• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

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.
Jun 20, 2019
2,638
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020...sques-serve-caucus-sites-200203194831339.html

"Four years ago, Mohamed Ali, a volunteer with the Bernie Sanders campaign, said it was hard getting those in his community to take part in caucuses in the US state of Iowa.

"They just didn't have the confidence" or they felt uncomfortable, Ali, who is a Palestinian-American real estate agent in the Des Moines area, told Al Jazeera by phone. Others, he said, didn't want to be involved in politics for fear of being targeted or discriminated against.

But this year participation of the Arab-Muslim community "has been huge ... it's been really amazing", he said."

I think this year's election is going to have the largest voter turnout in American history.
This really is the best story coming out of Iowa.
 
Oct 25, 2017
10,720
What would it take for caucuses to stop being a thing altogether? Would it require separate rulings in each State that holds them?

I think you are misunderstanding something about the primaries. They are a solely party process. It is up to the individual state parties to decide. Not any 'rulings' to be made (your wording sounds like you expect something judicial)
 

Deleted member 2533

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,325
I hate to be "old man yells at cloud" right now, but having some kind of vote in the evening, and reading the result the next morning in a newspaper wasn't the worst thing in the world.
 

cartographer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,004
Iowa not being a Caucus would make it lose the 'first in the nation' status which has a huge financial impact, so they would be against it.

Other states should definitely switch though. I'm not aware of any reasons holding them back.
Yeah, the barrier here is self-importance. Every individual state party should switch. That they don't is them just not properly valuing democracy as an inclusive, accessible process.

Edit: In fairness, we do have some state parties making the correct decision and abandoning the derelict process for a primary, so they seem to get it. The ones that will continue to choose it are the issue.
 

XMonkey

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,827
I don't even know what to think right now.

But I think they should do it again.

And this time write it on a piece of paper, get it triple checked and not on an app.
It's all on paper already and presumably it's taking so long now because they are meticulously checking it.

The app was to help report the data (that was on paper) from precincts, probably because there's a lot more of it to report now due to a change in the procedures from 2016.
 
Oct 27, 2017
17,973
What would it take for caucuses to stop being a thing altogether? Would it require separate rulings in each State that holds them?

Yes, per state and per party. Each political party, and state, has their own delegate allocation and selection rules. This attempts to account for population densities and desired influence making, while generally agreeing that it would be bad to have election vote-gathering conducted at the federal level.

Sometimes there is exhibited "unity", like setting dates for certain states to hold their voting on the same day ("Super Tuesday", New York/Connecticut, etc.) So it is possible that states and parties can get so fed up with what happened tonight that they could exhibit similar unity and agree for each caucus state to cease conducting them. That's what it would take.
 

Deleted member 14459

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,874
A win for Biden, he gets to obfuscate his really poor numbers and give possibility to rearrange the chairs in Nevada and NH, probably before any official results are declared final in Iowa...
 

Jimrpg

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,280
It's all on paper already and presumably it's taking so long now because they are meticulously checking it.

The app was to help report the data (that was on paper) from precincts, probably because there's a lot more of it to report now due to a change in the procedures from 2016.

Something is really dodgy. How long does it take to count it again? Maybe 3 or 4 hours. Something is up. Sanders statement has only counted 40% of his precincts? But Buttigieg has counted 77%? Is Sanders questioning a portion of the votes?
 
Jun 20, 2019
2,638
The Dems could say- you hold a caucus, we won't count your delegates. This is why most states don't vote before Super Tuesday.
Yep. Also happened before when someone tried to leapfrog NH. Iowa was left alone because someone has always stood to benefit by protecting their caucuses. This time I don't know that they'll still be protected.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,573
Next few days will be fun. For all you bringing conspiracy theory shit to thread, please leave, go praise Q and pass the Bakker Buckets amongst yourselves.
 

Version 3.0

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,161
I hate to be "old man yells at cloud" right now, but having some kind of vote in the evening, and reading the result the next morning in a newspaper wasn't the worst thing in the world.

Seriously. Our demand for instant gratification is childish. There would be nothing wrong with simply announcing that results will take approximately X hours to tally, and will be announced when final. Meaning the next day.
 
Oct 25, 2017
10,720
you said they wouldn't strip delegates from a state for not following their rules and i provided a fairly recent example of them doing exactly that.

no... I said they wouldn't punish a state for wanting to continue the same process they've been using for delegate allocation for 50 years. That instance has nothing to do with what I said. I am well aware the party has stripped delgates for date jumping in the past.
 

D.Lo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,348
Sydney
EP6Kk8HWkAE9TCa
I can't believe this is literally true.
 

fauxtrot

Member
Oct 25, 2017
454
Something is really dodgy. How long does it take to count it again? Maybe 3 or 4 hours. Something is up. Sanders statement has only counted 40% of his precincts? But Buttigieg has counted 77%? Is Sanders questioning a portion of the votes?

I wouldn't be surprised that a little rat like Pete would ratfuck the other candidates by giving a speech declaring victory then releasing a vague statement with no hard numbers at all but a large percentage (77%) to make it sound more legitimate than the other data out there, like what Bernie's camp released (40% I think?).

He could have won the most delegates while placing 2nd overall on the final ballots because of the fucked up way the delegates are allotted, but I even doubt that. We'll see tomorrow (hopefully).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.