This Video Shows Us America's Number One Enemy. You Already Know Them.
The Trump White House Declares War on This Little District Judge
'Iron Lung' and the Future of Filmmaking
Georgia's Jon Ossoff Says Trump Administration Imitates Rhetoric of 'History's Worst Regim...
U.S. Thwarts $4 Million Weapons Plot Aimed at Toppling South Sudan Government
Minnesota Mom, Daughter, and Relative Allegedly Stole $325k from SNAP
Michigan AG: Detroit Man Stole 12 Identities to Collect Over $400,000 in Public...
Does Maxine Waters Really Think Trump Will Be Bothered by Her Latest Tantrum?
Fifth Circuit Rules That Some Illegal Aliens Can Be Detained Without Bond Until...
Just Days After Mass Layoffs, WaPo Returns to Lying About the Trump Admin
Nigerian Man Sentenced to Over 8 Years for International Inheritance Fraud Targeting Elder...
Florida's Crackdown on Non-English Speaking Drivers Is Hilarious
Family Fraud: Father, Two Daughters Convicted in $500k USDA Nutrition Program Scam
American Olympians Bash Their Own Country As Democrats and Media Gush
Speculation Into Iran Strike Continues As Warplanes Are Pulled From Super Bowl Flyover...
Tipsheet

NYT: Iowa Caucus Results Contain Inconsistencies

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

The Iowa caucus debacle continues; it is now day three following the caucuses, and no clear winner has been declared. 97 percent of precincts are reported, leaving Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and Pete Buttigieg in a near dead-heat. 

Advertisement

In addition to this delay, it appears that an abundance of errors were made in the counting of some results, per The New York Times. Nearly 100 precincts reported had some sort of inconsistency. From NYT’s analysis:

In some cases, vote tallies do not add up. In others, precincts are shown allotting the wrong number of delegates to certain candidates. And in at least a few cases, the Iowa Democratic Party’s reported results do not match those reported by the precincts.

Some of these inconsistencies may prove to be innocuous, and the irregularities do not indicate an intentional effort to compromise or rig the result. There is no apparent bias in favor of the leaders Pete Buttigieg or Bernie Sanders, meaning the overall effect on the winner’s margin may be small.

But not all of the errors are minor, and they raise questions about whether the public will ever get a completely precise account of the Iowa results. With Mr. Sanders closing to within 0.1 percentage points with 97 percent of 1,765 precincts reporting, the race could easily grow close enough for even the most minor errors to delay a final projection or raise doubts about a declared winner.

The errors suggest that many Iowa caucus leaders struggled to follow the rules of their party’s caucuses, or to adopt the additional reporting requirements introduced since 2016. They show that the Iowa Democratic Party, despite the long delays, failed to validate all of the results fully before releasing them to the public.

Advertisement

This delay has caused a stir among Democratic voters; rightfully, the integrity of the results is now being questioned. Candidates have moved on to New Hampshire ahead of the debate Friday and primary next Tuesday.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement