I agree with you mostly, but to be fair, the formula isn't that complex. IIRC it's just 15% of the total people in your room is the "viable number." Then the more multiples of that number you get, the more delegates you get.
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
I agree with you mostly, but to be fair, the formula isn't that complex. IIRC it's just 15% of the total people in your room is the "viable number." Then the more multiples of that number you get, the more delegates you get.
Not really. See for yourself, they froze the forecast: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/iowa/
Yep, this is a good take.
Even if Pete holds his Iowa win it won't be by much. He is getting terrible black voter turnout, he is going to have huge problems winning states from here on. Bernie has the best chance of going all the way judging from these results, even if he comes in a very close second for Iowa.
Yeah the delegate selection rules mention they encourage state parties to do government run primaries;
Practically, the way they achieve this is because caucuses are held to save $$$ (because they're cheaper than a primary).
Measures that make them cost more, like the ones passed in the 2018, (ie: absentee votes, holding satellite caucuses, forcing reporting on vote totals), makes them less attractive to state parties. You might as well hold a primary if caucuses get more expensive.
The impact of this has been pretty pronounced; in 2016 Iowa, Nevada, Colorado, Minnesota, American Samoa, Kansas, Nebraska, Maine, Idaho, Utah, Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Wyoming, Puerto Rico, North Dakota.
In 2020; Iowa, Nevada, American Samoa, North Dakota, Wyoming. Pretty steep drop off.
So just to get caught up and correct me I I'm wrong but:
1. A little over 60 percent of precincts are reporting
2. Bernie is winning the popular vote BUT Mayor Pete is ahead in the delegate count?
So why is everybody acting as if Mayor Pete already won? Is it one of those statistical things where it's impossible for Bernie to pull ahead?
1. A little over 60 percent of precincts are reporting
2. Bernie is winning the popular vote BUT Mayor Pete is ahead in the delegate count?
So why is everybody acting as if Mayor Pete already won? Is it one of those statistical things where it's impossible for Bernie to pull ahead?
Going in to the caucus, they were pretty clear at every opportunity that it was close enough that given the polls any of the top 4 were easily imaginable as winning. A 3 or 4 point lead is not remotely "safe" in a primary, especially not one where the winner is more complicated than pure votes.
Nah, people just like races. This is only for some momentum and 1% of delegates overall, so, not that huge in the grand scheme.
Let's just drag this out and ensure a mayonnaise moderate gets the nom!
What do you find wrong in those formulas? They had 9 delegates to allocate, divided to get the number of delegates each candidate would get (to 3 decimal places,) and applied normal rounding rules.
The districts that have reported in represent a proportionate view of Iowa so there's not really any reason to think he'll pull ahead. It's possible though!
Vaguely. Their polling aggregate had Biden doing a bit better and everyone else doing a bit worse. Buttigieg being the outlier, he definitely overperformed here. Remembering that it's not a prediction, it's just data.
(SDE = state delegate equivalent)
ITT there are a lot of people that don't pay attention and have little political understanding.
I saw Carville too. I wish people could stay calm. If there was a race with a only a favorite, an underdog, and a never-gonna-happen like we've had before, then perhaps a 2020 apparent winner would have emerged from Iowa.
But there is a slate of appealing candidates, a couple of hangers-on, and a potential "spoiler". All of them are "Trump capable", at least. And at least right now, the only campaign for which this vote is not looking good for, compared with expectations, is Biden. The media is salivating at declaring an apparent winner for all of 2020 as soon as possible - that's their game, not yours - just keep up with what your favorite campaigns are saying and doing. Iowa is only 41 out of 1900+ total delegates.
Now, three campaigns made mistakes this time. Biden, by acting like Trump and firing off lawyer letters and suggesting injunctions. Also, by not really leaning into Iowa. Buttigieg, by leaning in to victory talk - not last night, but today. Sanders, by having campaign staff on tv complaining about mythical shady backroom deals and "oligarchs" in the race without giving voters in flux reasons to ditch those folks and go for Sanders. Perhaps appealing to the faithful - but even with the Iowa positioning right now, they need to increase their outreach and its effectiveness. And also being in Iowa midday today complaining while candidates already went to NH.
Buttigieg and Sanders should not have released their numbers. I get it, they want to tell donors and voters to keep going/giving, but don't put your thumb on the scale, and don't run when you are not being chased. They lost a bit of luster. And it's a bit Men Behaving Badly.
As for Shadow, they'll change their name and start again. There's no appgate.
Please take a moment to breathe when you have time.
But there is a slate of appealing candidates, a couple of hangers-on, and a potential "spoiler". All of them are "Trump capable", at least. And at least right now, the only campaign for which this vote is not looking good for, compared with expectations, is Biden. The media is salivating at declaring an apparent winner for all of 2020 as soon as possible - that's their game, not yours - just keep up with what your favorite campaigns are saying and doing. Iowa is only 41 out of 1900+ total delegates.
Now, three campaigns made mistakes this time. Biden, by acting like Trump and firing off lawyer letters and suggesting injunctions. Also, by not really leaning into Iowa. Buttigieg, by leaning in to victory talk - not last night, but today. Sanders, by having campaign staff on tv complaining about mythical shady backroom deals and "oligarchs" in the race without giving voters in flux reasons to ditch those folks and go for Sanders. Perhaps appealing to the faithful - but even with the Iowa positioning right now, they need to increase their outreach and its effectiveness. And also being in Iowa midday today complaining while candidates already went to NH.
Buttigieg and Sanders should not have released their numbers. I get it, they want to tell donors and voters to keep going/giving, but don't put your thumb on the scale, and don't run when you are not being chased. They lost a bit of luster. And it's a bit Men Behaving Badly.
As for Shadow, they'll change their name and start again. There's no appgate.
Please take a moment to breathe when you have time.
Yes, it is completely useless to note that polling is close enough for anyone to one. Totally useless.
Should she really drop out because 6% fewer people in Iowa caucused for her than Sanders? Seems silly. Long way to go still.
This is a very good outcome for Bernie—he won the popular vote and got a strong youth turnout. Images of profoundly stacked Bernie precincts are great media. Pete is basically the ideal contender as of right now. He might have a solid showing in NH, but his numbers in quite a few battleground states are awful, and he is primed to fold. Bernie supporters should be celebrating off of this.
a lot of people seem to have zero faith in bernie sanders or his platform and just want to revert back to the sour grapes mode they've been in since mid-2016 because bernie might end up slightly behind pete in this, the first contest of like a 52-contest primary, one that's only worth a total of 41 delegates in a primary where you need ~2000 to win.
he's from south bend.
Extremely disappointing to see how easily chapo types immediately jump to conspiracy theories. It's like an involuntary reaction to any bad news.
If Pete lands at #1 and Bernie at #2, AppGate will end up being the worst thing that could have happened to the former and the best thing for the latter.
Do you know how many Pete Buttigeg ads I've seen or heard here in Iowa over the past few months? A ton.
Like, it really shouldn't be THAT surprising.
Since June, according to RCP records for Iowa Buttigeg led in 5 polls, Warren in 5 polls, Sanders in 7 polls, and Biden in like half total. Yes, more recent polls carry more weight, but things reverting to the previous mean scenario of like 4 people bouncing back and forth should have always been on peoples minds.
I don't think it is too surprising given the way he ran Iowa and the way Iowa handles the primary. He went all in because he knew he was done if he didn't, mix in the fact that Joe did horrible and its natural for his supporters to gravitate towards Pete. He has no chance with the overwhelming majority of the democrat base, Iowa isn't representative of the party at all. Call me when he actually wins a primary that is representative of the majority of the party.
I'd like to see the alternate reality where Sanders pulled ahead even by like 0.5 in the early results. I'm guessing we'd be seeing a lot less of these sober, nuanced takes about what a disaster the caucus system is
(For the record, the caucus system sucks imo)
(For the record, the caucus system sucks imo)
- Status