Stuart on Twitter: "The IA Comms Director for @PeteButtigieg that was tweeting worksheet with the login pins visible, is literally married to the CEO of the company that made SHADOW. https://t.co/rQgwL3pJJC https://t.co/ACqU7xdTGQ" / Twitter

There's a correction in the thread. The IA Comms is the brother of the wife of the Shadow CEO.

There’s nothing wrong with bringing the election process into the 21st century like the rest of the developed world.

But this is the Iowa Caucus. They are run by old white volunteers used to counting ballots manually. You can’t just hand them an app and expect them to know how to use it.

The chances of this being rigged is very low. It’s the likelihood of people who are not digitally-savvy struggling with an unfamiliar app vs. using that unfamiliar app to orchestrate this grand election conspiracy.

Counterpoint: #madpridewasright

I'm gonna have to go with damnit on this one. Rigging caucus is basically impossible. The people in the caucus know what the delegates were and can just look them up and say "Hey, that's not what was decided." even if the app fudged the numbers.

Rigging could be more than just delegates counted. Today should have been "Democratic Frontrunner Wins!" and that national discussion with huge push forward of their campaign, instead of this. Plus whatever Republican fuckery is going on behind the cloud chaos.

But who could benefit from such a thing?

You mean like in 2016? The only reason the Iowa Caucus was so transparent this year with the multiple round total reporting and recording of the stances that allow for the current manual count is literally because of the insane amount of claims of inconsistencies there were in the 2016 primary.

Well, as pointed out in the article, it was easy to catch.

Of course, no sure if there's a process for adjudicating those sorts of things but they didn't fly under the radar.

Lol, so was this. Impossible to rig doesn't mean people aren't stupid or foolhardy enough to try. And it's not like there's actual consequences to trying. I know no one here bothers reading the articles, but there's been full on court cases over illegal voter roll purging in 2016 and people are still acting like Bernie supporters were just hyperbolic. 2016 featured blatant electioneering, voter roll purges, delegate credential refusal, media shenanigans and let's be real, 2020 isn't looking much different.

Hell, it doesn't even have to be about rigging; It's not as if this whole ordeal hasn't completely shit on whatever imaginary power the Iowa caucus has in the narratives and the ensuing momentum. The currently released results are still leaving the actual winner a mystery!

Haha - Ok at this point I 100% recant my previous statement. Holy shit - it's so blatant over there.

#madpridewasright

Right?! Back at the end of 2016 I did one of those word clouds on my facebook account and blatant was one of the biggest words on there. And it's only Iowa!

Or, just hear me out, a new app, in order to make things more efficient, is tested in the Iowa caucus. New/old software is hard so of course it will break, considering they paid peanuts to the developers to cobble it up.

Also, no one is apolitical, so of course a person funding the app would support a candidate. Russian social media disinformation conspiracy theory has more clout than Buttigieg rigging Iowa.

Heck, they interviewed an Iowan stumping for Pete and was taken aback when they told her he’s gay.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/abc7news.com/amp/5904036

I have no doubt they're incompetent as hell, but that doesn't disqualify incestuous corruption either.

It’s possible that they only released the polls for those showing Buttigieg in the lead to up their donations. 71% reporting still. Sanders has a slight lead in the popular vote.

NY For Sanders #Bernie2020 on Twitter: "Use the hashtag #WheresPolk and demand that @iowademocrats release the results they’ve been sitting on for nearly a day https://t.co/QhIhGDPrMX" / Twitter

It's sure looking that way.

Follow up. It’s looking like Sanders is winning Iowa. A lot of satellite caucuses are giving him the votes. They just started counting these last night. They’re from immigrant voters. Working class voters and new voters.

Yeah, they were some of the first caucuses recorded. A bunch went viral because of how much they clashed with the Bernie Bro narrative. He did well in all but the snowbird ones. Weird how it took so long for them to get to his heavy wins.🤷‍♂️

Jfc. I can't make this shit up. Tom Perez is now calling for a full recanvas, which the NYT claims is impossible

lmao. IDP tells Perez they'll only recanvas if a candidate asks for it. They're eating each other alive.

IDP says it's prepared for recanvass should a request from a candidate

NBC and NYT are refusing to call it citing numerous discrepancies. CNN, on the other hand...



Meanwhile, the Sanders campaign is bringing the receipts.
Eoin Higgins on Twitter: "Sanders campaign declares victory in Iowa and releases 14 discrepancies with official count for a total of 2.50383 SDE, putting the Vermont senator over the top for the win in SDEs (he already wins in actual votes) https://t.co/WjYT5s0811" / Twitter

It was a nice strategy. Satellite caucuses have their delagates determined by how many people use them, most folks didn't so they've been ignored. Sanders encouraged people to use them so the number of attendees spikes and suddenly there are a lot of delagates where nobody was looking.

Senator Jack Hatch on Twitter: "DNC Chair Tom Perez is sabotaging the #IowaCaucasDisaster. It was the DNC who rejected our caucus plan and forced the IDP to accept their app. I know because I assembled a team that received the IDP contract, then the DNC told the IDP to pull it and substituted their plan." / Twitter

Eating. Alive. 😂😂

Gonna be pretty pissed off if this gives Pete a bump in NH though.

I'm going to need a moment to get over the desire to make jokes about shadow inc. to actually talk about this beyond caucuses are dumb.

I can't stand Buttigieg but I'm not jumping to the conclusion that he had something to do with the fuckup—I'm pretty confident that the Iowa Democratic Party is capable of that all on their own. I do find it ironic that if it turns out he did in fact win Iowa (as he prematurely claimed last night), his victory will be overshadowed by the staggering incompetence of the very company his campaign is uncomfortably close to, and whether or not anything shady happened, his win is always going to smell fishy as a result.

How could the NH primaries possibly trip up a Sanders winpush forward?

I'm sure they'll think of something. Coronavirus outbreak?🤷‍♂️😅😅

Michael Culshaw-Maurer on Twitter: "Been working with @SethYefrican (who is now famous) on some analysis of weird #iowacaucases results. Here I outline a bunch of cases where a candidate went from VIABLE in the first round to NOT VIABLE in the final round, which isn't supposed to happen https://t.co/NDuvCcnHyd" / Twitter

Michael Culshaw-Maurer on Twitter: "@SethYefrican this may be even worse than I thought... I had been filtering out Uncommitted, but Uncommitted voters actually ARE subject to the viability rules: https://t.co/6SlSBySmA2" / Twitter

Iowa caucus app ran into issues when reporting results - CNNPolitics

Shadow, Inc. and Acronym sound like rough draft names for Mr. Robot's Evil Corp that got changed because they sounded too obvious.

The big joke online is that Pete is a cia asset. So, yeah...

Pete got a little bump but it's not holding. I wasn't so sure at first, but now I'm thinking this new Sanders campaign slogan is the right way to go.

My Sanders vote was mailed off yesterday, my first primary ballot ever, so count one more in Virginia from an independant.

Woo! Thank you! :D

And, as always, thank you.

JFC.

Taniel on Twitter: "🚨 NEW SITUATION. There's now evidence that there are some precincts still fully missing from the IDP results. And that other precincts have been double counted. And this isn't just in Sioux City, @CoatsandLinen confirms. The IDP results are NOT "100% reporting." https://t.co/0esgvcEPLh" / Twitter

Oh, oh good. This will be fun.