Iowa caucus vote totals delayed amid 'inconsistencies'; Trump team suggests contest 'rigged' - Beyond Parody

From Fox News (archive)
--------
The Iowa Democratic Party (IDP) still has not reported official vote totals in the critical Iowa caucuses as of early Tuesday morning, in a largely unexplained and unprecedented delay that has raised questions about the legitimacy of the contest -- and campaign officials are livid, Fox News has learned.

The Trump campaign, meanwhile, openly suggested that the delay meant that the caucuses were being "rigged," and that the embarrassing night proved that the Democratic Party can't be trusted to run Americans' health care and implement sweeping new government programs. Even if a winner is ultimately announced, the chaos and confusion has seemingly erased any hope for the major momentum boost that would normally result.

"We found inconsistencies in the reporting of three sets of results," the IDP said in a statement at 11:30 p.m. ET. "In addition to the tech systems being used to tabulate results, we are also using photos of results and a paper trail to validate that all results match and ensure that we have confidence and accuracy in the numbers we report. This is simply a reporting issue. The app did not go down and this is not a hack or an intrusion. The underlying data and paper trail is sound and will simply take time to further report the results."

Fox News is told that during a call with the campaigns, an IDP representative said the party would be "getting photos of the paper results sent over," but didn't answer any questions and then hung up on all the campaigns, even as frustrated staffers pushed for answers. A campaign staffer told Fox News the brief call was "crazy." A second campaign official told Fox News, “Yes, they did hang up.”

The Biden campaign then wrote to the IDP, complaining about the "considerable flaws" in the caucus reporting process.

"The app that was intended to relay Caucus results to the Party failed; the Party’s back-up telephonic reporting system likewise has failed," the campaign wrote in a letter. "Now, we understand that Caucus Chairs are attempting to — and, in many cases, failing to — report results telephonically to the Party. These acute failures are occurring statewide. We appreciate that you plan to brief the campaigns momentarily on these issues, and we plan to participate. However, we believe that the campaigns deserve full explanations and relevant information regarding the methods of quality control you are employing, and an opportunity to respond, before any official results are released."

About an hour earlier, IDP spokesperson Mandy McClure said in a statement, "The integrity of the results is paramount. We have experienced a delay in the results due to quality checks and the fact that the IDP is reporting out three data sets for the first time. What we know right now is that around 25% of precincts have reported, and early data indicates turnout is on pace for 2016."

Turnout in the 2016 Democratic caucuses in Iowa was 171,109. That was far below the nearly 240,000 that took part in the 2008 Democratic caucuses, when then-Sen. Barack Obama won the contest.

"With every passing minute that there is a delay, we worry that the process will lose credibility," a top Elizabeth Warren aide told CNN.

In a surreal moment shortly before Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar took the stage to thank her supporters -- even as no voting results were available -- a precinct chief was being interviewed on CNN while he was on hold for more than an hour with the IDP to report results. The IDP then hung up on the precinct chief live on-air after he was too slow to respond once they took him off hold.

At least four precincts had to resolve ties in their vote results by flipping a coin during the evening, Fox News has learned.

Speaking at 11:30 p.m. ET, former Vice President Joe Biden said he felt good about the caucus, then remarked, "It's on to New Hampshire! ... We're in this for the long haul."

Taking the microphone ten minutes later, Sanders said that when the results were in, he had a "good feeling we're going to be doing very very well here in Iowa."

For the first time ever, the IDP has previously said it will report three sets of results at the end of the state’s first-in-the-nation caucuses: a tally of caucus-goers’ initial candidate preference; vote totals from the “final alignment” after supporters of lower-ranking candidates were able to make a second choice, and the total number of State Delegate Equivalents each candidate receives. There is no guarantee that all three will show the same winner.

Earlier in the evening, an IDP official told Fox News the party was doing “quality control checks, making sure the numbers are accurate,” adding that “people are still caucusing; we are working to report results soon.”
----

tl;dr: Results from the Democratic Iowa Caucus are late coming in, DNC is blaming an app and claiming they are currently doing "quality control."
 
So, now they're going for a do-over but have no plan for execution? Yeah, that's going to inspire confidence. Might as well announce that you plan on doing it as many times as needed until you get the "desired" result.
 
Nigger if this winds up with Gamergate being named as the official culprit I might actually have to take a week off the internet for my own sanity.....jesus fucking christ the dems have fucked up worse than if they had Hillary Clinton parachuted in as a "unity" candidate.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
1o7cdkN.png


This guy works for the NYT so.......god fucking damnit they are really going there. I said it as a sarcastic joke and they are really fucking going there.
 
Just as Bernie starts an upswing in the results...


archive

DNC chair calls for immediate ‘recanvass’ of Iowa after botched caucus: ‘Enough is enough’
Published Thu, Feb 6 2020 12:33 PM EST

  • DNC Chairman Tom Perez called for an immediate “recanvass” of Iowa as concerns mounted about the integrity of the results from Monday’s first-in-the-nation caucuses in the state.
  • “Enough is enough,” Perez wrote in a post on Twitter. “In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.”
  • Perez's tweet is sure to inject even more uncertainty into a process that has threatened to upend the public trust in Iowa's caucus results, which historically have shaped the narrative of Democratic presidential primaries.
Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez called on Thursday for an immediate “recanvass” of Iowa as concerns mounted about the integrity of the results from Monday’s first-in-the-nation caucuses in the state.

“Enough is enough,” Perez wrote in a post on Twitter. “In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.”

Perez’s tweet came hours after The New York Times said that its analysis of the Iowa results revealed inconsistencies in data from more than 100 precincts.

Perez didn’t provide details or the specifics of what a potential recanvass would entail. The DNC and the Iowa Democratic Party didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Perez’s tweet is sure to inject even more uncertainty into a process that has threatened to upend the public trust in Iowa’s caucus results, which historically have shaped the narrative of Democratic presidential primaries.

Monday’s caucus has been plagued with problems, including the failure of an app that was supposed to be used for the reporting of results from nearly 1,700 precincts. The state party has insisted that despite the app’s problems, the underlying data is accurate. It has slowly released results throughout the week.

As of Thursday morning, the party released data from more than 97% of precincts that showed former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., vying for the lead.

But the precinct-level data has come under scrutiny from journalists and public observers, raising questions about the integrity of the election results. There is no evidence that the errors were intentional or designed to favor any candidate in particular.
Holy fucking shit hahaha, they can't help themselves.

Edit: hmmmm I wonder what I suddenly causing the DNC head to call for a do-over
FA917DCC-FC3C-4471-9D14-72AAB18FAEFE.jpeg
 
Holy fucking shit hahaha, they can't help themselves.

Edit: hmmmm I wonder what I suddenly causing the DNC head to call for a do-over
View attachment 1133078
lol The DNC is going to try and ratfuck Bernie before they even get to the nomination and the brokered convention bit, before Super Tuesday even happens. This is going to be so much fun to watch. :popcorn:
 
Perez is an idiot. A do-over is a terrible plan. If the results are different they will scream "rigged". If they are the same they will scream "rigged" but just a little quieter. Either way all it does it draw attention to their fuckup and drag this out even longer. The whole point of the exercise is to get the party to agree on a nominee, not drive wedges into it. Dumbass.

Just rolling with it and moving the focus to New Hampshire would have been the better play.
 
Holy fucking shit hahaha, they can't help themselves.

Edit: hmmmm I wonder what I suddenly causing the DNC head to call for a do-over
View attachment 1133078
Yeah, and they have a bunch of so-called 'satellite caucuses' (which are run outside the usual time which factory workers and students who don't wake up before midafternoon) still to report. Bernie's was the only campaign targeting these.

They want to throw out the results before he barely beats out the DNC/CIA rigging lol
 
Holy fucking shit hahaha, they can't help themselves.

Edit: hmmmm I wonder what I suddenly causing the DNC head to call for a do-over
View attachment 1133078

Because none of their preferred candidates made the cut. "If they vote wrong they must do it again until the get it right!". It's like watching the public referendums on forming the EU all over again. Perez wants a do over as it can be used to peper over the obvious shady shit that went down. Remember the Iowa votes aren't hidden like a normal election. Every precinct openly announced their outcome to the caucus goers. So there are witnesses, and probably recordings. Yet still the numbers do not match. oh me oh my. And all this alongside Pelosi's stated plan of "We're just gonna keep on impeaching him until they get it right!" lunacy.
 
death to node.js (which they used for their backend, by the way)

Got any shareable info on what that backend looked like? I want to jump back in to tearing their systems apart later today.

Oh my freaking God, if they make me go through that bullshit again...

The voting shall continue until the outcome improves.
 
That ratio after one hour ...
Archive
View attachment 1133082
If the democrats dont somehow win the election after this debacle, I genuinely think we will see a fully fledged third party split occur.

I mean how the hell would they be able to walk back from this if they lose to Trump again despite pulling all this shit?!
 
If the democrats dont somehow win the election after this debacle, I genuinely think we will see a fully fledged third party split occur.

I mean how the hell would they be able to walk back from this if they lose to Trump again despite pulling all this shit?!

At this point a third party split off coalescing around Bernie and the Squad of Socialist nitwits is inevitable. This might actually be a good thing, as among other things it would shatter the one party status of California and Illinois.
 
At this point a third party split off coalescing around Bernie and the Squad of Socialist nitwits is inevitable. This might actually be a good thing, as among other things it would shatter the one party status of California and Illinois.
Yeah, this is honestly what I think is the most likely option

You will have a Trumpist Republican party going forward on a high note and possibly picking up some independents due to the decline of the old establishment types who ran the party into the ground, a rump Democrat party, probably with a handful of Romney tier RINOs switching sides now that the leftists are gone, and a somewhat hard left "Progressive party" or whatever that includes the entire activist wing of the democrats and likely a chunk of the independents who lean leftwards.

Only question of note however is will this new progressive party last longer than their next election, or will they fold back into the democrats after they fail to take office?
 
You will have a Trumpist Republican party going forward on a high note and possibly picking up some independents due to the decline of the old establishment types who ran the party into the ground
I'm genuinely interested. What do you think is different about the GOPe with Trump as their President, vs. the GOPe with Bush as their President?

Is it that he says 'bullshit' in public?
 
I'm genuinely interested. What do you think is different about the GOPe with Trump as their President, vs. the GOPe with Bush as their President?

Is it that he says 'bullshit' in public?
It is less restrained. Both by its own ideas of "decency and civility" and by the dumb PR/outrage grovelling schtick that crippled them before, let alone by the fundies and warmongers of the past who made the party so despised under Bush.

So in a sense, yes. Because he says 'bullshit' in public. Mostly because he can make those who *are* bound by hypocritical standards of decency/civility and woke PR schtick act like gibbering fucking idiots by saying 'bullshit' in public and thus turn what is supposed to be their greatest strength into a dangerous weakness that he can exploit.
 
Back