U.S. Democratic Primary

[J.C.MacSwell]

On 1/16/2020 at 12:23 AM, J.C.MacSwell said:

I guess time will tell.

It seems, so far at least, that Warren's tactics against Sanders may not have been such a smart move after all:

 https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/478783-krystal-ball-the-polls-are-in-warrens-ploy-backfires-spectacularly

Yet another overzealous "stab" at identity politics bites the dust?

 

Another thought; hopefully the impeachment trial lasts long enough to give Yang some time to accelerate his progress, while Senators Sanders et al are tied up watching the "excitement" of the Washington spectacle.

Hopefully they are fully focused on the trial, to fully absorb all the arguments, and so be ready to vote conscientiously when the time comes.

Edited January 25, 2020 by J.C.MacSwell

[J.C.MacSwell]

Looks like Yang is back on stage for the February 7 debate:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/479966-yang-qualifies-for-new-hampshire-debate-stage

That adds one to the stage compared to that on January 14. I don't know if any more will qualify. Maybe Tulsi?

Looking forward to Episode 8: "The Return of the Yang"

[Raider5678]

4 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Looks like Yang is back on stage for the February 7 debate:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/479966-yang-qualifies-for-new-hampshire-debate-stage

That adds one to the stage compared to that on January 14. I don't know if any more will qualify. Maybe Tulsi?

Looking forward to Episode 8: "The Return of the Yang"

The link incorrectly reports that the second qualifying poll was Yang getting 5% in a new Hampshire poll. The qualifying polls were by ABC News/Washington Post and Fox, putting Yang at 6% and 5% respectively, nationally.

I've been watching closely and seriously hoping it would succeed.

 

Funny thing is, the Washington Post released a scathing article against Andrew Yang calling him "naive" due to him not wanting to engage in identity politics as one of the last non Caucasian candidates. And now their poll qualified him.

[iNow]

One week from tonight at this time I will have just finished caucusing. My first ever in Iowa. How a candidate does here dictates how likely they are to do well in the next set of primaries. No pressure. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

47 minutes ago, iNow said:

One week from tonight at this time I will have just finished caucusing. My first ever in Iowa. How a candidate does here dictates how likely they are to do well in the next set of primaries. No pressure. 

Vote Yang INow...you know you want to...

Why collude with the Ukrainians...collude with a Canadian...

[iNow]

Lol. I like Yang, just not for Prez. Should he magically win the primary, though; he’ll have my vote. Just not before. 

[StringJunky]

14 hours ago, iNow said:

Lol. I like Yang, just not for Prez. Should he magically win the primary, though; he’ll have my vote. Just not before. 

Is "the primary" who runs for president?

[CharonY]

18 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Is "the primary" who runs for president?

Yes in the primaries the parties essentially vote for their candidate to run for the presidency.

[iNow]

21 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Is "the primary" who runs for president?

Yeah, basically.

Primaries are where a party chooses who will be the flag bearer for them during the general election against the opposing party. So, 20 Democrats threw their hats in the ring trying to get the nomination for presidential candidate. This filtering and selection process occurs in the primaries.

Votes occur throughout the country on different date and winners of those elections collect state delegates (larger states tend to have more delegates). It then goes to the nominating convention where the person with the most delegates receives the party nomination. If nobody gets enough delegates to win, it becomes what’s known as a contested convention where it basically turns into a food fight (and hopefully won’t happen this year, but absolutely could). 

In terms of the general election later, it’s really better when a nominee is chosen sooner so the entire party can get behind them and support them. A longer drawn out primary means the same party is basically infighting and eating their young and decreasing their strength in the upcoming contest against Trump... the only one that really matters in the end. 

X-posted with Charon

Edited January 28, 2020 by iNow

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

Yes in the primaries the parties essentially vote for their candidate to run for the presidency.

 

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Yeah, basically.

Primaries are where a party chooses who will be the flag bearer for them during the general election against the opposing party. So, 20 Democrats threw their hats in the ring trying to get the nomination for presidential candidate. This filtering and selection process occurs in the primaries.

Votes occur throughout the country on different date and winners of those elections collect state delegates (larger states tend to have more delegates). It then goes to the nominating convention where the person with the most delegates receives the party nomination. If nobody gets enough delegates to win, it becomes what’s known as a contested convention where it basically turns into a food fight (and hopefully won’t happen this year, but absolutely could). 

In terms of the general election later, it’s really better when a nominee is chosen sooner so the entire party can get behind them and support them. A longer drawn out primary means the same party is basically infighting and eating their young and decreasing their strength in the upcoming contest against Trump... the only one that really matters in the end. 

X-posted with Charon

Thank you both.

[iNow]

John Delaney has dropped out (he's been in the race the longest... running since early 2017... but is strangely one that very few people had even heard of).

[J.C.MacSwell]

New rules for the Feb 19 debate. No longer do donor numbers matter. They might have considered letting Bloomberg count himself as many times as he wanted...but that would have been too obvious.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-shifts-debate-requirements-opening-door-for-bloomberg-110017

 

. 

Edited February 1, 2020 by J.C.MacSwell

[iNow]

I spoke with Senator Warren today. Asked about getting things done in an age of recalcitrance and how even things supported by vast majorities of US citizens still die in congress more often than not. 

I’ll be caucusing for her tomorrow night as we Iowans kick off the voting season for 2020. My concern is it won’t be enough. The polls seem to be all about Bernie vs Biden these last few days. My pick may not come out ahead (tho New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Super Tuesday states all clearly matter, too, so can’t write anyone off just bc of tomorrow). She’s flying back to Washington tonight for impeachment activities Monday.

This is my first election cycle in Iowa. I got to meet a few US Senators and a pretty popular mayor. Unfortunately, the math didn’t work out for me to get jumped into the Gang. Regardless... This is way better than voting in Texas... and I’ll only need to wait another 1,460 days to do it again. 

Anyway, I even got a picture with her dog Bailey. He’s a good boi... yes he is. 🐶 

Edited February 3, 2020 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

14 hours ago, iNow said:

I spoke with Senator Warren today. Asked about getting things done in an age of recalcitrance and how even things supported by vast majorities of US citizens still die in congress more often than not. 

I’ll be caucusing for her tomorrow night as we Iowans kick off the voting season for 2020. My concern is it won’t be enough. The polls seem to be all about Bernie vs Biden these last few days. My pick may not come out ahead (tho New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Super Tuesday states all clearly matter, too, so can’t write anyone off just bc of tomorrow). She’s flying back to Washington tonight for impeachment activities Monday.

This is my first election cycle in Iowa. I got to meet a few US Senators and a pretty popular mayor. Unfortunately, the math didn’t work out for me to get jumped into the Gang. Regardless... This is way better than voting in Texas... and I’ll only need to wait another 1,460 days to do it again. 

Anyway, I even got a picture with her dog Bailey. He’s a good boi... yes he is. 🐶 

Good luck tonight.

Be interesting to see if Yang outperforms his poll numbers to any degree.

[iNow]

Thanks, mate. Now, if only I could convince my wife that it's okay to have the kids out past bedtime for one night and join me... Oh well... one battle at a time, I suppose

[iNow]

My precinct isn’t representative of what’s happening around Iowa right now, but it was a high turnout of 125 people with 2 delegates to offer. That means no matter who you’re for, only 2 candidates can get a delegate (or 1 if their numbers are high enough).

Only 1 person of those 125 showed up for Yang, and after Round 1 it was only Biden, Buttigieg, and Klobuchar who were viable. It moved to Round 2 and Klobuchar crushed it, but Buttigieg and Biden tied. It went to coin flip, and Biden won it. 1 delegate to Klobuchar and 1 delegate to Biden... in my precinct. 

Across the state, we’re still waiting for numbers to get reported, but it sounds like Biden is NOT doing well and that Bernie and Pete are the candidates to beat. Will know more in the morning. 

Edited February 4, 2020 by iNow

[MigL]

I hope you weren't one of the factors in the 'vote reporting mess' that still hasn't given verified results.
Apparently it won't be till later today, before all votes are collected.

You Americans always have trouble with any kind of election.
If it's not hanging chads, it's reporting inconsistencies.

[iNow]

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

I hope you weren't one of the factors in the 'vote reporting mess' that still hasn't given verified results.

Lol. The app that precinct captains used to report the numbers was not aggregating data correctly... so... they went to the backup option of calling in the results by phone. However, there almost 1,700 precincts and there were only about 10 people answering the phones (much lower than in past years since that was just supposed to be a backup plan and the app would've gotten this done within minutes if working correctly). Most people calling in their numbers were on hold for hours, and many just hung up to go to sleep and try again in the morning.

I'm still blown away there was a coin flip at mine and that a whole bunch of Pete supporters had to go home with little more than an empty feeling in their stomachs since Biden won the flip. 

Early indicators are that it's Bernie, Pete, Warren, then Biden... but that's total speculation based on numbers shared directly by campaigns. Hopefully we'll know more in a few hours.

 

8 minutes ago, MigL said:

You Americans always have trouble with any kind of election.
If it's not hanging chads, it's reporting inconsistencies.

Yeah, and the results/outcomes often suck pretty badly, too! 

[J.C.MacSwell]

How did they get to the second voting, without results from the first?

3 hours ago, iNow said:

Lol. The app that precinct captains used to report the numbers was not aggregating data correctly... so... they went to the backup option of calling in the results by phone. However, there almost 1,700 precincts and there were only about 10 people answering the phones (much lower than in past years since that was just supposed to be a backup plan and the app would've gotten this done within minutes if working correctly). Most people calling in their numbers were on hold for hours, and many just hung up to go to sleep and try again in the morning.

I'm still blown away there was a coin flip at mine and that a whole bunch of Pete supporters had to go home with little more than an empty feeling in their stomachs since Biden won the flip. 

Early indicators are that it's Bernie, Pete, Warren, then Biden... but that's total speculation based on numbers shared directly by campaigns. Hopefully we'll know more in a few hours.

 

Yeah, and the results/outcomes often suck pretty badly, too! 

Be pretty unfortunate for Pete if, say that delegate ends up voting against Pete after Biden has long dropped out...and it ends up being the difference...

 

Of course the Republicans will have a field day with all of this...as if it couldn't have happened to them.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

How did they get to the second voting, without results from the first?

That part is local to each precinct. Everyone walks in (to a gym, school cafeteria, conference room, whatever is booked for that area) and goes to the table with the sign for the person they want to support. Folks are talking to each other and trying to convince undecideds and others to join their candidates group. 

Then they hand out a preference card and everyone is asked to write the name of their first preference on the card (along with their own name to validate against voter roles). They do a quick count of how many people are in each group and announce which groups are viable to move on to round 2 within the room and which didn’t make the cut in the room / precinct. This is based on needing 15% or more of the total people in the room who showed up. 

Folks standing with viable candidates had to stay where they were, but those supporting a candidate who didn’t make the cut in round 1 (in that room/precinct) then have to go choose one of the candidates who did. More talking and negotiating and trying to convince people to join their team.

Then they announce its time to commit, ask those who had to move around to write the name of their 2nd choice on the back of the card, then count the groups again. That’s the final count and from there the available delegates for that precinct get allotted (or a coin is tossed for any ties and after that then delegates get allotted). 

The local precinct captain then reports the results up to the state party heads. That’s what the app was for, but the results were inconsistent and here we are still waiting for numbers... but we all know how candidates did in our local precincts. 

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Be pretty unfortunate for Pete if, say that delegate ends up voting against Pete after Biden has long dropped out...and it ends up being the difference

Reporting suggests there were also a few ties btw Warren and Klobuchar where Klobuchar won the coin toss. Similar with Bernie and Biden in some spots. 

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Of course the Republicans will have a field day with all of this...as if it couldn't have happened to them.

They already are. You should see the social media accounts of my local state senator where every few minutes is another “derp derp dems dumb derp derp” comment and talk of “this is why we can’t trust them with our healthcare!” and “poor snowflakes need a hug cuz can’t caucus right” etc. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

Thanks INow. So is the intention to release the results from both before and after the second round?

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Thanks INow. So is the intention to release the results from both before and after the second round?

Correct. In past years, only delegate allocation was shared for each precinct. This year, they will share final delegate allocation, PLUS total people gathered for each candidate during Round 1 AND total people gathered for each candidate during Round 2 (to better understand how people shifted in the room and how many people had to settle for a second choice if their primary candidate didn’t win enough in Round 1 at their precinct)  

Majority of results will become available with 2 hours of this post (5pm Eastern today)

[iNow]

Iowa Update (finally!!): 62% of precincts reporting / these numbers will shift -

 

1) Pete @ 27%

2) Bernie @ 25%

3) Warren @ 18%

4) Biden @ 15%

5) Amy @ 12%

 

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/state/iowa?xid=ec_crm_iowa_d

For @J.C.MacSwell - Yang @ 1.1%

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

Iowa Update (finally!!): 62% of precincts reporting / these numbers will shift -

 

1) Pete @ 27%

2) Bernie @ 25%

3) Warren @ 18%

4) Biden @ 15%

5) Amy @ 12%

 

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/state/iowa?xid=ec_crm_iowa_d

For @J.C.MacSwell - Yang @ 1.1%

Ouch. Any thoughts on why Yang would poll substantially below polling? (not why you think he doesn't deserve better)

[iNow]

8 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Ouch. Any thoughts on why Yang would poll substantially below polling? (not why you think he doesn't deserve better)

According to the link I shared, he had:

Round ONE: 5,760 supporters
Round TWO: 1,124 supporters

While it's only 62% of precincts reporting thus far, this result pretty clearly means he didn't meet the 15% viability threshold in the majority of precincts. About 4,600 of the people who chose him in Round 1 were forced to choose someone else in Round 2 (or go home and not given anyone their vote).