Iowa caucus

[AUwent 3,756]

WTH is going on.

[bigbird 60,573]

Well, that was an interesting outcome

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

It's pretty crazy.  Also, how do we not just have straight voting in Iowa instead of this convoluted system?

[alexava 6,973]

5 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

It's pretty crazy.  Also, how do we not just have straight voting in Iowa instead of this convoluted system?

What is convoluted about it?

[TexasTiger 12,963]

6 hours ago, bigbird said:

Well, that was an interesting outcome

As of now, you and I are tied with both Biden & Bernie. 🍻

[AUDub 11,158]

14 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

As of now, you and I are tied with both Biden & Bernie. 🍻

And I'm declaring victory. See you in New Hampshire,  losers. 

[TexasTiger 12,963]

5 minutes ago, AUDub said:

And I'm declaring victory. See you in New Hampshire,  losers. 

Too late! Mayor Pete claimed it last night!

[AUDub 11,158]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

Too late! Mayor Pete claimed it last night!

Yeah well he can buzz off. My claim is no less valid. 

[AUDub 11,158]

So 62% of precincts are about to be reported.

Just to get out ahead of it, I won the other 38%. 

[AUDub 11,158]

 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

4 hours ago, alexava said:

What is convoluted about it?

You vote for who you like.  But if that person doesn't get a certain percentage the first time, then you can change to another candidate during realignment that same night.  And then, Iowa rewards delegates in the oddest way possible so the person who gets the most support may not get the most delegates.  Oh and let's not forget that it only happens between 6-9pm so a bunch of people can't participate because they have family obligations.

Basically, caucusing is stupid.

[alexava 6,973]

39 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

You vote for who you like.  But if that person doesn't get a certain percentage the first time, then you can change to another candidate during realignment that same night.  And then, Iowa rewards delegates in the oddest way possible so the person who gets the most support may not get the most delegates.  Oh and let's not forget that it only happens between 6-9pm so a bunch of people can't participate because they have family obligations.

Basically, caucusing is stupid.

Sheyet. Then they’ll have to start over?

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

1 hour ago, Brad_ATX said:

You vote for who you like.  But if that person doesn't get a certain percentage the first time, then you can change to another candidate during realignment that same night.  And then, Iowa rewards delegates in the oddest way possible so the person who gets the most support may not get the most delegates.  Oh and let's not forget that it only happens between 6-9pm so a bunch of people can't participate because they have family obligations.

Basically, caucusing is stupid.

Googled the difference in caucus vs primary this morning. "Confusing" seems to be the word describing caucus. Thanks, caucus sounds like a lot fun if your drinking beer.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

You vote for who you like.  But if that person doesn't get a certain percentage the first time, then you can change to another candidate during realignment that same night.  And then, Iowa rewards delegates in the oddest way possible so the person who gets the most support may not get the most delegates.  Oh and let's not forget that it only happens between 6-9pm so a bunch of people can't participate because they have family obligations.

Basically, caucusing is stupid.

Golf is easier to learn than this s***.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Golf is easier to learn than this s***.

Truth!

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

3 hours ago, alexava said:

Sheyet. Then they’ll have to start over?

No.  It's all done this go around.  But the state needs to move to a primary system of one vote all day like just about every other state.  It's way more democratic.

[bigbird 60,573]

9 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Golf is easier to learn than this s***.

What's hard? He's a PBR chugging, senile old man that smells like icy hot and moth balls

[DKW 86 7,431]

8 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

No.  It's all done this go around.  But the state needs to move to a primary system of one vote all day like just about every other state.  It's way more democratic.

New Hampshire is the first Primary, Iowa has to the be a caucus state or lose its first in the nation to NH.

[homersapien 11,393]

14 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

You vote for who you like.  But if that person doesn't get a certain percentage the first time, then you can change to another candidate during realignment that same night.  And then, Iowa rewards delegates in the oddest way possible so the person who gets the most support may not get the most delegates.  Oh and let's not forget that it only happens between 6-9pm so a bunch of people can't participate because they have family obligations.

Basically, caucusing is stupid.

A perfect compliment to our electoral college system.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

New Hampshire is the first Primary, Iowa has to the be a caucus state or lose its first in the nation to NH.

But....why?  Tradition?  Who's to say that can't change?

And it doesn't change my opinion that the entire caucus system in Iowa is stupid.

[DKW 86 7,431]

Caucusing was how Iowa got ahead of NH. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

Caucusing was how Iowa got ahead of NH. 

I'm aware.  It doesn't answer the big why.  Basically, why can't this change?  There's nothing specifically holding either party back from holding other primaries first or forcing the state into a primary system instead of a caucus for choosing and distribution of delegates.

[aubearcat 2,137]

13 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I'm aware.  It doesn't answer the big why.  Basically, why can't this change?  There's nothing specifically holding either party back from holding other primaries first or forcing the state into a primary system instead of a caucus for choosing and distribution of delegates.

I was listening to a podcast this morning, "Stuff You Should Know" I believe, and if I understood it correctly, there is some sort of legal standard to it. Iowa has to "Caucus" in order to be first in the political process, which they desperately desire, and New Hampshire is the first to vote (primary). 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

10 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

I was listening to a podcast this morning, "Stuff You Should Know" I believe, and if I understood it correctly, there is some sort of legal standard to it. Iowa has to "Caucus" in order to be first in the political process, which they desperately desire, and New Hampshire is the first to vote (primary). 

It's a state law in New Hampshire that they have to be first.  One state's law has no bearing on what a national party or parties choose to do.  Hell, another state could make their primary January 1st and completely bypass New Hampshire if it chose to.

[DKW 86 7,431]

19 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

It's a state law in New Hampshire that they have to be first.  One state's law has no bearing on what a national party or parties choose to do.  Hell, another state could make their primary January 1st and completely bypass New Hampshire if it chose to.

Well, Iowa did the diplomatic thing and did caucuses.