The Swamp

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:28 pm I've never understood how Biden was winning polls for so long. I never come across anyone - in real life or online - who is pulling for Biden. I get that the DNC wants him and the big donors want him, but do any actual voters?

There are a smattering of bumper stickers here in upper middle class suburban MD. They exist. There is a cohort still not comfortable with progressive policies. Not even the policies, but the concerns over optics.

Too many normal Americans trying to be pundits instead of voting for their beliefs, what's right, and what's fair.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:51 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:28 pm I've never understood how Biden was winning polls for so long. I never come across anyone - in real life or online - who is pulling for Biden. I get that the DNC wants him and the big donors want him, but do any actual voters?

There are a smattering of bumper stickers here in upper middle class suburban MD. They exist. There is a cohort still not comfortable with progressive policies. Not even the policies, but the concerns over optics.

Too many normal Americans trying to be pundits instead of voting for their beliefs, what's right, and what's fair.

In that area, it's possible those folks are long-time Democratic party insiders or at least firmly connected to those who are. An election of Bernie or even Warren scares the hell out of those people, because they fear real change. I think they'd rather a Republican win so they don't lose control of their party.

Stacey Abrams is the best. She makes great points in this thread.



ETA

Nate Silver's take: Iowa Might Have Screwed Up The Whole Nomination Process

To be even more blunt: The Iowa Democratic Party’s colossal screw-up in reporting results will potentially have direct effects on the outcome of the nomination process. The failure to report results will almost certainly help Biden, assuming that indications that he performed poorly in Iowa are correct, as they won’t get nearly as much media coverage. And they’ll hurt whichever candidate wins the state — most likely Sanders or Buttigieg. (Although if Sanders winds up finishing in second place or lower, he also might not mind a reduction in the importance of Iowa, especially with one of his best states, New Hampshire, coming up next.)

Perfect.

She ripped up his bullshit at the end of it too.



Also. And you're not going to believe this, guys:

Based on 62% of Iowa Caucus Results, Bernie Leads Popular Vote by 1,200 But Trails Buttigieg With Delegates

Rural voters can go and get fucked.

Did they ever release the last 38% or is that a big nah?

Think that's it.

Those 38% are lost probably in the app and by the time the paper trail is collected it's new Hampshire.

degenerasian wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:17 am Think that's it.

Those 38% are lost probably in the app and by the time the paper trail is collected it's new Hampshire.

They released a little bit of it but there’s 29% outstanding. What I’ve seen is that the 29% may help Sanders and Klobuchar significantly. Not sure the party would be thrilled with a Sanders 1st, Biden 5th outcome, so I suspect things may get slow walked between now and New Hampshire.

Joe K wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:52 am

degenerasian wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:17 am Think that's it.

Those 38% are lost probably in the app and by the time the paper trail is collected it's new Hampshire.

They released a little bit of it but there’s 29% outstanding. What I’ve seen is that the 29% may help Sanders and Klobuchar significantly. Not sure the party would be thrilled with a Sanders 1st, Biden 5th outcome, so I suspect things may get slow walked between now and New Hampshire.

That's really sad.

I mean, are you paranoid if they are actually out to get you? I bolded some of the more interesting parts.



Maker of Glitchy Iowa Caucus App Has Democratic Party Ties
By The Associated Press
Feb. 4, 2020

WASHINGTON — The little-known technology start-up under scrutiny after the meltdown of the Iowa Democratic caucuses on Monday was founded little more than a year ago by veterans of Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 presidential campaign who had presented themselves as gurus of campaigning in the digital era.

Shadow Inc. was picked in secret by the Iowa Democratic Party after its leaders consulted with the Democratic National Committee on vetting vendors and security protocols for developing a phone app used to gather and tabulate the caucus results.

Party officials in Iowa blamed an unspecified “coding issue” with the software that led to it producing only partial and unreliable results. It did not identify the firm that produced the technology, but campaign disclosure reports show that the Iowa party paid $63,000 to Shadow in late 2019.

After the company came under withering criticism on social media Tuesday, it issued a series of tweets that expressed “regret” over technical glitches which contributed to a delay in the release of results, but stopped short of apologizing.

“We sincerely regret the delay in the reporting of the results of last night’s Iowa caucuses and the uncertainty it has caused to the candidates, their campaigns, and Democratic caucus-goers,” the company posted Tuesday on Twitter. “We will apply the lessons learned in the future, and have already corrected the underlying technology issue. We take these issues very seriously, and are committed to improving and evolving to support the Democratic Party’s goal of modernizing its election processes.”

Shadow Inc. was launched by ACRONYM, a nonprofit corporation founded in 2017 by Tara McGowan, a political strategist who runs companies aimed at promoting Democratic candidates and priorities. McGowan, 34, is married to Michael Halle, a senior strategist for Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign, which records show has also paid Shadow Inc. $42,500 for software.

McGowan sought to distance herself from Shadow's IowaReporterApp on Monday night, characterizing the app developer as an “independent” company. In a separate statement, an ACRONYM spokesman said the nonprofit organization is an investor in several companies, including Shadow, but was “eagerly awaiting more information from the Iowa Democratic Party with respect to what happened.”

But business and tax records show ACRONYM and Shadow are registered at the same Washington, D.C., street address, which belongs to a WeWork co-working location. Shadow CEO Gerard Niemira previously served as the chief operating officer and chief technology officer at ACRONYM, according to an online resume.

And on Sunday, McGowan tweeted pictures from a birthday celebration that included her husband and Troy Price, the chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party.

ACRONYM presents itself as a cutting-edge leader when it comes to running political campaigns online. It announced ambitious plans in November to spend $75 million targeting President Donald Trump with online advertising, while irking many party leaders with sharp criticism of other established Democratic groups for not doing enough to combat Trump in the digital space.

So far, Facebook ad disclosures show the group has spent about $700,000 on ads. ACRONYM leaders said in November that they had raised about 40 percent of the $75 million they hoped for. But by the end of 2019, it had raised only about one-tenth of that, according to a disclosure filed Monday with the Federal Election Commission. A separate tax-exempt wing of the group won't have to disclose how much money it has raised to the IRS until next year.

David Plouffe, who helped lead both of former President Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns, joined ACRONYM's board of directors in September.

Just who works at Shadow was not clear on the company's webpage Tuesday. But resumes posted on the online business networking site LinkedIn show the company's top executives all worked in the Clinton campaign's digital operation in 2016.

Niemira, the CEO, was Clinton's director of product, responsible for creating a digital platform for field organizers to contact voters and manage local volunteers “while opening up new avenues of data collection for the campaign.”

James Hickey, Shadow's chief operating officer, was an engineering manager at Hillary for America. Krista Davis, the chief technical officer and chief software architect at Shadow, was a backend engineer for the Clinton campaign.

The month after Clinton's 2016 loss to Trump, Niemira and Davis founded Groundbase, a political technology company that Hickey soon joined. In January 2019, ACRONYM announced via tweet that it had bought Groundbase, which provided a text-messaging software tool for organizing campaign volunteers.

“We've acquired SMS tool Groundbase & are launching Shadow, a company focused on building the technology infrastructure needed to enable Democrats to run better, more efficient campaigns,” ACRONYM announced.

The professional and social connections between Shadow and members of the party's establishment were feeding conspiracy theories Tuesday among some Democrats that something was fishy with the company's glitchy Iowa app — suspicions Trump and his GOP allies were looking to stoke.

Donald Trump Jr. took to social media Monday night to suggest the DNC was attempting to rig the primary, harkening back to embarrassing 2016 email leaks that showed party leaders favoring Clinton over her primary rival Bernie Sanders. Many swing-state supporters of the Vermont senator then stayed home on Election Day, aiding Trump's narrow victory.

“Yea rigging the primary worked wonders for the Democrats last time,” the president's eldest son wrote in a series of tweets. “And by ‘Quality Control’ they mean fixing the results to get the candidate the Democrat Overlords in DC want.”

Again, congrats for agreeing with Eric Trump. There is no world where this is good news for anyone. And everyone who was there knows who was voted for. This is embarrassing.

Giff wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:28 am Again, congrats for agreeing with Eric Trump. There is no world where this is good news for anyone. And everyone who was there knows who was voted for. This is embarrassing.

I’ve ready expressed my view that incompetence is more likely than conspiracy but this is pretty fallacious reasoning. By this logic, Hunter Biden is the man and anyone who criticizes him for profiting off nepotism, getting kicked out of the Navy for drug use or impregnating a DC stripper is being unreasonable because they are “agreeing with” right-wing assholes.

Joe K wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:34 am

Giff wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:28 am Again, congrats for agreeing with Eric Trump. There is no world where this is good news for anyone. And everyone who was there knows who was voted for. This is embarrassing.

I’ve ready expressed my view that incompetence is more likely than conspiracy but this is pretty fallacious reasoning. By this logic, Hunter Biden is the man and anyone who criticizes him for profiting off nepotism, getting kicked out of the Navy for drug use or impregnating a DC stripper is being unreasonable because they are “agreeing with” right-wing assholes.

Not, it's not. I'm saying it's ridiculous to agree with Eric Trump that this is somehow proof of election rigging. It's ridiculous because for someone to be conspiring to do something you should at least have 1) a plausible fortunate outcome for a specific person and 2) a way to hide results from other people. There are thousands of people who know the results of this. These aren't hidden votes. This makes the entire DNC look idiotic.

In fact, the only person who would actually benefit from a shitshow like this is Sanders way more than Buttigieg. Sanders and his supporters aggressively hate the DNC establishment, so who's to say they didn't sabotage the app to make them look bad?!? See how fucking stupid that sounds?

It shows incompetence. That's a bad look for everyone.

Thousands of people in Iowa is not million of people around the World.

I'm not saying it's a conspiracy either but just release the full results already, unless they are truly lost, which could have happened.
Some poll manager could have loaded the results on the app and threw out his paper copy and the app has lost it.

degenerasian wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:44 am Thousands of people in Iowa is not million of people around the World.

I'm not saying it's a conspiracy either but just release the full results already, unless they are truly lost, which could have happened.
Some poll manager could have loaded the results on the app and threw out his paper copy and the app has lost it.

I don't understand, if there was this paper trail being touted yesterday by numerous sources, how you have almost 1/3 of the precincts not being reported.

That's a huge number.

In on the press conference by Trump of "we can't have a fair election until we figure all this out, we're going to use executive order to suspend election in 2020 pending investigation into 'what's going on here'".

Just want to get some coin down before the odds lose their luster

Giff wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:40 amIt's ridiculous because for someone to be conspiring to do something you should at least have 1) a plausible fortunate outcome for a specific person ...

Good point, I can't think of any fortunate outcomes for a specific person the app issue has created.

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 9:07 pm I've never understood how Biden was winning polls for so long. I never come across anyone - in real life or online - who is pulling for Biden. I get that the DNC wants him and the big donors want him, but do any actual voters?

There are millions of people who prefer Biden. There are way more moderates than liberals in this country. We just don't normally interact with them. Plus unless things have changed, isn't Biden the clear favorite among African-American voters?

(I've been making calls for Warren this week and come across a couple who intend to vote for Biden. I haven't actually had all that many people answer the phone, so there's every reason to believe Biden is in the same mix as other candidates.)

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 9:07 pm I think they'd rather a Republican win so they don't lose control of their party.

Yeah, there's no evidence for this. There are certainly some who fear the kind of change that Sanders or Warren are talking about, but I think it's mostly due to the fact that they believe that kind of change is an electoral loser.

And sure, it's possible we all know way more about the national electorate than they do. But it's also possible they're right.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:46 am

degenerasian wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:44 am Thousands of people in Iowa is not million of people around the World.

I'm not saying it's a conspiracy either but just release the full results already, unless they are truly lost, which could have happened.
Some poll manager could have loaded the results on the app and threw out his paper copy and the app has lost it.

I don't understand, if there was this paper trail being touted yesterday by numerous sources, how you have almost 1/3 of the precincts not being reported.

That's a huge number.

Yes, there is a paper trail being touted but at the end of the day, what did each of the 1600 managers do? When you managing one of these things you follow every rule literally.

So did the instructions say, "When done, enter the results into the app" or "When done, enter the results into the app and keep the paper".
When I worked one, I had about 11 envelopes that different things had to go into to be returned to headquarters.

If it didn't literally say, keep the paper, or put the paper this envelope, i'd throw it out. I'm not taking anything home.

Well, not to be pedantic, but it's stated in multiple articles that the paper ballots were the backup in case of some kind of technical glitch. What people did in practice is obviously unknown, but the paper shouldn't have been tossed for any reason. Especially if the reporting is correct that many of the precinct captains were skeptical or actually reporting glitches prior to this week.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 12:15 pm Well, not to be pedantic, but it's stated in multiple articles that the paper ballots were the backup in case of some kind of technical glitch. What people did in practice is obviously unknown, but the paper shouldn't have been tossed for any reason. Especially if the reporting is correct that many of the precinct captains were skeptical or actually reporting glitches prior to this week.

I hope this is the case. But we never get 100%, this is what possibly could have happened.

If calling out the facts means "agreeing with Eric Trump" and thus is a bad thing despite the truth, then just go ahead and call me a fucking white supremacist now then.

Caucuses ended 16 hours ago and still 30% of results not yet tallied.

I think that they are more efficient counting votes in India.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 12:11 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 9:07 pm I think they'd rather a Republican win so they don't lose control of their party.

Yeah, there's no evidence for this. There are certainly some who fear the kind of change that Sanders or Warren are talking about, but I think it's mostly due to the fact that they believe that kind of change is an electoral loser.

And sure, it's possible we all know way more about the national electorate than they do. But it's also possible they're right.

I'm not writing a thesis, just stating my opinions. I honestly believe that for about 95% of those who have political power, the most important issue to them is keeping that power. I'm sure that most justify that thought to themselves by thinking that they are the best person for the job, so it's really important that they keep it. But in the end, they want to keep that power. A completely recentered Democratic party led by Bernie, AOC, etc. directly challenges that power in a way that Trump as president does not.

Pruitt wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 12:42 pm Caucuses ended 16 hours ago and still 30% of results not yet tallied.

I think that they are more efficient counting votes in India.

Hasn't it happened before that it took some time for complete Iowa results to come out?

Shirley wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 12:57 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 12:11 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 9:07 pm I think they'd rather a Republican win so they don't lose control of their party.

Yeah, there's no evidence for this. There are certainly some who fear the kind of change that Sanders or Warren are talking about, but I think it's mostly due to the fact that they believe that kind of change is an electoral loser.

And sure, it's possible we all know way more about the national electorate than they do. But it's also possible they're right.

I'm not writing a thesis, just stating my opinions. I honestly believe that for about 95% of those who have political power, the most important issue to them is keeping that power. I'm sure that most justify that thought to themselves by thinking that they are the best person for the job, so it's really important that they keep it. But in the end, they want to keep that power. A completely recentered Democratic party led by Bernie, AOC, etc. directly challenges that power in a way that Trump as president does not.

Dozens of Democratic legislators committed political suicide to pass the ACA and make health care accessible to millions. A bunch of red-state Democratic senators lost their seats over the past few cycles instead of switching to the Republican Party. Going back further, Democrats lost their decades-long House majority because they voted to raise taxes to reduce the deficit. In 2008-09 they voted for less stimulus out of a misguided sense of responsibility even though voting for more would have been more popular, and voted for unpopular bailout programs that helped save the economy at a time when those were crazy unpopular.

There's absolute truth to the point that those in power want to remain there, often to the detriment of the party or nation.

I can't remember which podcast it was, but there's one out there detailing how the Alabama democratic party didn't get behind Doug Jones because he was seen as a threat to the state's democratic party establishment. That fight is still going on to this day. It's maddening.

Johnnie wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 12:24 pm If calling out the facts means "agreeing with Eric Trump" and thus is a bad thing despite the truth, then just go ahead and call me a fucking white supremacist now then.

I'm fucking tired of this wokemode bullshit. I don't like Rogan myself but you get people going "NICE WORK STANDING NEXT TO THAT GUY WHO WAS DRINKING A DIET COKE, BERNIE. YOU KNOW WHO ELSE DRANK DIET COKE? HITLER. THEREFORE, BURNIE IS A NAZI SYMPATHIZER."

Nuance is dead.

Shirley wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:28 pm I've never understood how Biden was winning polls for so long. I never come across anyone - in real life or online - who is pulling for Biden. I get that the DNC wants him and the big donors want him, but do any actual voters?

I think early polling heavily favors the candidates with the most name recognition and the safest candidates. Most people don't know much, if anything about the lesser known candidates, so when asked who they would vote for, they say the name they are most familiar with. Or they know Bernie and Warren are more controversial, so when asked, they say Biden, because that's the safest response to a poll. When it comes to actual voting, people get more information, and Biden will lose "support" as people learn more about the other candidates. If anything, I think Trump attacking Biden helps him in the primaries.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:50 pm There's absolute truth to the point that those in power want to remain there, often to the detriment of the party or nation.

I can't remember which podcast it was, but there's one out there detailing how the Alabama democratic party didn't get behind Doug Jones because he was seen as a threat to the state's democratic party establishment. That fight is still going on to this day. It's maddening.

Reply All.

Nothing to see here, unless you are pro-Eric Trump:

This plan keeps getting better and better. Let's conspire to rig a caucus and throw votes not to myself, but to Deval Patrick. GENIUS!!!

The plan just keeps on getting better and better. If banging means not a fastball, how will the hitters ever know when there is a fastball???

A continuation of nothing ...

Honest to God - what the fuck is wrong with having humans count votes and write the results down on a piece of paper?

How much money is wasted on shit like this?

Pruitt wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 5:50 pm Honest to God - what the fuck is wrong with having humans count votes and write the results down on a piece of paper?

How much money is wasted on shit like this?

Sure, but then you have a pile of pieces of paper, that other humans have to then add up, or type (correctly) into a computer program.

Errors in vote-counting happen all the time with paper ballots, too.

We need robo-counters

Honest to God I thought that was a parody account of some sort made to sound like you know who.

The photo even has the person reading Dark Money by Jane Mayer to make it really stand out.

Then I realized we're living in a god-damned fantasy world and irony is dead.