Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)

Who's Going to Win South Carolina?

  • Joe Biden

    Votes: 585 39.2%
  • Bernie Sanders

    Votes: 853 57.2%
  • Elizabeth Warren

    Votes: 24 1.6%
  • Pete Buttigieg

    Votes: 7 0.5%
  • THE KLOBBERER

    Votes: 16 1.1%
  • Tom Steyer

    Votes: 6 0.4%

  • Total voters
    1,491
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Tfritz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,408
i guess what gets my goat about some of y'all and the concept of bernie needing momentum to win the primary is that it flies in the face of his general election pitch about how he's a candidate that will inspire people to vote and you can't blame people for not voting for a candidate that doesn't inspire them and all that crap, but the momentum stuff just lays the groundwork that bernie isn't inspiring enough to even win the primaries.

edit: this was a continued thought from a previous post and a criticism of the concept of "momentum", and what bernie needing "momentum" to win the primary would mean for the general election, not a criticism of bernie sanders or the outcome of iowa (which was actually good for bernie, because pete spending so much of his money and energy campaigning there to basically tie with bernie and wind up with a cloud of conspiratorial innuendo floating above him is good for bernie, and joe biden absolutely flopping in such a way that may perhaps damage his perceived electability is also good for bernie. also "electability" is another dumb and meaningless concept)
 
Last edited:

Blue Skies

Member
Mar 27, 2019
7,969
Does anyone here think Bloomberg actually has a chance to win?

Why the hell do people on predictit have him at second place in becoming the nominee?
I have him at 5th place
succession: if candidate _____ stumbles then ______ takes their place:
Moderates turn out more= Biden -> Pete -> Bloomberg -> Amy
Progressives turn out more= Bernie -> Warren
 

ry-dog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,150
So if these were rigged results, why would Biden be so low and why would you give Bernie the same number of delegates as the winner.
Not saying there aren’t a million issues with the app and how it was run, but you don’t need to swoop down to Trump supporter level of conspiracy theories
 

lmcfigs

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
9,275
Glad that wagging your fingers at other users is more pressing than this massive fuck up
 

GoldenEye 007

Roll Tide, Y'all!
Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,118
Texas
Glad that wagging your fingers at other users is more pressing than this massive fuck up
I mean, it is a massive fuckup, but it’s also Iowa. A state with a history of fucking up caucuses. This represents what 1% of the total delegate count? The count ultimately will be right.

It’ll be fine as the primaries pick up steam.
 

ry-dog

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,150
Glad that wagging your fingers at other users is more pressing than this massive fuck up
Iowa doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. Big figures on the left buying into the same dead brain fake votes conspiracy theory the right laps up, is far more worrying than a low stakes experimental voting app not going smoothly.

You have to ask yourself this, if Bernie was up 2% right now, and all the app issues remained, would people be as angry?
 
Last edited:

Mr. RPG

Member
Oct 25, 2017
678
i guess what gets my goat about some of y'all and the concept of bernie needing momentum to win the primary is that it flies in the face of his general election pitch about how he's a candidate that will inspire people to vote and you can't blame people for not voting for a candidate that doesn't inspire them and all that crap, but the momentum stuff just lays the groundwork that bernie isn't inspiring enough to even win the primaries.
Sanders has a very clear path to the nomination. I'm very confident in saying that after Biden's huge loss in Iowa.

He didn't even under perform in Iowa. He actually did better than what he was at in the polling aggregate.
 

Afrikan

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,707
seems like some don't like/rooting against Bernie in here, because he is so loved... not because of his policies.

they want to taste some tears so bad...only to find that, um there really are no tears.

this whole tie or 1 extra point thing only looks good for the media to use for a week or two.
 

Tfritz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,408
Sanders has a very clear path to the nomination. I'm very confident in saying that after Biden's huge loss in Iowa.

He didn't even under perform in Iowa. He actually did better than what he was at in the polling aggregate.
To be clear: I literally agree with you and I've been saying since the night of the caucus that this is a pretty good result for Bernie. I'm just super annoyed at folks suggesting that this was all a conspiracy to harm Bernie's momentum or whatever, and it'd be nice if they'd act like they actually think he can win.
 

eebster

Member
Nov 2, 2017
711
There's more posts in here mocking those who think it's rigged, than there's people who think it's rigged
 

Fhtagn

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,576
So if these were rigged results, why would Biden be so low and why would you give Bernie the same number of delegates as the winner.
Not saying there aren’t a million issues with the app and how it was run, but you don’t need to swoop down to Trump supporter level of conspiracy theories
first up, I'm personally convinced this is 95% incompetence and 5% resentment, but...

The app itself failing is a great example of consultant grift and the kind of ridiculous bullshit anyone involved in tech has probably encountered. The connections to Pete's campaign are a bad look but not proof of anything.

The way in which the results may be massaged (and thus rigged) without being wildly obviously wrong is that the numbers are being doled out in the most favorable way to the second place in vote total moderate rather than the first place progressive.

Caucuses are easy to massage if the public doesn't have access to all of the numbers because rounding errors can compound over and over again.

as it is, Sanders still has a higher popular vote count, and they are tied for delegates. The real damage done was the PR damage of allowing Pete to claim victory on Monday night (with no evidence) and then taking days to slowly roll out the info. That they released numbers that conflicted with what we knew from earlier in the week via a Facebook post didn't help matters. Of course they gave 500 of Bernie's votes to Patrick. That's been fixed now, but a mistake like that throws the whole count into question.

It's ultimately not going to matter all that much as Sanders performed as well as expected and is going to win NH, etc.
 

Mr. RPG

Member
Oct 25, 2017
678
To be clear: I literally agree with you and I've been saying since the night of the caucus that this is a pretty good result for Bernie. I'm just super annoyed at folks suggesting that this was all a conspiracy to harm Bernie's momentum or whatever, and it'd be nice if they'd act like they actually think he can win.
Ah, I misread your post then. :P
 
Iowa wrapup & on toNew Hampshire
OP
OP
Poodlestrike

Poodlestrike

It's salt.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
6,864
Okay, I'm calling this thing.

It is Wednesday, February 5th, 2020. The Iowa Caucuses were 2000 years ago today. They have counted 83% of the votes but they're apparently too tired to use Excel over there so they've had to revise the latest estimate at least twice. The Needle claims to have a result, but I will not worship at that dark altar.

Thus, the results are: for the first time ever, the Iowa Democratic primary has lost the Iowa Caucuses! Nobody won!

A warbling rendition of Hail to the Chief begins playing on kazoos. All-white balloons drift down from the ceiling. Confetti is fired out of cannons, but it's all wet. One of the balloons pops. It is filled with spiders. Guy Fieri is there for some reason, eating an ear of corn as long as his arm, smothered in donkey sauce.

Knew I shouldn't have let those fuckers organize the festivities.



Anyway, speaking slightly more seriously for a moment, it looks like Pete might pull this out, but the whole thing got so thoroughly fucked up by AppGate that it really truly doesn't matter much any more. Just a tiny rural state that split its delegates 4 different ways. To the 15 brave users who read 538, come forward and collect your prize.

(It's one of the spider balloons)

A lot of people have asked why this happened. The long and short of it is: money, for both the fuckery of the caucuses and the fuckery of the app. This app was essentially a paid side project for a company called Shadow, Inc. Which is a terrible name for an election tools firm, but hey, tech bros are nothing if not terrible at naming things. Shadow, it's worth noting, is (or was) fairly well regarded as a technology firm catering to Democratic campaigns and activists. They've built a number of useful tools in the past. However, because of the way campaign finance works in the US, companies like Shadow make ends meet by taking on tiny jobs on everything they can get. The Iowa and Nevada Democratic parties each paid around 50-60k to Shadow for them to develop a tool for caucus reporting, which is a terrible idea from the jump, and Shadow took the job, because apparently they're that hard up for cash. For those of you who do technology work, that might look like a very small number for a job like this. You would be right.

The Iowa Caucuses are the way they are because a) caucuses are mostly free to run, since they're organized almost entirely by volunteers who then screw things up and b) New Hampshire has made it legally impossible for them to not be the first primary in the nation. If another state moves in front of NH, the state party is legally bound to advance in front of them. So if Iowa switched over to a primary from a caucus, they would lose their first-in-the-nation status. Which is valuable if you care about campaigns spending money in the state, sure, but the real gain is in legislation. This prime position is why we've got corn syrup in fucking everything and why politicians were briefly super enthusiastic about Ethanol and now it's in all the gas - making it so that every presidential hopeful in the nation has to campaign in Iowa (and campaign hard) has created enormous pressure to cater to Iowa specific interests. So they've got a lot hanging on being in front of NH, which means being a caucus instead of a primary. It's a mess. It's always been a mess. This is just the first time it has been so publicly a mess. Still, remember, could be worse.



Now, on to NH! The OP (which I'm sure everybody read) has this to say on the subject of the Granite State Primary:

New Hampshire! Like Iowa, but instead of caucuses, they have primaries, and instead of corn syrup, they’ve got maple. Mmm. Taking place on February 11 this year, the New Hampshire primaries first rose in importance in 1952, and successfully predicted the president (if not the party nominee) every year from then until 1988. Similar to Iowa, NH has a very “retail politics” vibe, but unlike Iowa, the candidates don’t get to hang out there for months on end, following the first contest as it does by only a week (okay, 8 days). This results in an absolutely hectic period of on-the-ground campaigning as candidates furiously shove pancakes into their mouths and sing muffled praise for the various 10,000 districts of the NH State Legislature in an effort to shore up support with key figures they previously hadn’t had the time to extensively court.

NH frankly hasn’t been subject to the same level of scrutiny as Iowa, but it probably should be. Like Iowa, it’s very rural, and very white - not at all representative of the country as a whole. But like Iowa, there’s a certain amount of pride (and perhaps exasperation) in the way that every 4 years candidates for president show up in their living rooms, dining rooms, and back decks peering in the window and checking to see if they’re really not home.

Primaries are much simpler than Caucuses: show up, be registered, vote. New Hampshire has semi-open primaries, so undeclared voters can vote in either primary, but voters with declared party affiliation can only vote in their own. If you’re a registered republican but want in on the primary, it may be too late. Want to know where to vote? Check here. Not sure if you’re registered? No worries - according to the Secretary of State’s office, you can register to vote on election day at your polling place. The requirements are outlined here.

As an aside, NH Dem party: get your shit together - I had to go trawling the SoS office's site directly to find that. Smh.
Wow, I feel bad about dunking on the NH Democratic party now. Turns out Iowa really ain't shit.

Anyway, highlights from the upcoming few days include candidates awkwardly standing inside total strangers' living rooms, lots of weird photos of people shoving breakfast food and crabcakes (hopefully not at once) into their mouths, and the knives coming out as people no long have to worry about appealing to Iowa Nice second-alignment caucusgoers. There's also a town in the state that all gets together at midnight at votes all at once by dropping their votes in a box. Rural American, everybody!

Next poll is who you think will win the NH Primary. In the interest of covering our bases, there will be a "nobody" option this time.
 

Psychonaut

Member
Jan 11, 2018
2,862
i guess what gets my goat about some of y'all and the concept of bernie needing momentum to win the primary is that it flies in the face of his general election pitch about how he's a candidate that will inspire people to vote and you can't blame people for not voting for a candidate that doesn't inspire them and all that crap, but the momentum stuff just lays the groundwork that bernie isn't inspiring enough to even win the primaries.
I know we're all guilty of it, but it's fun to see the ways in which people selectively decree that Iowa is/is not indicative of broader national trends. Because he failed to take Iowa in decisive fashion, he suddenly "isn't inspiring enough to win the primaries" despite... every other part of the picture.

Does anyone here think Bloomberg actually has a chance to win?

Why the hell do people on predictit have him at second place in becoming the nominee?
I would agree that Bloomberg is the second, perhaps first most likely candidate. Biden is going off the rails in slow-motion and Pete doesn't have the minority support to hold the moderate lane in his stead. While Bernie could potentially pick up some of those votes, Bloomberg is using his fortune to absolutely blitz Super Tuesday states and beyond with ads. Speaking from my personal experience, he's targeting Hispanics hard. If he caters to them as a moderate, he may Hoover up every potential Biden and Buttigieg voter after they collapse.
 

Tfritz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,408
Ah, I misread your post then. :P
It's fine, I was continuing a thought I made in an earlier post, because what is this thread if not my personal twitter.

I know we're all guilty of it, but it's fun to see the ways in which people selectively decree that Iowa is/is not indicative of broader national trends. Because he failed to take Iowa in decisive fashion, he suddenly "isn't inspiring enough to win the primaries" despite... every other part of the picture.
i mean that's literally not what i'm saying, i'm criticizing the concept of "momentum" and i'm specifically arguing that bernie sanders does not need the nebulous concept of "momentum" to win, and even if he did that would be real fucking bad news for his chances in the general.
 
Oct 25, 2017
13,744
Sweden
Iowa doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. Big figures on the left buying into the same dead brain fake votes conspiracy theory the right laps up, is far more worrying than a low stakes experimental voting app not going smoothly
which "big figures" on the left have bought into it?

random twitter users don't count as "big figures"

has anyone on bernie's campaign team questioned the validity of the results, like that spokesperson for biden did?
 

Mr. RPG

Member
Oct 25, 2017
678
I'm already tired of this election.

Bloomberg and Buttigieg do not deserve the nomination. They're completely unfit to be president.

I would honestly prefer Biden.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
13,744
Sweden
Okay, I'm calling this thing.

It is Wednesday, February 5th, 2020. The Iowa Caucuses were 2000 years ago today. They have counted 83% of the votes but they're apparently too tired to use Excel over there so they've had to revise the latest estimate at least twice. The Needle claims to have a result, but I will not worship at that dark altar.

Thus, the results are: for the first time ever, the Iowa Democratic primary has lost the Iowa Caucuses! Nobody won!

A warbling rendition of Hail to the Chief begins playing on kazoos. All-white balloons drift down from the ceiling. Confetti is fired out of cannons, but it's all wet. One of the balloons pops. It is filled with spiders. Guy Fieri is there for some reason, eating an ear of corn as long as his arm, smothered in donkey sauce.

Knew I shouldn't have let those fuckers organize the festivities.



Anyway, speaking slightly more seriously for a moment, it looks like Pete might pull this out, but the whole thing got so thoroughly fucked up by AppGate that it really truly doesn't matter much any more. Just a tiny rural state that split its delegates 4 different ways. To the 15 brave users who read 538, come forward and collect your prize.

(It's one of the spider balloons)

A lot of people have asked why this happened. The long and short of it is: money, for both the fuckery of the caucuses and the fuckery of the app. This app was essentially a paid side project for a company called Shadow, Inc. Which is a terrible name for an election tools firm, but hey, tech bros are nothing if not terrible at naming things. Shadow, it's worth noting, is (or was) fairly well regarded as a technology firm catering to Democratic campaigns and activists. They've built a number of useful tools in the past. However, because of the way campaign finance works in the US, companies like Shadow make ends meet by taking on tiny jobs on everything they can get. The Iowa and Nevada Democratic parties each paid around 50-60k to Shadow for them to develop a tool for caucus reporting, which is a terrible idea from the jump, and Shadow took the job, because apparently they're that hard up for cash. For those of you who do technology work, that might look like a very small number for a job like this. You would be right.

The Iowa Caucuses are the way they are because a) caucuses are mostly free to run, since they're organized almost entirely by volunteers who then screw things up and b) New Hampshire has made it legally impossible for them to not be the first primary in the nation. If another state moves in front of NH, the state party is legally bound to advance in front of them. So if Iowa switched over to a primary from a caucus, they would lose their first-in-the-nation status. Which is valuable if you care about campaigns spending money in the state, sure, but the real gain is in legislation. This prime position is why we've got corn syrup in fucking everything and why politicians were briefly super enthusiastic about Ethanol and now it's in all the gas - making it so that every presidential hopeful in the nation has to campaign in Iowa (and campaign hard) has created enormous pressure to cater to Iowa specific interests. So they've got a lot hanging on being in front of NH, which means being a caucus instead of a primary. It's a mess. It's always been a mess. This is just the first time it has been so publicly a mess. Still, remember, could be worse.



Now, on to NH! The OP (which I'm sure everybody read) has this to say on the subject of the Granite State Primary:



Wow, I feel bad about dunking on the NH Democratic party now. Turns out Iowa really ain't shit.

Anyway, highlights from the upcoming few days include candidates awkwardly standing inside total strangers' living rooms, lots of weird photos of people shoving breakfast food and crabcakes (hopefully not at once) into their mouths, and the knives coming out as people no long have to worry about appealing to Iowa Nice second-alignment caucusgoers. There's also a town in the state that all gets together at midnight at votes all at once by dropping their votes in a box. Rural American, everybody!

Next poll is who you think will win the NH Primary. In the interest of covering our bases, there will be a "nobody" option this time.
nice post. thanks!

edit: (uh and i'm being sincere. i just realized this post looks a bit dismissive)
 

danm999

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,928
Sydney
Okay, I'm calling this thing.

It is Wednesday, February 5th, 2020. The Iowa Caucuses were 2000 years ago today. They have counted 83% of the votes but they're apparently too tired to use Excel over there so they've had to revise the latest estimate at least twice. The Needle claims to have a result, but I will not worship at that dark altar.

Thus, the results are: for the first time ever, the Iowa Democratic primary has lost the Iowa Caucuses! Nobody won!

A warbling rendition of Hail to the Chief begins playing on kazoos. All-white balloons drift down from the ceiling. Confetti is fired out of cannons, but it's all wet. One of the balloons pops. It is filled with spiders. Guy Fieri is there for some reason, eating an ear of corn as long as his arm, smothered in donkey sauce.

Knew I shouldn't have let those fuckers organize the festivities.



Anyway, speaking slightly more seriously for a moment, it looks like Pete might pull this out, but the whole thing got so thoroughly fucked up by AppGate that it really truly doesn't matter much any more. Just a tiny rural state that split its delegates 4 different ways. To the 15 brave users who read 538, come forward and collect your prize.

(It's one of the spider balloons)

A lot of people have asked why this happened. The long and short of it is: money, for both the fuckery of the caucuses and the fuckery of the app. This app was essentially a paid side project for a company called Shadow, Inc. Which is a terrible name for an election tools firm, but hey, tech bros are nothing if not terrible at naming things. Shadow, it's worth noting, is (or was) fairly well regarded as a technology firm catering to Democratic campaigns and activists. They've built a number of useful tools in the past. However, because of the way campaign finance works in the US, companies like Shadow make ends meet by taking on tiny jobs on everything they can get. The Iowa and Nevada Democratic parties each paid around 50-60k to Shadow for them to develop a tool for caucus reporting, which is a terrible idea from the jump, and Shadow took the job, because apparently they're that hard up for cash. For those of you who do technology work, that might look like a very small number for a job like this. You would be right.

The Iowa Caucuses are the way they are because a) caucuses are mostly free to run, since they're organized almost entirely by volunteers who then screw things up and b) New Hampshire has made it legally impossible for them to not be the first primary in the nation. If another state moves in front of NH, the state party is legally bound to advance in front of them. So if Iowa switched over to a primary from a caucus, they would lose their first-in-the-nation status. Which is valuable if you care about campaigns spending money in the state, sure, but the real gain is in legislation. This prime position is why we've got corn syrup in fucking everything and why politicians were briefly super enthusiastic about Ethanol and now it's in all the gas - making it so that every presidential hopeful in the nation has to campaign in Iowa (and campaign hard) has created enormous pressure to cater to Iowa specific interests. So they've got a lot hanging on being in front of NH, which means being a caucus instead of a primary. It's a mess. It's always been a mess. This is just the first time it has been so publicly a mess. Still, remember, could be worse.



Now, on to NH! The OP (which I'm sure everybody read) has this to say on the subject of the Granite State Primary:



Wow, I feel bad about dunking on the NH Democratic party now. Turns out Iowa really ain't shit.

Anyway, highlights from the upcoming few days include candidates awkwardly standing inside total strangers' living rooms, lots of weird photos of people shoving breakfast food and crabcakes (hopefully not at once) into their mouths, and the knives coming out as people no long have to worry about appealing to Iowa Nice second-alignment caucusgoers. There's also a town in the state that all gets together at midnight at votes all at once by dropping their votes in a box. Rural American, everybody!

Next poll is who you think will win the NH Primary. In the interest of covering our bases, there will be a "nobody" option this time.
Mods in the pocket of Big Chaos
 

Psychonaut

Member
Jan 11, 2018
2,862
i mean that's literally not what i'm saying, i'm criticizing the concept of "momentum" and i'm specifically arguing that bernie sanders does not need the nebulous concept of "momentum" to win, and even if he did that would be real fucking bad news for his chances in the general.
Ah, you're right-- poor reading on my part, sorry. I stand by what I said, it just doesn't happen to be remotely relevant to what you posted. :p

While I do think momentum can be a small factor in a Bernie success (swinging voters away from Warren if he's surging, for example), the fact that his strategy centers around activating non-voters does mean that means that his base will be largely unaffected by the results of prior primaries/caucuses. So yeah, you're right momentum isn't integral if the campaign strategy pays off.
 

umop 3pisdn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,639
i guess what gets my goat about some of y'all and the concept of bernie needing momentum to win the primary is that it flies in the face of his general election pitch about how he's a candidate that will inspire people to vote and you can't blame people for not voting for a candidate that doesn't inspire them and all that crap, but the momentum stuff just lays the groundwork that bernie isn't inspiring enough to even win the primaries.
What? Is Bernie’s camp somehow the only one that doesn’t need some kind of positive feedback loop to know how well they’re actually doing? Or alternatively and more to your presumed point, that his positions go against conventional political wisdom of the past few generations so there’s arguably a cohort that has to see him clearly and explicitly succeed before they’ll be comfortable voting for him, even if he’s the candidate they really want? People will vote against what they want if they’re convinced better things aren’t possible, the contrary position to that being what broad popular momentum is meant illustrate lol...
 
Last edited:

Tfritz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,408
Ah, you're right-- poor reading on my part, sorry. I stand by what I said, it just doesn't happen to be remotely relevant to what you posted. :p
it's fine, i wasn't super clear because i was continuing a thought from an earlier post but this one has an unfortunate position of being the top of the page.
 

Morrigan

Arrogant Smirk
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
14,830
Well. This whole thing was funnier than a Veep episode.

And Veep was very, very funny.
 

Steel

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
12,977
Iowhere
Phil Jamesson keeps finding little mistakes it seems.

I know one was already posted but didn’t know there were more.
Ya know, this feels like when 6 different people are working on separate spreadsheets and then some overworked intern is copy and pasting all their differently formatted data into a spreadsheet.

Has the Needle accounted for this? Cause it shows that Pete might win the final alignment too.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,456
That is oversimplification of what Democracy is. Straight from wiki Democracy literally means "rule by people." It is a form of government in which the people have the authority to choose their governing legislation. Caucuses are essentially disenfranchising, and therefore limit the authority of 'the people' to choose their governing legislation.
If we're going to get in to a definition battle, I'm going to request you google "disenfranchise."
 

danm999

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,928
Sydney
I feel bad for the voters of Iowa who went out on a work night, in the winter, participated in what I think we can all agree is a confusing and often anxiety inducing process, just for the State Party and the geniuses behind this app to shit the bed so badly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.