Offline
Editorial: Something smells in the Democratic Party
The Register's editorial
Once again the world is laughing at Iowa. Late-night comedians and social media mavens are having a field day with jokes about missing caucusgoers and coin flips.That’s fine. We can take ribbing over our quirky process. But what we can’t stomach is even the whiff of impropriety or error.
What happened Monday night at the Democratic caucuses was a debacle, period. Democracy, particularly at the local party level, can be slow, messy and obscure. But the refusal to undergo scrutiny or allow for an appeal reeks of autocracy.The Iowa Democratic Party must act quickly to assure the accuracy of the caucus results, beyond a shadow of a doubt.First of all, the results were too close not to do a complete audit of results. Two-tenths of 1 percent separated Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.
A caucus should not be confused with an election, but it’s worth noting that much larger margins trigger automatic recounts in other states.Second, too many questions have been raised. Too many accounts have arisen of inconsistent counts, untrained and overwhelmed volunteers, confused voters, cramped precinct locations, a lack of voter registration forms and other problems.
Too many of us, including members of the Register editorial board who were observing caucuses, saw opportunities for error amid Monday night’s chaos.The Sanders campaign is rechecking results on its own, going precinct by precinct, and is already finding inconsistencies, said Rania Batrice, a Sanders spokeswoman. The campaign seeks the math sheets or other paperwork that precinct chairs filled out and were supposed to return to the state party. They want to compare those documents to the results entered into a Microsoft app and sent to the party.“Let’s compare notes. Let’s see if they match,” Batrice said Wednesday.
Dr. Andy McGuire, chairwoman of the Iowa Democratic Party, ">dug in her heels and said no. She said the three campaigns had representatives in a room in the hours after the caucuses and went over the discrepancies.McGuire knows what’s at stake. Her actions only confirm the suspicions, wild as they might be, of Sanders supporters. Their candidate, after all, is opposed by the party establishment — and wasn’t even a Democrat a few months ago.
So her path forward is clear: Work with all the campaigns to audit results. Break silly party tradition and release the raw vote totals. Provide a list of each precinct coin flip and its outcome, as well as other information sought by the Register. Be transparent.And then call for a blue ribbon commission to study how to improve the caucuses, as the Republican Party of Iowa did after its own fiasco in 2012.
Monday’s mess showed that it’s time for the Democrats to change, too.The caucuses have become something they were never intended to be. It’s as if RAGBRAI tried to morph into the Tour de France. It wasn’t built for the speed or the significance.The current process grew out of efforts to find a more democratic way to choose delegates to conventions, after the grassroots saw how Democratic powerbrokers controlled the nominating process in 1968.
But the caucuses have become as antiquated and opaque as the smoke-filled rooms of yore.Democrats should ask themselves: What do we want the Iowa caucus to be? How can we preserve its uniqueness while bringing more order? Does it become more like a straw poll or primary? How do we strike the balance between tradition and transparency?We have time to consider these questions. First, however, we need answers to what happened Monday night. The future of the first-in-the-nation caucuses demands it.
Offline
Is the point of this to declare the true winner, then FINE, but what this all boils down to is a handful of votes and representatives either way. The IOWA caucuses are Americas biggest waste of political attention and money. The way the caucuses work particularly on the Dem side is ridiculous.
Offline
What is interesting to me about the Des Moines Register editorial is that the editors decided to take aim at other media outlets causing the whole world to laugh at Iowa. Secondly to single out one party for the 'chaos' of the Iowa caucuses.
If it wasn't for their self designated inaugural primary circus of the Iowa caucus, no media would have been in Iowa. No media, camera crews, reporters, campaign staffs, candidates and all the hoopla that brings tons of money into Iowa every four years, let alone the extra bucks to the Des Moines Register for political advertisements. Along with the financial windfall this side show produces comes a lot of free publicity for Iowa. Over 50% of the U.S. population can't pick the state of Iowa out of a map of the U.S. At least during caucus season people see it on a map during the evening news. Nary a word in the editorial about the supposed record number of caucus goers that had to add to the confusion of this antiquated system of distributing delegates. Just complaining about mistakes, clarifications and recounts in one party. From what I've seen and read both parties had problems administering their caucuses. Maybe it's time to upgrade the entire process.
So, get a life, or at least a sense of humor, about your caucus process and apparatus Des Moines Register editorial staff. It's your state's system . . . Live with it, or change it, but don't blame the rest of the world for laughing at what you own.
Offline
Iowa and the handwringing over who "won" is kinda silly.
Clinton earned 23 delegates for the national convention. Sanders 21.
The thing that smells in the democratic party is the superdelegates.
When you count them Clinton has a 385 - 29 delegate lead.
Clinton had a 362-8 lead before a single person voted.
That is what smells of autocracy.
Offline
Good observations from everybody. It's about time we simply have a national 'primary day' or designate some 3 day period on a national scale and get the whole thing over with in one swoop.
Offline
Just Fred wrote:
Good observations from everybody. It's about time we simply have a national 'primary day' or designate some 3 day period on a national scale and get the whole thing over with in one swoop.
I think your idea is the best I heard lately.
A National Primary Day!
You have my vote Fred.
Offline
I think that the entire time that I lived in PA that the race was "over" by the time I got to vote.
Perhaps we should have 3-4 primary days grouping states such that there are a roughly equal number of delegates at stake each day.
I rather like the primary season to develop over more than one day. It gives voters the chance to weed out the crazies who might being enjoying their fifteen minutes of fame on Feb 1. (Think of the fleeting popularity of that 999 guy. Imagine if his big moment coincided with national primary day.)
What I do not like is that Iowa, with 44 delegates at stake gets so much more attention than say PA with 189 delegates. (And that Iowa, and NH decide where the smart money will go).
Offline
I think we all might be on the same page here. Waaaaaayyyyyyyyy too much emphasis is focused on Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, and probably all 3 of them together have fewer delegates than PA. Additionally, the backers with deep pockets would really be scrambling around like chickens with their heads cut off and wondering where to invest their campaign cash.
Offline
Just Fred wrote:
I think we all might be on the same page here. Waaaaaayyyyyyyyy too much emphasis is focused on Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, and probably all 3 of them together have fewer delegates than PA. Additionally, the backers with deep pockets would really be scrambling around like chickens with their heads cut off and wondering where to invest their campaign cash.
It is time to modernize our primary season in terms of it being shorter and more relevant. I do NOT think we ever will or should get to a one primary for all as it would place too many demands on the candidates themselves. Perhaps a number of regional primaries would be ideal for both the voting public as well as the candidates.
Offline
Goose wrote:
I think that the entire time that I lived in PA that the race was "over" by the time I got to vote.
.
The last time that we had a meaningful Presidential Primary in Pennsylvania was inn '08 when Hillary and Obama were neck and neck.
But that was the exception---most times it is "why bother.....decision has been made for me weeks ago">