stay in until at least Super Tuesday, but I also expect his star to tarnish and fade through February.

I have a suspicion he'll be in until Mrs. Clinton has 50%+1 delegate, and even a bit further until the numbers are overwhelming and even unreliable delegates (unlikely to impossible though they are) wouldn't save him.

I also wonder if he's going to retire from the Senate thereafter. This Ind to Dem change can't be playing that well in VT, and he's sure not paying much attention to his Senate duties.

[yallerdawg]

8. Another thing coming!

Next weeks forecast in Iowa - BRUTAL!

The question is, does it start Monday or Tuesday?

[Treant]

9. Tuesday

https://weather.com/weather/today/l/USIA0231:1:US

I hope that link worked. The current estimate is for 5 to 8" of snow on Tuesday in Des Moines. That's not an extreme amount for the area, and on the border between a nuisance and a minor problem.

[yallerdawg]

10. Next week - snow, single-digits, never over freezing!

We'll see if they got Monday right.

Where I live, forecast is low 70's!

"Nuisance and minor problem?" I wouldn't leave my bed!

[Treant]

11. Please. ;-)

Around here, we get up, blow that off, and go to work. We're not even late. And I don't live in IA, but in a much more temperate band in Pennsylvania.

I'd kill for some low seventies right now. Monday's supposed to be an extremely warm 48 here.

[SunSeeker]

12. LOL

It's 78 in L.A. right now.

[dlwickham]

13. So O'Malley is not even a factor in this

I can't imagine him getting 5% let alone 15%. I just wonder who will get his supporters. Honestly I haven't paid too much attention to his supporters on here But I figure they'll go for Sanders

[yallerdawg]

14. If I were an O'Malley supporter...

the last one I would give my vote to would be the DINO who screwed me!

O'Malley is a blue blood Democrat.

In a room full of Hillary Democrats, I don't see them going over to the dark side.

[dlwickham]

15. I hope you're right

I hope you're right

[Treant]

16. 538 projects

the most probable point on the bell curve as 5.3%.

Undoubtedly support will be clustered and one or two counties might exceed the 15% margin.

The rest will find new homes. My estimate is actually about half and half, or not a game changer.