Page 1 of 88
1
2
3
11
51
... LastLast
  1. #1
    Over 9000! Milchshake's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Shitposter Burn Out
    Posts
    9,981

    Iowa Caucus 2020 - MegaThread

    It's caucus time! Remember, only the final counting is official.

    Since there's some people that might act in bad faith, by declaring the winner after the first counting. Or claiming that the caucus was "rigged" without even knowing the rules.


    Here's the rules.
    The Iowa caucuses operate very differently from the primary election used by most other states (see U.S. presidential primary). The caucuses are generally defined as "gatherings of neighbors". Rather than going to polls and casting ballots, Iowans gather at a set location in each of Iowa's 1,681 precincts. Typically, these meetings occur in schools, churches, public libraries, or even individuals' houses. Caucuses are held every two years, during both the presidential and midterm election seasons, but those that receive national attention are the presidential preference caucuses, held every four years. The rules of the caucus process to determine delegates to national conventions are determined by the party, and differ substantially between the Democratic and Republican Parties.

    In addition to the voting and the presidential preference choices, caucus-goers begin the process of writing their parties' platforms by introducing resolutions.

    Each precinct divides its delegate seats among the candidates in proportion to caucus goers' votes. Participants indicate their support for a particular candidate by standing in a designated area of the caucus site (forming a preference group). An area may also be designated for undecided participants. Then, for roughly 30 minutes, participants try to convince their neighbors to support their candidates. Each preference group might informally deputize a few members to recruit supporters from the other groups and, in particular, from among those undecided. Undecided participants might visit each preference group to ask its members about their candidate.

    After 30 minutes, the electioneering is temporarily halted, and the supporters for each candidate are counted.
    • At this point, the caucus officials determine which candidates are viable. Depending on the number of county delegates to be elected, the viability threshold is 15% of attendees. For a candidate to receive any delegates from a particular precinct, he or she must have the support of at least the percentage of participants required by the viability threshold.
    • Once viability is determined, participants have roughly another 30 minutes to realign: the supporters of inviable candidates may find a viable candidate to support, join together with supporters of another inviable candidate to secure a delegate for one of the two, or abstain.
    • This realignment is a crucial distinction of caucuses in that (unlike in a primary) a voter's second choice can help a candidate.


    When the voting is closed, a final head count is conducted, and each precinct apportions delegates to the county convention. These numbers are reported to the state party, which counts the total number of delegates for each candidate and reports the results to the media. Most of the participants go home, leaving a few to finish the business of the caucus: each preference group elects its delegates, and then the groups reconvene to elect local party officers and discuss the platform. The delegates chosen by the precinct then go to a later caucus, the county convention, to choose delegates to the district convention and state convention. Most of the delegates to the Democratic National Convention are selected at the district convention, with the remaining ones selected at the state convention. Delegates to each level of convention are initially bound to support their chosen candidate but can later switch in a process very similar to what occurs at the precinct level; however, as major shifts in delegate support are rare, the media declares the candidate with the most delegates on the precinct caucus night the winner, and relatively little attention is paid to the later caucuses.


    Iowa has 56 delegates at stake. Out of the DNC total of 4,366.


    A history of past caucuses.
    1980 (January 21): Jimmy Carter (59%) and Ted Kennedy (31%)
    1984 (February 20): Walter Mondale (49%), Gary Hart (17%), George McGovern (10%), Alan Cranston (7%), John Glenn (4%), Reubin Askew (3%), and Jesse Jackson (2%)
    1988 (February 8): Dick Gephardt (31%), Paul Simon (27%), Michael Dukakis (22%), and Bruce Babbitt (6%)
    1992 (February 10): Tom Harkin (76%), "Uncommitted" (12%), Paul Tsongas (4%), Bill Clinton (3%), Bob Kerrey (2%), and Jerry Brown (2%)
    1996 (February 12): Bill Clinton (98%), "Uncommitted" (1%), and Ralph Nader (1%)
    2000 (January 24): Al Gore (63%), and Bill Bradley (37%)
    2004 (January 19): John Kerry (38%), John Edwards (32%), Howard Dean (18%), Dick Gephardt (11%), and Dennis Kucinich (1%)
    2008 (January 3): Barack Obama (38%), John Edwards (30%), Hillary Clinton (29%), Bill Richardson (2%), and Joe Biden (1%)
    2012 (January 3): Barack Obama (98%), and "Uncommitted" (2%)
    2016 (February 1): Hillary Clinton (49.8%), Bernie Sanders (49.6%), and Martin O'Malley (0.5%)
    Government Affiliated Snark

  2. #2
    Eesh, I remember Harkin. Pretty stark reminder that the results of the caucus aren't really as indicative as people think.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker76 View Post
    It's caucus time! Remember, only the final counting is official.

    Since there's some people that might act in bad faith, by declaring the winner after the first counting. Or claiming that the caucus was "rigged" without even knowing the rules.
    The irony. dude just post links to your digs https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...results-110318

  4. #4
    Man, John Edwards. I really liked him policy wise, if only he wasn't such a piece of human garbage in his personal life.

  5. #5
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    I’d like to take this opportunity to say caucuses are dumb and way too much emphasis is placed on a state that is whiter than a box of Nilla Wafers simply because it happens early in the year.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    I’d like to take this opportunity to say caucuses are dumb and way too much emphasis is placed on a state that is whiter than a box of Nilla Wafers simply because it happens early in the year.
    The two states together basically winnow the field of people with no chance of being elected, and leave people picking between candidates with a chance instead of wasting their votes in latter states. You want this type of thing done in states with relatively low populations so more people vote in more populous states for candidates with a chance. Until about the last 10 years, while Iowa wasn't diverse racially, they were a moderate state, routinely electing both dems and gop. They were essentially a bell weather on if a candidate could win slightly more left leaning rural areas (that is, still leaning right, but not as heavily as most rural areas). NH was the slightly right leaning area of the dem stranglehold on the NE. They're never meant to be a true cross section of america, no matter how people like to frame otherwise.

    If it wasn't NH/Iowa, it'd be other low pop states with basically the same makeups. Minnesota instead of Iowa say, though the results would be somewhat skewed because of the twin cities, so maybe wisconsin (though this could also be skewed because of chi-exurbs). You're not going to get the types of states the national parties want in california or alabama. If you can find two other states that match the conditions of "low pop" and "slightly right leaning dem area" or "slightly left leaning GOP area" champion those instead.

    Your race-baiting basically ignores the point of those two states having earlier voting.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  7. #7
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    They're never meant to be a true cross section of america, no matter how people like to frame otherwise.
    That's nice. Doesn't change the fact caucuses are dumb compared to straight primaries and that the Iowa caucus is given undue importance - the latter of which you don't seem to be disputing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    That's nice. Doesn't change the fact caucuses are dumb compared to straight primaries and that the Iowa caucus is given undue importance - the latter of which you don't seem to be disputing.
    Caucuses are much closer to ranked choice than the current system that primaries use of FPTP. Something I believe is good. That being said, I'd much rather ranked choice primaries. And I am disputing your second claim. That's what the whole comment was about. It's not undue importance. The national parties want to favor candidates that will poll well with "independents." The actual independents. The ones who might actually vote for either side. They do that by starting the polling in states with low pop and have populations that tend to mirror independents. Again, find two states that do that job as well as IA/NH. Neither MN or WI actually replace IA in that respect.

    It's also nice that, as yet, you've have zero backing of your conclusions but racial commentary. Maybe try to actually have a point next time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  9. #9
    The Insane Dug's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    15,636
    And the Sanders smearing continues

  10. #10
    Old God -aiko-'s Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The House of All Worlds
    Posts
    10,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Dug View Post
    And the Sanders smearing continues
    If they strike him down, he shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

    It would be funny if it wasn't so fucking blatant. I was never full on Bernie mode but the way he's being treated has turned me over.

  11. #11
    That's ok, cause he's becoming stronger with every hit. That guy on MSNBC tho, he's never getting invited again after slamming DNC's shit tactics lmao

  12. #12
    Are the Dems really going to railroad Bernie again? For whom? Bloomberg?

    This is going to be dumber than 2016

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Are the Dems really going to railroad Bernie again? For whom? Bloomberg?

    This is going to be dumber than 2016
    They already trashed the rules to let Bloomberg in, so everything goes at this point. Not that he had a real chance, but they need more 'contestants' to offset the pesky progressives that dared to run.
    I do appreciate Bloomberg for making Trump upset tho.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Are the Dems really going to railroad Bernie again? For whom? Bloomberg?

    This is going to be dumber than 2016
    Bloomberg apparently. Since DNC would rather nominate a Republican than a leftie.

  15. #15


    They're spending a lot on negative ads. Hilarious. There are also some against Warren.
    Last edited by Sorshen; 2020-02-04 at 12:22 AM.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Hextor View Post
    They're spending a lot on negative ads. Hilarious. There are also some against Warren.
    Warren's policies aren't that drastically different from Sanders'. If she was higher in the polls there would be a lot more attacks aimed at her.

  17. #17
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrt View Post
    Warren's policies aren't that drastically different from Sanders'. If she was higher in the polls there would be a lot more attacks aimed at her.
    Why would they spend money doing that when Bernie Bros spend their entire time attacking her for free?
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  18. #18
    hmf...Warren is my first choice...whether or not she's nominated for pres, or if she accepts a VP position.
    At this point, it's more or less Biden or Sanders. (I lean more towards Sanders personally)

    Bloomberg is a punchline to a shitty joke.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrt View Post
    Warren's policies aren't that drastically different from Sanders'. If she was higher in the polls there would be a lot more attacks aimed at her.
    Warren is not the same as Sanders at all. And if she was, why hasn't she dropped out and supported him? She's not getting the nomination.

  20. #20
    Immortal Fahrenheit's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    7,800
    Prediction, Sanders wins the majority of delegates, but not by much over Biden. The real question is what are the “also rans” going to do after today and NH?
    Rudimentary creatures of blood and flesh. You touch my mind, fumbling in ignorance, incapable of understanding.
    You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it.

    Sovereign
    Mass Effect

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •