OK, I was told by reader Formynder that my micturition aim was way off and I was reading that thing “wrong” as in incomplete. Bad design got me. He was gracious enough to send me a screen cap from NPR:


I’ll be having the Chicken Fried Crow with humble pie a la mode for lunch, thank you.

And thank you to Formynder 🙂

Before I headed for bed this AM, I caught a Facebook post from a buddy complaining that the Democrats had not finished the tally in Iowa. I went to check on it and saw he was right.

Almost there, but damn it, it should have been done all by now. Next and out of sheer curiosity, I clicked on the Republican side and noticed something disproportionate:

It was a given that Trump was going to wing big but, are those the caucus votes? over 31,000? That represents people? One person, one vote?
I pulled the calculator and I added the numbers for the Democrats: 2,098.

Wait a gorramed minute: Barely over 2,000 people show up to vote 2 days ago and you cannot count the effing votes? You are getting less people that lunchtime service Chick Fill A and the mighty Democrat party makes a cluster flock out of it?

All of the sudden those states that passed the laws forcing the Electoral College Votes to go to the winner of the Popular Vote? Suddenly it does not looks that good of an idea.

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

6 thoughts on “Iowa Democrat Caucus is a bigger mess than I thought. (I stand corrected)”
  1. 2098 votes and it still isn’t done? What are they doing, counting on their fingers and toes?

    I knew it was fubar’ed but this is a whole new level of fubar.

  2. I think it’s more like double entry bookkeeping. They get the people to show up. The number of people then get reps assigned and those get reported to the main office which then get divided into delegates. Makes it easier to hide their shenanigans.

    The number I heard was somewhere in the area of 170k.

    But now they’re trying to blame Trump and ‘Trump supporters’ to try and distract from their incompetence.

  3. We’re still looking at only about 200,000 individual votes, right?

    Seems to be less than most mid-size American cities and a pretty small sample to draw significant conclusions.

  4. And Bernie got more votes that Pete but less ‘SDE’. Who’s opposed to the electoral college again?

  5. It doesn’t particularly matter whether the number of votes to be counted is 2000 or 170,000 — it’s a tiny number either way. NH uses paper ballots, usually counted by scanner (except in tiny towns). It has no trouble reporting election results within a few hours, for a total vote count 5x or so larger than that.
    The difference is that here we have Democratic party drones doing the reporting. Even by the low standards expected of party hacks, they really are quite astoundingly incompetent. And that’s the best case conclusion.

Login or register to comment.