Iowa Caucus Results Thread (pg 148 - full results)

[Archies Wild Ride]

After the update, they are still getting Des Moines-14 wrong. I wonder how many others are misreported. With the SDEs this close, it could decide the winner.

Source???

You can see that they placed the wrong SDEs on Warren and Sanders


Biden: 25 votes      .27 SDE
Pete: 52 votes        .55 SDE
Sanders: 50 votes   .27 SDE
Warren: 31 votes     .55 SDE

Sanders    50*6/158 = 1.89  rounded up to 2 delegates
Warren      31*6/158 = 1.17  rounded down to 1 delegate.

There should be no coin flip weirdness going on either.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Dang it.

But again, no one's really going to notice this outside of here, so there won't be a huge effect on future primaries.

If Bernie wins 3 in a row before SC people will definitely notice

[2016]

Everyone is kind of being hard to the Sanders Campaign when they put out that Memo that they still can win this. Looks like that wasn't so far fetched at all.

[GM Team Member and Deputy PPT WB]

AAAAAAAAAAA

[adamevans]

Why does NYT still have Iowa >95% Buttigieg?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Well they sure know how to end it in style.

[NOVA Green]

NYT expects Pete to get 7 SDEs out of the remaining stuff on the map. Bernie therefore should hope to net 10+ from CD1 for a lead.

Fake News...

[Gass3268]

Needle didn't have the satellite caucuses:

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1225286636302471170?s=20

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Why does NYT still have Iowa >95% Buttigieg?

Again it’s rigged

[John Dule]

If Sanders pulls through on the SDEs, the Bernie people on the internet are going to absolutely implode-- and I'm not going to blame them for it either. They will say that the DNC held back on reporting the results because they knew Sanders would ultimately win all three tabulations, and that they deliberately released results in an order that would benefit Buttigieg. Sanders will be robbed of an extremely positive media cycle and the establishment Democrats will once again be to blame.

I don't believe any of this conspiracy, but I hope he pulls through just so that Twitter socialists can drive MacArthur up the wall.

[Adam Griffin]

Just an update on the PV totals: Sanders has widened his lead considerably in the final round compared to earlier this evening.

FIRST ROUND
Sanders 24.90% (+3.48)
Buttigieg 21.42%
Warren 18.68%
Biden 14.99%
Klobuchar 12.88%

FINAL ROUND
Sanders 26.79% (+1.51)
Buttigieg 25.28%
Warren 20.54%
Biden 13.80%
Klobuchar 12.29%

[We Live in Black and White]

Holy s**t, the madman might do it!

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

How much did Bernie net off of CD3?

[Matty]

Selzer poll  was incredible this time

[jimrtex]

Those satellite caucuses are coming in quite strong for Bernie.

Probably Pete just wins by 1-3 delegate equivalents in the end.

He still overperformed the polls by about 4% in the initial vote count though.

He seems also on good footing for NH, with the new tracking polls out.

PETEMENTUM !

The allocation of delegates for the satellite precincts is strange.

Any satellite precinct gets 4 delegates, 3 for existing and 1 for 1-20 in attendance. There is an additional delegate for every 20 extra participants, but this is capped at 9.

1-20 4
21-40 5
41-60 6
61-80 7
81-100 8
100+ 9

The number of state delegates is also dynamic, in steps of 600. Does anyone have the state delegate counts for the traditional precincts.

In one nursing home in Mason City, there was a three-way tie for first (with one vote each). Bloomberg appears to have won the coin flip to gain 2 "county" delegates.

There was a satellite caucus in Storm Lake, apparently for workers at two Tyson Plants, either for swing shift workers, or workers uncomfortable with English language or American politics. Storm Lake schools are 60% Hispanic, and 10% Asian. These pushed Sanders popular support in the satellite caucuses for CD 4 to 75%, but he might not have a majority for the virtual county due to all the micro-caucuses.

In the out-of-state caucuses, Sanders finished fifth in the popular vote, due to a weak performance in the winter sites, but had strong support at the college sites, and picked up support there.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Needle didn't have the satellite caucuses:

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1225286636302471170?s=20

They should take it down until it's fixed. At this point it's more confusing that helpful.

[Tartarus Sauce]

If Sanders pulls through on the CDEs, the Bernie people on the internet are going to absolutely implode-- and I'm not going to blame them for it either. They will say that the DNC held back on reporting the results because they knew Sanders would ultimately win all three tabulations, and that they deliberately released results in an order that would benefit Buttigieg. Sanders will be robbed of an extremely positive media cycle and the establishment Democrats will once again be to blame.

I don't believe any of this conspiracy, but I hope he pulls through just so that Twitter socialists can drive MacArthur up the wall.

Actually, the maximal Bernie Bro implosion scenario is Buttigieg winning the SDE totals by one.

[Grassroots]

Well they sure know how to end it in style.

[Florida Man for Crime]

If this comes through, Bernie should fly quickly back to Iowa, give a YUGE victory speech, and demand that the media cover it (they would).

[Bidenworth2020]

so where is this 3% from?

[Sorenroy]

Why does NYT still have Iowa >95% Buttigieg?

These estimates represent a snapshot of our forecast based on the results released by the Iowa Democratic Party as of 9:00 p.m. Eastern.

Also, as Gass3268 posted, the Needle seems to not be factoring in satilite caucuses. They may have paused updates to it to see what's going wrong.

[Florida Man for Crime]

Everyone should also remember that in 2016, Sanders "lost" Iowa by 4 SDEs resulting from coin tosses. And given the way that delegates are distributed geographically (more weight on rural counties, and especially less weight on college towns), it is basically a sure thing that he also won the popular vote then.

[RI]

The NYT's model showing Buttigieg netting +7 more SDEs from precincts outstanding is clearly off as at least 2 of those 7 are coming from counties which are already 100% reported (Dubuque + Lyon, possibly others).

[adamevans]

Everyone should also remember that in 2016, Sanders "lost" Iowa by 4 SDEs resulting from coin tosses. And given the way that delegates are distributed geographically (more weight on rural counties, and especially less weight on college towns), it is basically a sure thing that he also won the popular vote then.

Hillary won the PV in 2016 by like ~1,000 votes iirc.

[OBD]

Dang it.

But again, no one's really going to notice this outside of here, so there won't be a huge effect on future primaries.

If Bernie wins 3 in a row before SC people will definitely notice

Well that's not a guarantee. And there's been so many issues with Iowa that a lot of the Democrats won't take it seriously.

That said, if Bernie wins NH and NV that would be a big boost to his campaign. But that would occur independently from Iowa, I don't see anyone getting a lift from this mess.