"The timing of this (right as Sanders is likely going to be declared a victor both on delegates and the popular vote) could not possibly be more suspicious."
Throwing yet another wrench into the endlessly disastrous Iowa caucus process, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez on Thursday demanded an immediate "recanvass" of the vote even before the results have been fully reported by the Iowa Democratic Party.
"Enough is enough," Perez tweeted. "In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass."
In a follow-up tweet sent 40 minutes later, Perez wrote: "A recanvass is a review of the worksheets from each caucus site to ensure accuracy. The [Iowa Democratic Party] will continue to report results."
The announcement by Perez, who has faced growing calls to resign since Monday night, sparked further confusion and outrage, particularly among supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"Let me see if I understand this," tweeted Sanders backer Shaun King. "Ninety-seven percent of the votes are counted. Bernie surges and is about to take the lead in delegates. Tom Perez calls for something called a 'recanvass.'"
A recanvass is a review of the worksheets from each caucus site to ensure accuracy.
Keep your eyes on the prize. Bernie will keep dragging the recalcitrant horde back on track. There is no way Bernie will allow them to take this win away.
"The timing of this (right as Sanders is likely going to be declared a victor both on delegates and the popular vote) could not possibly be more suspicious."
Throwing yet another wrench into the endlessly disastrous Iowa caucus process, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez on Thursday demanded an immediate "recanvass" of the vote even before the results have been fully reported by the Iowa Democratic Party.
"Enough is enough," Perez tweeted. "In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass."
In a follow-up tweet sent 40 minutes later, Perez wrote: "A recanvass is a review of the worksheets from each caucus site to ensure accuracy. The [Iowa Democratic Party] will continue to report results."
The announcement by Perez, who has faced growing calls to resign since Monday night, sparked further confusion and outrage, particularly among supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"Let me see if I understand this," tweeted Sanders backer Shaun King. "Ninety-seven percent of the votes are counted. Bernie surges and is about to take the lead in delegates. Tom Perez calls for something called a 'recanvass.'"
A recanvass is a review of the worksheets from each caucus site to ensure accuracy.
@snoopydawg
seem at all upset about the recanvass news when he gave his presser a few minutes ago. He said he expected a recount to resemble the results they've released so far.
That's about my view too. Perez might have felt it was a necessary move to try to restore some basic faith in the primary process, at least in Iowa, after the party getting a black eye for several days as the local yokels seemed to stumble and bumble in reporting all vote totals. A/o he might have been getting word from his DNC people on the ground that some of the vote counting was a little sloppy.
I wonder too if many people watching this on this day have already discounted the 97% reported results as unreliable. Bernie's case for a 6k popular vote victory would probably be improved with a recount to legitimize the process.
"The timing of this (right as Sanders is likely going to be declared a victor both on delegates and the popular vote) could not possibly be more suspicious."
Throwing yet another wrench into the endlessly disastrous Iowa caucus process, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez on Thursday demanded an immediate "recanvass" of the vote even before the results have been fully reported by the Iowa Democratic Party.
"Enough is enough," Perez tweeted. "In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass."
In a follow-up tweet sent 40 minutes later, Perez wrote: "A recanvass is a review of the worksheets from each caucus site to ensure accuracy. The [Iowa Democratic Party] will continue to report results."
The announcement by Perez, who has faced growing calls to resign since Monday night, sparked further confusion and outrage, particularly among supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"Let me see if I understand this," tweeted Sanders backer Shaun King. "Ninety-seven percent of the votes are counted. Bernie surges and is about to take the lead in delegates. Tom Perez calls for something called a 'recanvass.'"
A recanvass is a review of the worksheets from each caucus site to ensure accuracy.
MANCHESTER, N.H. — Bernie Sanders’ campaign announced Thursday it raised $25 million in January from nearly 650,000 people, a third of whom were new donors. That makes it his best fundraising month of the 2020 campaign, according to his team.
Sanders’ aides also said that he is using the small-dollar cash infusion to place a $5.5 million TV and digital ad buy in nine Super Tuesday states and South Carolina.
The Vermont senator’s show of fundraising force comes days before the first-in-the-nation primary and as the results in Iowa are still being counted. With 97 percent of precincts reporting, the caucuses are too close to call, and Sanders and Pete Buttigieg are fighting for first place.
Sanders’ Iowa state director, Misty Rebik, sent a memo to staffers and supporters on Wednesday night that said the campaign has "a viable path forward to achieve a clean sweep and retake the lead in state delegate equivalents and national pledged delegates.”
Sanders’ aides believe that he has won the satellite caucuses, which were held for residents who could not attend the 7 p.m. caucuses, according to their unverified internal results. Not all of the satellite caucuses have reported their figures so far.
I was just about to look for it because I saw some live video of Sanders in a window on CNN but then they went to commecial and never showed it or even deigned to report on what he said.
CNN isn't even trying to pretend they are not behind the establishment at this point.
I mean, we always knew it but at least they didn't insult our intelligence to this point before.
They are so gross it makes my skin crawl but I have an even harder time listening to MSNBC and that Harpy Maddow screaming about Russia and Bernie Bro's every time I seem to turn it on.
I am so disgusted with myself for liking her way back when.
I guess the only question about her was was she pandering back then to the left for notoriety or now for the $$$.
I guess getting into the 1% has taken all the fight out of her.
Imagine that.
up
23 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
So, I spent time on this. I'm good at math. But the Democratic Caucus Math is something else. Maybe it's multidimensional.
Anyway, this is what has been decided today:
Buttigieg and Sanders are one-tenth of a point apart: 26.2% and 26.1% respectively, with 97% of precincts reporting.
It's a tie, right? Bernie and Hillary also were exactly one-tenth of a point apart four years ago in Iowa. And I'm thinking it may have worked out the same way....
After the mysterious caucus math is done, Buttigieg could walk away with 18 more delegates than Bernie.
Here's the math:
Here is the official explanation of the #RoundingErrors. If they have an extra delegate it's awarded to the candidate with the highest decimal below .5. But WHY do they have all these leftover delegates? Because they're dividing by original voters not the final number of voters. pic.twitter.com/g2SzyYDwKl
If the work sheet doesn't show up here, click on the 'pic.twitter.com' link above.
That wasn't so bad.
Here's what's bad:
The math is absurd. You're dividing by initial voters instead of final voters & it inherently leaves an extra delegate unaccounted for in many precincts. Probably more extra delegates than the margin of victory. That delegate gets "assigned" by a rule but that is not voting.
According to Ms Lulu Friesdat at the Iowa Caucus:
"If 30% of 1678 precincts have an extra delegate assigned this way, it could be approximately 500 delegates. Buttigieg is currently leading Sanders by 18 delegates."
.
And that's why we can't have nice things.
up
22 users have voted.
—
____________________
The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato
BTW: if a McKinsey recruiter suddenly calls offering a job, tell him you're busy through at least November.
So, I spent time on this. I'm good at math. But the Democratic Caucus Math is something else. Maybe it's multidimensional.
Anyway, this is what has been decided today:
Buttigieg and Sanders are one-tenth of a point apart: 26.2% and 26.1% respectively, with 97% of precincts reporting.
It's a tie, right? Bernie and Hillary also were exactly one-tenth of a point apart four years ago in Iowa. And I'm thinking it may have worked out the same way....
After the mysterious caucus math is done, Buttigieg could walk away with 18 more delegates than Bernie.
Here's the math:
Here is the official explanation of the #RoundingErrors. If they have an extra delegate it's awarded to the candidate with the highest decimal below .5. But WHY do they have all these leftover delegates? Because they're dividing by original voters not the final number of voters. pic.twitter.com/g2SzyYDwKl
If the work sheet doesn't show up here, click on the 'pic.twitter.com' link above.
That wasn't so bad.
Here's what's bad:
The math is absurd. You're dividing by initial voters instead of final voters & it inherently leaves an extra delegate unaccounted for in many precincts. Probably more extra delegates than the margin of victory. That delegate gets "assigned" by a rule but that is not voting.
According to Ms Lulu Friesdat at the Iowa Caucus:
"If 30% of 1678 precincts have an extra delegate assigned this way, it could be approximately 500 delegates. Buttigieg is currently leading Sanders by 18 delegates."
.
And that's why we can't have nice things.
up
18 users have voted.
—
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
do you think he is on to something. The 18 out of 500 is only about 4%.
The state convention delegate distribution isn't really important enough to be of interest. It's the national convention delegate distribution that is of interest, and that is not going to change by any significant amount.
but from what I understand from the post, an extra SDE awarded to Buttigieg in 30% of districts gives him an EXTRA 500 SDEs he would not otherwise have.
IOW, Pete is currently 18 SDEs ahead when he should be ~500 behind.
do you think he is on to something. The 18 out of 500 is only about 4%.
The state convention delegate distribution isn't really important enough to be of interest. It's the national convention delegate distribution that is of interest, and that is not going to change by any significant amount.
RIP
up
11 users have voted.
—
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
delegate distribution only effects local political stuff and has nothing to do with the national delegate composition. The local stuff only effects the tone of the national convention after the initial ballot count.
If Bernie doesn't have the votes on the first round of the national convention the followup will bury him in the dust. The only way that will change is if we kill the beast before the convention.
I am not a political hack, but I predict: It is unlikely (to use an understatement) the DNC will be re-organized into a "for the people" organization before the national convention.
but from what I understand from the post, an extra SDE awarded to Buttigieg in 30% of districts gives him an EXTRA 500 SDEs he would not otherwise have.
IOW, Pete is currently 18 SDEs ahead when he should be ~500 behind.
apportioning 41 pledged delegates to the national convention.
2107/41= 51.4 SDEs per pledged delegate.
In that context, the IDP is awarding an extra 500 SDEs (the equivalent of almost 10 pledged delegates) because of a mathematically invalid counting formula.
It's a pretty big deal. Basically 25% of the SDEs shouldn't even exist yet can be allocated to the wrong candidate with the mere slip of the pencil.
delegate distribution only effects local political stuff and has nothing to do with the national delegate composition. The local stuff only effects the tone of the national convention after the initial ballot count.
If Bernie doesn't have the votes on the first round of the national convention the followup will bury him in the dust. The only way that will change is if we kill the beast before the convention.
I am not a political hack, but I predict: It is unlikely (to use an understatement) the DNC will be re-organized into a "for the people" organization before the national convention.
RIP
up
6 users have voted.
—
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
… you seem to be describing the delegate count for the state convention. No one cares about that number, at all. Why do you care?
The only real number is the number of delegates (28?) to the national convention.
RIP
So, I spent time on this. I'm good at math. But the Democratic Caucus Math is something else. Maybe it's multidimensional.
Anyway, this is what has been decided today:
Buttigieg and Sanders are one-tenth of a point apart: 26.2% and 26.1% respectively, with 97% of precincts reporting.
It's a tie, right? Bernie and Hillary also were exactly one-tenth of a point apart four years ago in Iowa. And I'm thinking it may have worked out the same way....
After the mysterious caucus math is done, Buttigieg could walk away with 18 more delegates than Bernie.
Here's the math:
Here is the official explanation of the #RoundingErrors. If they have an extra delegate it's awarded to the candidate with the highest decimal below .5. But WHY do they have all these leftover delegates? Because they're dividing by original voters not the final number of voters. pic.twitter.com/g2SzyYDwKl
If the work sheet doesn't show up here, click on the 'pic.twitter.com' link above.
That wasn't so bad.
Here's what's bad:
The math is absurd. You're dividing by initial voters instead of final voters & it inherently leaves an extra delegate unaccounted for in many precincts. Probably more extra delegates than the margin of victory. That delegate gets "assigned" by a rule but that is not voting.
According to Ms Lulu Friesdat at the Iowa Caucus:
"If 30% of 1678 precincts have an extra delegate assigned this way, it could be approximately 500 delegates. Buttigieg is currently leading Sanders by 18 delegates."
@PriceRip
What counts are National delegates and actual votes. Bernie is tied with buttigeig for national delegates, 11 each and he beat the actual vote count by 6000. He won, pure and simple.
Last time around this track I ran with the big dogs in Nebraska. They didn't like that we held them to their rules and Nebraska sent some Bernie delegates to the national convention.
Big bonus, I didn't even need to go "full street fighter" to participate in this process. It was a cake walk. This time around, I have been told, Nebraska has scuttled the whole caucus process in favor of an old fashion primary.
Score one for the good guys!
RIP
#6.2 What counts are National delegates and actual votes. Bernie is tied with buttigeig for national delegates, 11 each and he beat the actual vote count by 6000. He won, pure and simple.
Having a Bernie guy in charge of the state party apparatus may not only help with taking back the party from the Republicans currently running it as well as prevent future fuckery if I'm not mistaken.
Is that correct?
I don't understand a thing about the way the Democrats run their party. One thing you gotta give to the Republicans, their base has a lot more control over the party then the Democrats base does over theirs.
, however, if it is anything like what happened in Nebraska the effects were mostly local. The effect at national were relatively unimportant as they only defined how they would deal with a case where a nominee was not chosen during the first round.
Having a Bernie guy in charge of the state party apparatus may not only help with taking back the party from the Republicans currently running it as well as prevent future fuckery if I'm not mistaken.
Is that correct?
I don't understand a thing about the way the Democrats run their party. One thing you gotta give to the Republicans, their base has a lot more control over the party then the Democrats base does over theirs.
However, I had to explore the Work Sheet that Brought Democracy to a Screeching Halt in the US. Going on four days. Finally I realized that the work sheet instructions were wrong. Thus, nobody in Iowa could do the math. They are still standing around adding columns of numbers.
I fear I've lost several brain cells and an IQ point in the process.
I have tried to decipher such stuff in the past, (shutters). I am very familiar of the failure of my fellow humans with respect to the dark arts. (I inhabited classrooms for 6 decades.)
However, I had to explore the Work Sheet that Brought Democracy to a Screeching Halt in the US. Going on four days. Finally I realized that the work sheet instructions were wrong. Thus, nobody in Iowa could do the math. They are still standing around adding columns of numbers.
I fear I've lost several brain cells and an IQ point in the process.
Iowa has 41. So far Bernie and pete each have 11 and Liz has 5. That's 27.
I suspect some committed delegates my be yet to be assigned, but I have no clue how many supers they have in mind. That's part of what can happen at the State Convention. I haven't read their (as I understand it confusing) Caucus Rules, so I will defer that point to any who have any real information. If they are following a standard protocol there will be 14 or fewer Iowa Super Delegates at the national convention.
It is critical (in order to have a sane discussion) to understand the rules are not really set in stone. The usual mode is to have a clearly defined protocol, that is strictly followed. However, from my reading of the tea leaves, in this brave new world of Idiocracy all bets are off.
I would like to be a "fly on the wall" as I suspect they are having a conversation about following Nebraska's route to abandoning caucuses in the future.
RIP
#6.2 Iowa has 41. So far Bernie and pete each have 11 and Liz has 5. That's 27.
What about the rest? I have no clue. super delegates?
I just wanted to let you know I am glad I was drinking water rather than coffee, it is easier to get out of my laptops keyboard!
Now off to read what you actually wrote.
A
So, I spent time on this. I'm good at math. But the Democratic Caucus Math is something else. Maybe it's multidimensional.
Anyway, this is what has been decided today:
Buttigieg and Sanders are one-tenth of a point apart: 26.2% and 26.1% respectively, with 97% of precincts reporting.
It's a tie, right? Bernie and Hillary also were exactly one-tenth of a point apart four years ago in Iowa. And I'm thinking it may have worked out the same way....
After the mysterious caucus math is done, Buttigieg could walk away with 18 more delegates than Bernie.
Here's the math:
Here is the official explanation of the #RoundingErrors. If they have an extra delegate it's awarded to the candidate with the highest decimal below .5. But WHY do they have all these leftover delegates? Because they're dividing by original voters not the final number of voters. pic.twitter.com/g2SzyYDwKl
If the work sheet doesn't show up here, click on the 'pic.twitter.com' link above.
That wasn't so bad.
Here's what's bad:
The math is absurd. You're dividing by initial voters instead of final voters & it inherently leaves an extra delegate unaccounted for in many precincts. Probably more extra delegates than the margin of victory. That delegate gets "assigned" by a rule but that is not voting.
According to Ms Lulu Friesdat at the Iowa Caucus:
"If 30% of 1678 precincts have an extra delegate assigned this way, it could be approximately 500 delegates. Buttigieg is currently leading Sanders by 18 delegates."
.
And that's why we can't have nice things.
up
9 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
So, I spent time on this. I'm good at math. But the Democratic Caucus Math is something else. Maybe it's multidimensional.
Anyway, this is what has been decided today:
Buttigieg and Sanders are one-tenth of a point apart: 26.2% and 26.1% respectively, with 97% of precincts reporting.
It's a tie, right? Bernie and Hillary also were exactly one-tenth of a point apart four years ago in Iowa. And I'm thinking it may have worked out the same way....
After the mysterious caucus math is done, Buttigieg could walk away with 18 more delegates than Bernie.
Here's the math:
Here is the official explanation of the #RoundingErrors. If they have an extra delegate it's awarded to the candidate with the highest decimal below .5. But WHY do they have all these leftover delegates? Because they're dividing by original voters not the final number of voters. pic.twitter.com/g2SzyYDwKl
If the work sheet doesn't show up here, click on the 'pic.twitter.com' link above.
That wasn't so bad.
Here's what's bad:
The math is absurd. You're dividing by initial voters instead of final voters & it inherently leaves an extra delegate unaccounted for in many precincts. Probably more extra delegates than the margin of victory. That delegate gets "assigned" by a rule but that is not voting.
According to Ms Lulu Friesdat at the Iowa Caucus:
"If 30% of 1678 precincts have an extra delegate assigned this way, it could be approximately 500 delegates. Buttigieg is currently leading Sanders by 18 delegates."
.
And that's why we can't have nice things.
up
5 users have voted.
—
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
The more the party tries to cheat him the more people support him. Perez should not resign, he should wear all black and change his name to The Hooded Claw or Wile E. Coyote. If he keeps this up even Trump will vote for Bernie.
Perez is where progressive candidates go to get politically murdered.
A
The more the party tries to cheat him the more people support him. Perez should not resign, he should wear all black and change his name to The Hooded Claw or Wile E. Coyote. If he keeps this up even Trump will vote for Bernie.
up
14 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Bernie remaining calm, taking all the muss and fuss in stride. Nice to hear him call out the DNC for allowing Bloomberg to buy his way onto the debate stage too.
up
18 users have voted.
—
All I want is the truth. Just give me some truth. John Lennon
Comments
Tell them like it is Bernie.
I have only heard a portion of his speech so far but I like the beginning.
The Q & A
contains some of the best quotable material.
RIP
I especially enjoyed when some Bozo asked Bernie
"Mayor Pete's been declaring a win for days now why should people believe your victory speech over his?"
Bernie's answer?
"Because I got six thousand more votes and from where I come when you got six thousand more votes that's generally regarded to be the winner"
Ha!
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Unbelievable
This is outrageous
'Beyond Absurd': DNC Chair Tom Perez Demands 'Recanvass' of Iowa Caucus Before Results Fully Reported
Ya think?
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
Deja Vu all over again
Keep your eyes on the prize. Bernie will keep dragging the recalcitrant horde back on track. There is no way Bernie will allow them to take this win away.
RIP
Bernie didn't
seem at all upset about the recanvass news when he gave his presser a few minutes ago. He said he expected a recount to resemble the results they've released so far.
That's about my view too. Perez might have felt it was a necessary move to try to restore some basic faith in the primary process, at least in Iowa, after the party getting a black eye for several days as the local yokels seemed to stumble and bumble in reporting all vote totals. A/o he might have been getting word from his DNC people on the ground that some of the vote counting was a little sloppy.
I wonder too if many people watching this on this day have already discounted the 97% reported results as unreliable. Bernie's case for a 6k popular vote victory would probably be improved with a recount to legitimize the process.
My two cents.
It looks like Bernie is getting the last laugh.
While other candidates are busy cutting back on their organizations we get this even before the Iowa debacle.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/06/bernie-sanders-iowa-fundraising...
Thanks for sharing this!
I was just about to look for it because I saw some live video of Sanders in a window on CNN but then they went to commecial and never showed it or even deigned to report on what he said.
CNN isn't even trying to pretend they are not behind the establishment at this point.
I mean, we always knew it but at least they didn't insult our intelligence to this point before.
They are so gross it makes my skin crawl but I have an even harder time listening to MSNBC and that Harpy Maddow screaming about Russia and Bernie Bro's every time I seem to turn it on.
I am so disgusted with myself for liking her way back when.
I guess the only question about her was was she pandering back then to the left for notoriety or now for the $$$.
I guess getting into the 1% has taken all the fight out of her.
Imagine that.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Taking his cues from James Brown, Bernie is
... the hardest working man in politics.
He'll never give up on us. We should never give up on him.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzMXvzyC_wE&feature=youtu.be&t=122]
Tom Perez: You're Fired!
Brokeback Caucus
So, I spent time on this. I'm good at math. But the Democratic Caucus Math is something else. Maybe it's multidimensional.
Anyway, this is what has been decided today:
Buttigieg and Sanders are one-tenth of a point apart: 26.2% and 26.1% respectively, with 97% of precincts reporting.
It's a tie, right? Bernie and Hillary also were exactly one-tenth of a point apart four years ago in Iowa. And I'm thinking it may have worked out the same way....
After the mysterious caucus math is done, Buttigieg could walk away with 18 more delegates than Bernie.
Here's the math:
If the work sheet doesn't show up here, click on the 'pic.twitter.com' link above.
That wasn't so bad.
Here's what's bad:
The math is absurd. You're dividing by initial voters instead of final voters & it inherently leaves an extra delegate unaccounted for in many precincts. Probably more extra delegates than the margin of victory. That delegate gets "assigned" by a rule but that is not voting.
According to Ms Lulu Friesdat at the Iowa Caucus:
.
And that's why we can't have nice things.
____________________
The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato
Nice...
I think you're onto something here.
BTW: if a McKinsey recruiter suddenly calls offering a job, tell him you're busy through at least November.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
Why??
do you think he is on to something. The 18 out of 500 is only about 4%.
The state convention delegate distribution isn't really important enough to be of interest. It's the national convention delegate distribution that is of interest, and that is not going to change by any significant amount.
RIP
Pluto can explain for himself....
but from what I understand from the post, an extra SDE awarded to Buttigieg in 30% of districts gives him an EXTRA 500 SDEs he would not otherwise have.
IOW, Pete is currently 18 SDEs ahead when he should be ~500 behind.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
State Convention
delegate distribution only effects local political stuff and has nothing to do with the national delegate composition. The local stuff only effects the tone of the national convention after the initial ballot count.
If Bernie doesn't have the votes on the first round of the national convention the followup will bury him in the dust. The only way that will change is if we kill the beast before the convention.
I am not a political hack, but I predict: It is unlikely (to use an understatement) the DNC will be re-organized into a "for the people" organization before the national convention.
RIP
There are 2107 SDEs...
apportioning 41 pledged delegates to the national convention.
2107/41= 51.4 SDEs per pledged delegate.
In that context, the IDP is awarding an extra 500 SDEs (the equivalent of almost 10 pledged delegates) because of a mathematically invalid counting formula.
It's a pretty big deal. Basically 25% of the SDEs shouldn't even exist yet can be allocated to the wrong candidate with the mere slip of the pencil.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
Excuse me ...
… you seem to be describing the delegate count for the state convention. No one cares about that number, at all. Why do you care?
The only real number is the number of delegates (28?) to the national convention.
RIP
Exactly right
What counts are National delegates and actual votes. Bernie is tied with buttigeig for national delegates, 11 each and he beat the actual vote count by 6000. He won, pure and simple.
All I want is the truth. Just give me some truth. John Lennon
Experience
Last time around this track I ran with the big dogs in Nebraska. They didn't like that we held them to their rules and Nebraska sent some Bernie delegates to the national convention.
Big bonus, I didn't even need to go "full street fighter" to participate in this process. It was a cake walk. This time around, I have been told, Nebraska has scuttled the whole caucus process in favor of an old fashion primary.
Score one for the good guys!
RIP
Doesn't that determines who chairs that states party?
Having a Bernie guy in charge of the state party apparatus may not only help with taking back the party from the Republicans currently running it as well as prevent future fuckery if I'm not mistaken.
Is that correct?
I don't understand a thing about the way the Democrats run their party. One thing you gotta give to the Republicans, their base has a lot more control over the party then the Democrats base does over theirs.
And they should be ashamed of that.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
True enough
, however, if it is anything like what happened in Nebraska the effects were mostly local. The effect at national were relatively unimportant as they only defined how they would deal with a case where a nominee was not chosen during the first round.
RIP
You are quite right. And that was discussed in the thread.
However, I had to explore the Work Sheet that Brought Democracy to a Screeching Halt in the US. Going on four days. Finally I realized that the work sheet instructions were wrong. Thus, nobody in Iowa could do the math. They are still standing around adding columns of numbers.
I fear I've lost several brain cells and an IQ point in the process.
____________________
The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato
You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!
I have tried to decipher such stuff in the past, (shutters). I am very familiar of the failure of my fellow humans with respect to the dark arts. (I inhabited classrooms for 6 decades.)
RIP
the National delegates
Iowa has 41. So far Bernie and pete each have 11 and Liz has 5. That's 27.
What about the rest? I have no clue. super delegates?
NYCVG
Super Delegates
may account for the others?
I suspect some committed delegates my be yet to be assigned, but I have no clue how many supers they have in mind. That's part of what can happen at the State Convention. I haven't read their (as I understand it confusing) Caucus Rules, so I will defer that point to any who have any real information. If they are following a standard protocol there will be 14 or fewer Iowa Super Delegates at the national convention.
It is critical (in order to have a sane discussion) to understand the rules are not really set in stone. The usual mode is to have a clearly defined protocol, that is strictly followed. However, from my reading of the tea leaves, in this brave new world of Idiocracy all bets are off.
I would like to be a "fly on the wall" as I suspect they are having a conversation about following Nebraska's route to abandoning caucuses in the future.
RIP
LoL! Best. Title. EVER!!!
I just wanted to let you know I am glad I was drinking water rather than coffee, it is easier to get out of my laptops keyboard!
Now off to read what you actually wrote.
A
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Oh good!
Glad you picked up on it. Hahaha.
____________________
The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato
Did you ever see the clip of Brokeback Mountain from....
The horses perspective?
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEkJJGdQuHo]
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Brokeback caucus
Nice!
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
Bernie doesn't need to complain
The more the party tries to cheat him the more people support him. Perez should not resign, he should wear all black and change his name to The Hooded Claw or Wile E. Coyote. If he keeps this up even Trump will vote for Bernie.
On to Biden since 1973
He could just change his name to McConnell
Isn't his desk where bills go to die?
Perez is where progressive candidates go to get politically murdered.
A
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Thanks for posting this. Great video!
Bernie remaining calm, taking all the muss and fuss in stride. Nice to hear him call out the DNC for allowing Bloomberg to buy his way onto the debate stage too.
All I want is the truth. Just give me some truth. John Lennon