Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Joe BidenCongratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
 

BeyondGeography

(39,276 posts)
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:14 PM Feb 2020

NYT comment from Iowa precinct worker illustrates the depth of caucus count issues

This is a top reader-rated comment from
Iowa Caucus Results Riddled With Errors and Inconsistencies
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/upshot/iowa-caucuses-errors-results.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#commentsContainer

jp-ia
Iowa


I was in charge of doing the calculations in one precinct. I am not surprised at all that inconsistencies were common.

I did not go through any training; I relied on the manual, which I found straightforward, although I can imagine it could get complicated for folks who are not mathematically inclined.

I was designated to download and use the app for my precinct, and in spite of registering to receive the app the day I got the instructions on how to do it, I never received an invitation to download it. A well-intentioned local volunteer shared a spreadsheet in my county as a backup to manual calculations, except the day of the caucus as I was testing it I found it had errors. So did others and an email went out a few hours before the caucus with an updated version that avoided some of the more complicated cases. I don't know how widely the spreadsheet was shared and if everyone who received it got the corrected version.

During the caucus, the number of voters that was used to calculate viability didn't match the number of preference cards we got in the end, which was actually higher (about 2% off). One group that was counted as viable in the 1st round wouldn't have been if we had the right number.

The bottom line is that the process is not accurate, in particular in the allocation of delegates. The best you can do is follow the vote counts, for which at least there's a paper trail. Next time, the way to go is a primary, even better if voters can rank candidates.


Another caucus worker responded with the following:

Twice I added up the numbers in the First Alignment and Final Alignment columns. The totals were 199 and 190 respectively. The numbers should have been equal, according to the rules, but nine people did not realign after the First Alignment and did not participate in the Final Alignment.

This suggests that Iowa caucus attendees didn't understand what to do, or that they chose not to follow the rules.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT comment from Iowa precinct worker illustrates the depth of caucus count issues (Original Post) BeyondGeography Feb 2020 OP
Appalling. enough Feb 2020 #1
Sounds confusing (the instructions) and I'm an old IT guy with tons of experience...maybe SWBTATTReg Feb 2020 #2
I thought I read somewhere that the Sanders campaign was telling people it could leave... W_HAMILTON Feb 2020 #3
The Iowa Democratic Party should really be ashamed of itself BeyondGeography Feb 2020 #5
Not a problem as long as their voter preference cards were handed in. bluewater Feb 2020 #6
But it is a problem is people are still focused on counting heads as was the case in prior caucuses. W_HAMILTON Feb 2020 #8
They counted people to determine group viability. bluewater Feb 2020 #11
Sanders insisted on reporting actual votes and having a paper trail, and we now see why. bluewater Feb 2020 #4
Good on Bernie - this ain't his first time 'round the block! polichick Feb 2020 #9
His insistence on changing the rules to suit him only made the entire process messier... W_HAMILTON Feb 2020 #12
Not true at all. Reporting the votes used to calculate delegates was no extra work. bluewater Feb 2020 #14
Completely true. W_HAMILTON Feb 2020 #17
Only two more number had to be reported! The actual vote totals! bluewater Feb 2020 #19
LOL, clearly there was a helluva lot of extra effort required to report those two numbers. W_HAMILTON Feb 2020 #20
I'm sorry to all the candidates (especially the front runners) & all the caucus-attendees hlthe2b Feb 2020 #7
Viability a clue? JoeOtterbein Feb 2020 #10
I've read 2 things that are related, 1 from a worker, 1 online... jmg257 Feb 2020 #13
There was a box Skidmore Feb 2020 #15
After this debacle there should be no question to ditch it and go to a primary. brush Feb 2020 #16
That second comment shows what a mess it was judeling Feb 2020 #18
See, that's wrong. W_HAMILTON Feb 2020 #21
No it is not judeling Feb 2020 #22
A viable candidate's supporters cannot realign, but they can have more supporters added to their mix W_HAMILTON Feb 2020 #23
 

SWBTATTReg

(21,856 posts)
2. Sounds confusing (the instructions) and I'm an old IT guy with tons of experience...maybe
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:20 PM
Feb 2020

better instructions or a test run of the whole process should have been done. But, this may have been impossible being that volunteers are probably used heavily during any election process. Perhaps have a point of contact at every polling place who is a SME on the Apps to be opened and populated, and then shipped off when finalized (shipped off to be signed off on, etc., whatever), which will eventually get to a tabulating station and be counted.

What a mess.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

W_HAMILTON

(7,813 posts)
3. I thought I read somewhere that the Sanders campaign was telling people it could leave...
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:24 PM
Feb 2020

...after the first alignment, which means that there would be fewer votes in the final alignment if some people did that.

Of course, people were probably counting the actual number of people, which means the final alignment could be different. But based on the rule that said viable candidates were "locked in" after the first alignment, that means that there should have been no circumstances under which a viable candidate recorded fewer supporters in the final alignment; however, if the caucus heads are counting actual people, it would show fewer.

This is just a &%*@(% up process and caucuses should be eliminated. Any state that continues to insist on a caucus going forward should be punished by the DNC by having their delegates refused to be seated at the convention or whatever the process would be for disregarding them.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

BeyondGeography

(39,276 posts)
5. The Iowa Democratic Party should really be ashamed of itself
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:30 PM
Feb 2020

It should also have the good sense (fat chance) not to lobby for a repeat in 24 or 28.

Our candidates more than held up their end of the bargain blowing through $300 mn collectively and spending most of last year's campaigning time in their state. Never again. Please.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

bluewater

(5,376 posts)
6. Not a problem as long as their voter preference cards were handed in.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:31 PM
Feb 2020

And that their group was viable to start with. If their group was not viable and people left, that would have hurt Sanders.

The Sanders' people addressed this point and said unviable groups were not an issue for them.



If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

W_HAMILTON

(7,813 posts)
8. But it is a problem is people are still focused on counting heads as was the case in prior caucuses.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:36 PM
Feb 2020

I believe this "viable candidates are locked in after the first round" rule only began this year. I know the voter preference cards were supposed to be a sort of paper trail, but in all the caucus sites I saw being televised, they were counting people -- not voter preference cards.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

bluewater

(5,376 posts)
11. They counted people to determine group viability.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:51 PM
Feb 2020

Once your group was deemed viable, the preference cards were the thing counted in the first and 2nd rounds and eventual delegate assignment. At least that is how it was suppose to happen.

I suppose mistakes could be made counting heads to see if a small group was actually viable, but that would not effect people leaving from large groups like Sanders' as long as they turned in their preference cards. If officials did not count those preference cards, then they were violating the rules and cheating that candidate.



Yeah, caucuses, what a mess... lol


If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

bluewater

(5,376 posts)
4. Sanders insisted on reporting actual votes and having a paper trail, and we now see why.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:29 PM
Feb 2020

His insistence that actual vote tallies be reported was right on the money.

Yes, yes, that isn't how the "winner" is supposed to be declared, but right now it's the best metric we have to evaluate this very flawed process.



If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

polichick

(37,152 posts)
9. Good on Bernie - this ain't his first time 'round the block!
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:36 PM
Feb 2020
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

W_HAMILTON

(7,813 posts)
12. His insistence on changing the rules to suit him only made the entire process messier...
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:02 PM
Feb 2020

...and is one of the reasons why it has been even more of a clusterfuck than usual.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

bluewater

(5,376 posts)
14. Not true at all. Reporting the votes used to calculate delegates was no extra work.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:10 PM
Feb 2020

All that was asked is that the actual vote totals also be reported, the same vote totals they need anyway to calculate delegates. No extra work involved at all.

Then they asked that a paper trail of those votes be kept. Again, no extra working and a lifesaver iof an actual recounted needed to be done.

Sorry, but blaming Bernie just isn't going to fly. His suggestions saved the day in this fiasco. At least we have that papertrail thanks to him.


If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

W_HAMILTON

(7,813 posts)
17. Completely true.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:24 PM
Feb 2020

Most of this mess stemmed from the additional reporting, which did absolutely nothing to change how the ultimate result was arrived at and apparently won't even have an appreciable effect on the outcome, other than to have everyone doubt the results due to the pile-up of minor errors resulting from all the additional reporting requirements.

The remainder was due to the actual rules changes that went into effect, which apparently confused regular caucus goers and caused the additional reporting to have even more errors (e.g., viable candidates were "locked in" after the first alignment and could only gain votes in the final alignment, but several people went home and apparently the people were counting heads, so they showed fewer people, which was technically against the rules).

It was a complete and unnecessary fuck up for no other reason than a temporary Democrat wanted more shit to whine and complain about the party for and fundraise off it all while his supporters created more of their usual conspiracy theories. Well, congrats, you got your wish, Sanders.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

bluewater

(5,376 posts)
19. Only two more number had to be reported! The actual vote totals!
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:33 PM
Feb 2020

The very same vote totals that were always needed to calculated the delegates assigned.

Again, it was no extra effort to report those two numbers.

And again, people leaving from viable groups that were viable did not matter because there was a paper trail this year. Their candidate preference cards were there to be counted. If official refuse to count those cards, that is their fault alone.

And thankfully Sanders insisted on that actual paper trail tis year. He saved us all from total embarrassment.

Honestly, I can't explain this any clearer.

Thanks for the discussion and enjoy your evening.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

W_HAMILTON

(7,813 posts)
20. LOL, clearly there was a helluva lot of extra effort required to report those two numbers.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 07:09 PM
Feb 2020

They felt the need to spend tens of thousands of dollars to develop an entire freaking app to facilitate the additional reporting, even though they never needed that crap before.

And people leaving viable groups DID matter because, due to this unnecessary additional reporting, we can see that there are viable candidates that have fewer supporters in the final alignment than they did after the first alignment, which means that people were probably counting heads (like had always been done) and now their counts are off and there is confusion and mistrust about the entire process.

Once again, the caucuses are a screwed up, undemocratic way of voting to begin with, and they were made even worse by the changes that Sanders dictated be made.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

hlthe2b

(101,703 posts)
7. I'm sorry to all the candidates (especially the front runners) & all the caucus-attendees
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:34 PM
Feb 2020

but I have exactly ZERO confidence that we'll ever get reliable results from Iowa. They may get the counts at the end, but given caucus volunteers apparently did not reliably follow the intended instructions (e.g., excluding those on the first vote that got <15% from the next vote), may not have calculated delegate counts correctly and on and on and on--I just don't see how they can stand behind any results.

Caucus goers expended considerable time and effort to attend. Volunteers man the entire effort and have expended more time and effort than anyone could ever justify trying to clean this mess up. In the end, it won't be.

I'll be damned if I have the answers (beyond the obvious for the future), but I feel bad for all concerned. Mortified too, but that is a given.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

JoeOtterbein

(7,697 posts)
10. Viability a clue?
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 05:49 PM
Feb 2020
During the caucus, the number of voters that was used to calculate viability didn't match the number of preference cards we got in the end, which was actually higher (about 2% off).
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

jmg257

(11,996 posts)
13. I've read 2 things that are related, 1 from a worker, 1 online...
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:08 PM
Feb 2020

The worker stated that instead of the nonviable people being told to find another candidate after the 1st round, they were allowed to try to recruit others into their group.

The online description of the process (Vox?) stated after a candidate was deemed un-viable, they could realign OR choose to disperse/leave.

Not sure what is the truth?

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
15. There was a box
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:10 PM
Feb 2020

on side two of the ballot to mark if the person was not realigning by choice.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

brush

(53,467 posts)
16. After this debacle there should be no question to ditch it and go to a primary.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:21 PM
Feb 2020

And not the first in the nation. trump will beat the pants off Sanders and Mayor Pete.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

judeling

(1,086 posts)
18. That second comment shows what a mess it was
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 06:27 PM
Feb 2020

Not realigning and leaving is in the rules. The numbers from the first realignment and the second do need to match, they just cannot grow.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

W_HAMILTON

(7,813 posts)
21. See, that's wrong.
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 07:13 PM
Feb 2020

Based on the rules, for a viable candidate, the final alignment number can ONLY grow -- it cannot be less than the first alignment since the supporters are "locked in" (gee, thanks Sanders) after the first alignment if their candidate is deemed viable. They can have nonviable supporters join them in the final alignment, but supporters of viable candidates must stay with whoever they supported in the first alignment.

This is how some of the errors in reporting are being recognized, because for some viable candidates, they were losing support in the final alignment, which is basically against the rules.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
 

judeling

(1,086 posts)
22. No it is not
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 08:07 PM
Feb 2020

A viable candidate's supporters cannot realign. So their cards should have been collected.
The second realignment merely had to be people turning in their cards after they filled them out for that round. Those cards should have then been sorted and counted, the total of that count for viable candidates would then be added to the first round totals and that was then reported second round count. While all cards should have been collected, it was not required because the total attendance at the signing sheet was used to calculate the viability threshold.

The only real numbers problem would be if there were more cards then sign ins.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Undecided
 

W_HAMILTON

(7,813 posts)
23. A viable candidate's supporters cannot realign, but they can have more supporters added to their mix
Thu Feb 6, 2020, 09:09 PM
Feb 2020

And yet, that was not what happened in certain precincts. Viable candidates LOST supporters in the final alignment based on some of the counts reported, which absolutely cannot happen based on the rules that were in place. This is why there was such an uproar over counts being made public that were then subsequently found to have errors in them.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Democratic Primaries»NYT comment from Iowa pre...