Tuesday, 4 February 2020

The Iowa caucus smartphone app disaster, explained

quote [ Monday night’s Iowa caucuses were supposed to offer America a first look at the Democratic Party’s frontrunner in the 2020 presidential race, based on the results of the first primary battle. That didn’t quite happen. Instead, after a chaotic night full of errors and mismanagement, the party had still failed to name a winner by the next afternoon.

While party leaders and pundits alike are struggling to figure out what went wrong, it looks like a hastily built and reportedly insufficiently tested smartphone app is at the center of the disaster. ]

We should be doing paper..even for ballots. Cannot believe they were using an app. Leave it to the Dems to turn a caucus into a clusterfuck.
[SFW] [politics] [+2 WTF]
[by knumbknutz@7:02pmGMT]


steele said @ 7:25pm GMT on 4th Feb [Score:3 Funny]
steele said @ 7:26pm GMT on 4th Feb [Score:1 Funny]
steele said @ 7:22pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:30pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:35pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:35pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:23pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:24pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:25pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said[1] @ 7:27pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:28pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:29pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:38pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 7:44pm GMT on 4th Feb
damnit said @ 7:45pm GMT on 4th Feb
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.
steele said @ 8:26pm GMT on 4th Feb
Counterpoint: #madpridewasright
conception said @ 9:40pm GMT on 4th Feb
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.
ComposerNate said @ 12:11am GMT on 5th Feb [Score:1 Underrated]
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.
steele said @ 12:53am GMT on 5th Feb
But who could benefit from such a thing?
steele said @ 10:36pm GMT on 4th Feb
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.
conception said @ 11:15pm GMT on 4th Feb
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.
steele said @ 11:54pm GMT on 4th Feb
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!
conception said @ 1:29am GMT on 6th Feb [Score:1 Funsightful]
Haha - Ok at this point I 100% recant my previous statement. Holy shit - it's so blatant over there.

steele said @ 2:34am GMT on 6th Feb
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!

damnit said[1] @ 4:08pm GMT on 5th Feb
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.
steele said @ 4:54pm GMT on 5th Feb
I have no doubt they're incompetent as hell, but that doesn't disqualify incestuous corruption either.
damnit said @ 6:05pm GMT on 5th Feb
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.
steele said @ 6:38pm GMT on 5th Feb
damnit said @ 5:16pm GMT on 6th Feb
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.
steele said @ 5:44pm GMT on 6th Feb
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.🤷‍♂️

steele said @ 6:29pm GMT on 6th Feb
Jfc. I can't make this shit up. Tom Perez is now calling for a full recanvas, which the NYT claims is impossible
steele said @ 7:46pm GMT on 6th Feb [Score:1 Funny]
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
steele said @ 3:51am GMT on 7th Feb
steele said @ 8:10pm GMT on 7th Feb
Bruceski said @ 5:22pm GMT on 7th Feb
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.
steele said @ 8:34pm GMT on 7th Feb
steele said @ 7:54pm GMT on 4th Feb
steele said @ 8:00pm GMT on 4th Feb
biblebeltdrunk said[1] @ 8:06pm GMT on 4th Feb
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.
steele said @ 8:18pm GMT on 4th Feb
hellboy said @ 1:57am GMT on 5th Feb
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.
steele said @ 2:02am GMT on 5th Feb
steele said @ 2:12am GMT on 5th Feb

ComposerNate said @ 1:35pm GMT on 5th Feb
How could the NH primaries possibly trip up a Sanders winpush forward?
steele said @ 2:44pm GMT on 5th Feb
I'm sure they'll think of something. Coronavirus outbreak?🤷‍♂️😅😅
steele said @ 10:22pm GMT on 5th Feb
steele said @ 10:30pm GMT on 5th Feb
steele said @ 11:31pm GMT on 5th Feb
steele said @ 12:28am GMT on 6th Feb
steele said @ 2:36am GMT on 6th Feb
steele said @ 7:56pm GMT on 6th Feb
steele said @ 10:32pm GMT on 5th Feb
steele said @ 1:12am GMT on 6th Feb
arrowhen said @ 3:22am GMT on 6th Feb
Shadow, Inc. and Acronym sound like rough draft names for Mr. Robot's Evil Corp that got changed because they sounded too obvious.
steele said @ 4:29am GMT on 6th Feb
The big joke online is that Pete is a cia asset. So, yeah...
steele said @ 12:24am GMT on 7th Feb

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.

ComposerNate said @ 9:00am GMT on 11th Feb [Score:1 Classy Pr0n]
My Sanders vote was mailed off yesterday, my first primary ballot ever, so count one more in Virginia from an independant.
steele said @ 7:02pm GMT on 11th Feb
Woo! Thank you! :D
ComposerNate said @ 8:44pm GMT on 11th Feb [Score:1 Classy Pr0n]
And, as always, thank you.
steele said @ 2:57am GMT on 9th Feb
steele said @ 7:38pm GMT on 9th Feb
steele said @ 9:48pm GMT on 9th Feb
Oh, oh good. This will be fun.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.

Posts of Import
If you got logged out, log back in.
4 More Years!
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things
AskSE: What do you look like?

Karma Rankings