I really miss the hanging chads.

Furthermore, .the number is not .0075% but is actually approximately 2.97%: .1053/(700.47-696.92).

You could even argue, though I will not, that the error was 6.4%: (.1053 + .122)/(700.47-696.92)

Is it your implication by your words "the costly and time-consuming recount" that this recount (which has not been confirmed as completed) was a waste?

as long as it is being ultimately overseen by someone who has a vested interest in Hillary winning.




rocktivity

They are now equal.

Congrats Bernie! You won in your recount. She lost a delegate and you picked one up.

?resize=620%2C414

With such a slim margin of victory, surely splitting everything down the middle is fairer than a coin toss.


rocktivity

http://iowademocrats.org/iowa-democratic-caucus-results-updated-after-idp-completes-review/

Des Moines—Over the past week, to ensure the accuracy of our results the Iowa Democratic Party worked with the Sanders campaign, the Clinton campaign and local party leadership to review results from 14 precinct caucuses.


These follow-up reviews were in addition to the work we did on caucus night, where we worked with the campaign representatives in our tabulation room and our precinct and county chairs to resolve any issues that arose from the 1,681 Democratic precincts.

We reviewed the 14 precincts on a case-by-case basis, and in each instance reached out to our precinct and county chairs on the ground for a full accounting of the results. Nine of the 14 precincts were confirmed to be correct as reported on caucus night, while five instances of reporting errors were found:

SNIP

Did you ignore the title or are you disputing the Party's statement that they've completed the review?

I don't dispute the title or the statement. I only noted that at the time I posted, what I said was correct. This is not complicated.

didn't say what I said it did. And you were incorrect, because you must have missed the title.

that your post "still stands."

What did you mean by that?

following commentary would serve as clarifications for the historical record.

Wasserman Schutlz must be above reproach -- we need to have total confidence in the outcomes if only because she failed in her effort to get Hillary elected previously. And there was a discrepancy, so there!


rocktivity

results be what anyone would want? The Des Moines Register sure thought so.

of the 0.1053 delegate who will be voting?

First woman to ever win the IA caucus. That's historical in itself.

if the was the first woman to lose an IA caucus in 2008!


rocktivity

I take pride in women breaking down doors for others, particularly if the woman is a Democrat. I honor my mother's generation who had to fight for job and pay equality. It's a shame that other women take so much for granted. A bit more classy would have been to say "congratulations" and move on, or simply refrain from commenting at all.

IE. I didn't want Sarah Palin to be vice president after she announced she was going to over-turn Roe vs. Wade when she announced she was running.

Correction Hillarys donors from 1999 to 2016:

Citigroup Inc $824,402 $816,402 $8,000
Goldman Sachs $760,740 $750,740 $10,000
DLA Piper $700,530 $673,530 $27,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $696,456 $693,456 $3,000
Morgan Stanley $636,564 $631,564 $5,000
EMILY's List $609,684 $605,764 $3,920
Time Warner $501,831 $476,831 $25,000
Skadden, Arps et al $469,290 $464,790 $4,500
University of California $417,327 $417,327 $0
Sullivan & Cromwell $369,150 $369,150 $0
Akin, Gump et al $364,478 $360,978 $3,500
Lehman Brothers $362,853 $359,853 $3,000
21st Century Fox $340,936 $340,936 $0
Cablevision Systems $336,613 $307,225 $29,388
Kirkland & Ellis $329,141 $312,141 $17,000
National Amusements Inc $328,312 $325,312 $3,000
Squire Patton Boggs $328,306 $322,868 $5,438
Greenberg Traurig LLP $327,890 $319,790 $8,100
Corning Inc $322,450 $304,450 $18,000
Credit Suisse Group $318,120 $308,120 $10,000
This is NOT definitive because she has a lot of Super Pacs.

She has a long history with Goldman Sachs who just got fined 5 billion for the Federal Mortgage crisis last week.

She is not likely to regulate anyone.

Let's just be clear, that, that is the first woman who just won Iowa (only it's far worse because that was back when she was only running for Senator. ) Congratulations to her for being a woman.

I am a woman, btw. The only thing I see good about this is the glass ceiling there is broken.

That said. Be happy. Bernie picked up a delegate and Clinton lost one. They are even on Delegates now.

... reduced Clinton's win from 0.30% to 0.25% shows you just how tenuous these results are.

Several precincts had as many as 30 votes thrown in question due to sloppy procedures (people coming and going mid-vote, required recounts not breing taken, precincts understaffed, etc.). I don't think we'll ever know for sure who won. The caucus was so chaotic that the outcomes we've seen (the original report and the revised report) fall within the procedure's margin of error.

There hasn't been a recount. The party has corrected some of the problems that have been brought to their attention.

That's neither a recount, nor costly to the party.

You know what would be really cheap? Releasing the raw numbers. Just post 'em on the party web site, and plenty of people and media will do the recount for them. For free.

Not the tallies. And there are no ballots to be counted; and the humans that were being head-counted have left the building.

So, why hide the tallies? Are we now against transparency in elections?

The party has been transparent with all three campaigns.


http://iowademocrats.org/iowa-democratic-caucus-results-updated-after-idp-completes-review/


Des Moines—Over the past week, to ensure the accuracy of our results the Iowa Democratic Party worked with the Sanders campaign, the Clinton campaign and local party leadership to review results from 14 precinct caucuses.


These follow-up reviews were in addition to the work we did on caucus night, where we worked with the campaign representatives in our tabulation room and our precinct and county chairs to resolve any issues that arose from the 1,681 Democratic precincts.

We reviewed the 14 precincts on a case-by-case basis, and in each instance reached out to our precinct and county chairs on the ground for a full accounting of the results. Nine of the 14 precincts were confirmed to be correct as reported on caucus night, while five instances of reporting errors were found:

SNIP

Uh, no. The discrepancies were found by the delegate not matching what the Sanders campaign captains wrote down on election day.

The party has not released the tallies to anyone. Including the campaigns.

Btw, 14 of 1,681 is not a recount.

And has a much bigger effect than these tiny differences.

They allocate delegates to each precinct based on the number of voters who turned up in the two previous elections -- not the current election.

Then they have formulas to allocate whole delegates, rather than giving proportional representation. This means in a precinct with two delegates, a candidate with 25% of the vote and another with 75% will each get ONE delegate. In other words, a delegate in the same precinct could represent 3 times as many people as another. And the disparities could even be greater across precincts.

Then there is all the other unfairness, because people can't get absentee ballots.

Every state should switch to primaries. Too late this season, though. We're stuck with some caucuses. Nevada will be the next.

consuming process. We stood in LOOOOONG lines in freezing rain just to get inside the fairgrounds building, because Obama enthusiasm had brought in so many students in our college town (Lawrence, KS--home of KU's Jayhawks). Then by the time we got out, we were in blizzard conditions and barely made it home. Normally I could get home from the fairgrounds in about 5-7 minutes, but that time it took about 50 minutes. I didn't get home until 2:00 a.m.

That is the sort of crap that discourages people from being actively involved in politics at the state and lcal level. Unfortunately, those who enjoy wielding power in small kingdoms prefer less involvement, because that protects their hold on power.

I plan to caucus March 1 this year (for Bernie), but I honestly dread the loss of many hours that I need for grading papers and having conferences with my students.

We actually used to have a primary rather than a caucus here.

There were efforts but the costs were too high so it got shot down. Caucuses are definitely cheaper, since it is pen and paper, no need to print out ballots (and since Colorado has mail in, no need to mail them out).

This is how this news link appeared on my facebook:

[IMG][/IMG]

It was only minutes before this post was made in LBN....

That's what I'm getting from the math in the article.

Hillary Clinton
✔ ?@HillaryClinton
History: made. #IowaCaucus
4:38 AM - 2 Feb 2016
1,856 1,856 Retweets 4,139 4,139 likes