Buttigieg gets the most delegates and Sanders comes in second, Iowa ...

[Harris Walz 2024 1,451]

Buttigieg gets the most delegates and Sanders comes in second, Iowa Democratic Party says

By Jennifer Agiesta, Dan Merica and Paul LeBlanc, CNN

"According to the Iowa Democratic Party, he will claim 14 delegates. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders will receive 12, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren will get eight, former Vice President Joe Biden will receive six, and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar will get one."

Full story here:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/09/politics/iowa-democratic-party-precincts-review/index.html

 

Wow, Mayor Pete just went up by two delegates ! Discuss....

 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

The IDP already announced they will not be fixing mathematical and reporting errors, so the delegate allocation system is undeniably incorrect

I have no values - democracy be damned, the truth is no longer relevant in 2020.

[Harris Walz 2024 1,451]

1 minute ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

The IDP already announced they will not be fixing mathematical and reporting errors, so the delegate allocation system is undeniably incorrect

I have no values - democracy be damned, the truth is no longer relevant in 2020.

I'm just showing breaking news at CNN.com, it's the headline right now.

[Buddy 5,686]

My prediction was right omg 

While Bernie won popular vote (in first and final alignment) and received more SDEs after miscalculation corrections, statewide delegates were determined by SDEs spread out across the 4 congressional districts I believe. Bernie's were more concentrated than Pete's.

EDIT: Actually, I may be wrong. Can someone help me figure out exactly how the delegates were distributed? I know the 4 congressional districts play a factor, but how much?

This is a win for both.

Anyways... 41 delegates down, 3,938 to go!

[FATCAT 60,897]

Rigged from the moment they delayed the votes. Sad that the Iowa DNC has shafted confidence in the vote. Thankfully were getting to actual primaries soon, which are most like actual elections, which Bernie won by a lot of first alignment votes.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

4 minutes ago, Albuquerque Duke said:

I'm just showing breaking news at CNN.com, it's the headline right now.

I didn't quote you, I was just saying that its unfortunate that there is no institutional pushback against an ADMITTEDLY broken system.

It is a shame that people's votes were essentially discounted in this process. There's a reason people dont have faith in our institutions, and the DNC and the IDP said "so what" to them. This is how we lose.

[Chromatica 7,042]

Well, he did exactly what they’ve spent the last year trying to do. Now to see if investing all of your resources into the first few states is a winning strategy. Looks like it could be.

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

3 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

Rigged from the moment they delayed the votes. Sad that the Iowa DNC has shafted confidence in the vote. Thankfully were getting to actual primaries soon, which are most like actual elections, which Bernie won by a lot of first alignment votes.

Oop I hope you’re ready to be labeled a conspiracy theorist by the enlightened centrists of GGD 

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

Third world countries with rampant election fraud can run an election better than the grossly incompetent IDP. 

2 more delegates for a 0.1% difference. 

The scariest thing is Democrats who claim to be all about democracy will cheer this on. 

[pachinko 10,757]

Wow gays keep on winning! What a time to be alive. 

[REALITY 80,184]

Well, Pete's still not winning this thing. If anything, this is better news for Bernie. Biden is slipping, and I think people are finally starting to acknowledge that. He no longer is the "clear frontrunner" that many people make him out to be. 

Bernie, on the other hand, did very well in Iowa, and he looks like he's going to do very well in NH.

As long as Pete still has a problem with voters of color (which he very much does), he's not going to be able to win the nomination.  

[Economy 52,932]

24 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

The IDP already announced they will not be fixing mathematical and reporting errors, so the delegate allocation system is undeniably incorrect

I have no values - democracy be damned, the truth is no longer relevant in 2020.

I know it's unorthodox but in a situation like this they really should have just done the whole thing again.

 

Accuracy is crutial in democracy and in a case like this where the race was so tight between 2 candidates a few votes difference by area can make a difference 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

Just now, Economy said:

I know it's unorthodox but in a situation like this they really should have just done the whole thing again.

 

Accuracy is crutial in democracy and in a case like this where the race was so tight between 2 candidates a few votes difference by area can make a difference 

They should have called for a recanvass last week. Or pushed it to be redone in June during Iowa's regular primary.

The thing is, this decision is clearly political, and we'd be naive to assume it isn't.

If they were interested in transparency, they would hold a press conference and announce that the SDE counts cannot be trusted because there are clear, serious errors. But, they aren't.

The biggest kii of all of this is that THIS kind of political action has had more impact on the results of an election than anything Russia did in 2016

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

8 minutes ago, M Monstre said:

As long as Pete still has a problem with voters of color (which he very much does), he's not going to be able to win the nomination.

Thank goodness. We have enough frauds in Washington that are funded by billionaires, heath insurance executives and lobbyists. We don’t need another one.

[boneknuckleskin 776]

All the handsome, intelligent, progressive, Bernie-loving stans in this thread seeing right through phoney bologna Pete, we love to see it