Someone Has To Do It: US Elections 2020

[Incandenza]

I would just call it an open conspiracy. The establishment doesn't want him to be the nominee, everyone understands this.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...legates-110083

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/u...tic-party.html

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama...b00149f724793b

[San Bernardhinault]

I think the hypothetical working theory is that now that Sanders appears likely to have "won" on all three main metrics (really, as I keep saying, finished first...), that the DNC are trying to spike any publicity and any bounce he'd get from that by going into re-canvass mode, meaning that the announcement of Sanders winning will come after New Hampshire and when we're in a different news cycle where nobody really cares about Iowa because it actually has very few pledged delegates (and Sanders and Buttigieg will probably have the same numbers of those).

This is by far the most plausible of the post-Iowa conspiracies that I've seen. It's simple and it's not self-contradictory and it's plausible. I still think it's more likely that the DNC actually just want to make sure the count is correct, but I wouldn't discount this.

Of course, if the New Hampshire polling stands up and Sanders wins that and then they announce he won Iowa almost immediately after that, it may be that he actually gets a bigger boost in momentum.

[caja-dglh]

I really don't see how the DNC benefits from making itself seem idiotic and incompetent in Iowa when Sanders is almost certain to take New Hampshire, gets momentum, and so Iowa just gets remembered as a mess?

In fact this mess doesn't seem to be stopping any Sanders momentum at all. It seems like Iowa - a state that desperately wants to be recognized by caucusing first - decided to use tech cos it is really future thinking, and... well. This.

[ursus arctos]

It is much more than just tech. They either don't know, understand or have the ability to apply the rules.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1225433272710291457

[San Bernardhinault]

One interesting aspect is Sanders's late surge in the count - it turns out that the Sanders campaign really focused on the satellite caucuses. I think it's partly tactical - there are some ways of running up the numbers that I don't fully understand; and it's partly name recognition: Sanders supporters are very loyal, so if you're a Sanders Iowan in, say, Philadelphia, you'd likely show up to the satellite caucus. Buttigieg in particular has relatively low name recognition and has invested his time in retail politics in Iowa itself, so he's been getting no traction elsewhere. The result is that Buttigieg is absolutely getting crushed in the these satellite caucuses. Sanders has 22 state delegates from them, Buttigieg has just one.

[Nefertiti2]

[URL]https://twitter.com/thestalwart/status/1225477863647961090?s=21[/URL]

[Nefertiti2]

One interesting aspect is Sanders's late surge in the count - it turns out that the Sanders campaign really focused on the satellite caucuses. I think it's partly tactical - there are some ways of running up the numbers that I don't fully understand; and it's partly name recognition: Sanders supporters are very loyal, so if you're a Sanders Iowan in, say, Philadelphia, you'd likely show up to the satellite caucus. Buttigieg in particular has relatively low name recognition and has invested his time in retail politics in Iowa itself, so he's been getting no traction elsewhere. The result is that Buttigieg is absolutely getting crushed in the these satellite caucuses. Sanders has 22 state delegates from them, Buttigieg has just one.

A lot of the satellite caucuses were with ethnic groups usually ignored. Bosnian meat packers, poultry workers etc. Not name recognition, community organisation

[URL]https://twitter.com/venturecommunis/status/1224745204613148673?s=21[/URL]

Or

[URL]https://twitter.com/noahisaak/status/1225290269194686464?s=21[/URL]

[Nefertiti2]

Four bilingual satellite caucuses

[URL]https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1225505446552838145?s=21[/URL]

[Nefertiti2]

This is pretty good, too.

[URL]https://twitter.com/anandwrites/status/1225472609527177216?s=21[/URL]

[Incandenza]

This is pretty good, too.

[URL]https://twitter.com/anandwrites/status/1225472609527177216?s=21[/URL]

Thanks for that. Chait is such a failed prognosticator who keeps hanging around and telling us what we should be doing.

[ursus arctos]

In large part because he remains a favoured stenographer for much of the donor class

[Nefertiti2]

https://twitter.com/briebriejoy/status/1225526956160094208?s=20

[Nefertiti2]

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1225523277831036930?s=20

[Nefertiti2]

this is a great find

https://twitter.com/NaomiAKlein/status/1225526621387591682?s=20

[Incandenza]

Yang has apparently laid off some staff. Not sure if he will endorse Sanders, but that would seem more likely than any of the other candidates except maybe Warren.

[anton pulisov]

It's Buttigieg really asking for the satellite caucus things to be given less weight?

[anton pulisov]

If Sanders wants to win the nomination he has to give the Democratic establishment a hard time. In the same way Trump shat all over the Republican establishment. He has to stop playing nice. He tried that in 2016 and look where it got him.

[Incandenza]

Buttigieg has soared in the Boston Globe NH poll. One point behind Sanders. Sanders is at 24, Pete 23, Warren 13.

Any Warren supporters that have said that Sanders is their second choice and say that they want a progressive to win need to get behind Sanders if Pete looks to keep gaining momentum.

[San Bernardhinault]

I wouldn't be too worried. Buttigieg is stronger on super-white states with a Democrat electorate who are heavily liberal and college educated. There aren't enough of those.If Pete maintains momentum in Nevada and South Carolina, then you should worry, but I don't think it'll happen. You should still mostly worry about Biden, but what you really want is Biden, Buttigieg and Bloomberg splitting the non-Sanders vote.

[Flynnie]

Once you realize Perez is asking for a recount, not doing the caucuses over again, I agree with him. There were a lot of delegates apportioned based on shoddy math, people dividing things the wrong way, etc. I think we had a tweet a few days ago where somebody erroneously gave Pete a Sanders SDE — well, if that error hasn’t been fixed then that would be enough to give Sanders the victory, as they’re 1.5 SDEs apart from each other.

[anton pulisov]

Buttigieg's strength is appearing amazing at first view. I mean, I was very impressed by him when he first hit the scene. Then when I heard more and more from him I realised he was a total fraud and product of the establishment. Primary voters in various states who haven't been following things might just be getting their first impression of him now, and end up voting for him. Then, by the time November rolls around, they'll be fed up of Mayor Pete and his empty bullshit and simply stay at home.

Sanders is the opposite. People are luke warm about him first, but the more exposure they get to him the more he wins them over.

Buttigieg seems to be trying to emulate the Obama coalition, but without the black voters. I don't see how that's going to work. Unless Obama himself comes out and stumps for him. It could happen.

[Tactical Genius]

Buttigieg's strength is appearing amazing at first view. I mean, I was very impressed by him when he first hit the scene. Then when I heard more and more from him I realised he was a total fraud and product of the establishment. Primary voters in various states who haven't been following things might just be getting their first impression of him now, and end up voting for him. Then, by the time November rolls around, they'll be fed up of Mayor Pete and his empty bullshit and simply stay at home.

Sanders is the opposite. People are luke warm about him first, but the more exposure they get to him the more he wins them over.

Buttigieg seems to be trying to emulate the Obama coalition, but without the black voters. I don't see how that's going to work. Unless Obama himself comes out and stumps for him. It could happen.

Nobody is winning the black vote mate. Obama coming out to endorse a candidate may get a handful of black voters but he is a lot less popular amongst the black community than many seem to think.

[Bruno]

Chait's prognostication history and stenographic role aside, he doesn't lose that exchange. Anand Giridharadas cites reportorial anecdote and feelings, Chait cites polling data. Chait is accused of falsely comparing Bernie to Corbyn. He doesn't do that, he compares the disregard for polls in both cases. Chait isn't saying Bernie can't win, though he's accused of saying that, he says Bernie is not the strongest bet based on the polling data. I'd like to know how that isn't a reasonable argument.

It seems to me that a Bernie victory will either require a rather different electorate turning out in November that overturns the polling data, or for the polls to change quite a bit on his policies, or for Trump's popularity among his base to decline. At this point we can't see that.

[anton pulisov]

Nobody is winning the black vote mate. Obama coming out to endorse a candidate may get a handful of black voters but he is a lot less popular amongst the black community than many seem to think.

Yes, the 'first black president' shine has worn off a bit.

[ursus arctos]

That was Clinton's schtick