Caucus Results Should Not Be Determined by Coin Flips!

As the latest news unfolds out of Iowa it is becoming increasingly clear the Democrats in that state need to leave their whale oil lamps and covered Ticonderoga wagons behind and at least move into the 20th century with their caucuses! I mean, Jeezus Peace, using coin flips to determine outcomes?!

Good grief, the nature of the early Iowa caucus is not even remotely like the general election in November where we must have a winner (two presidents can't 'share' power). Also, given the Iowa Dem caucus is not 'winner take all'  it doesn't matter if precincts end up perfectly tied in some results. You simply allot the delegate votes equally - if odd in number in one precinct (e.g. 3) combine with another precinct or precincts with similar ties and split the results evenly. Better yet, chuck this whole antiquated system and replace it with the simpler caucus modality of the Iowa GOP, which just counts ballots.

As salon.com has reported:

"The results of the first caucus in the U.S. presidential primary election came down not to actual votes, but to a coin toss — or, rather, to multiple coin tosses."

As noted in the previous blog, Sen. Sanders and Hillary Clinton had a virtual tie in the Iowa caucus Monday night. With 99 percent of precincts reported, there was just a 0.2 percent difference; Sanders had 49.6 percent of statewide delegate equivalents, and Clinton had 49.8 percent.  The Iowa Democratic Party said the results were “the closest in Iowa Democratic caucus history.” Because they were tied, in order to determine who would get the delegates, coin tosses were reportedly held in at least seven precincts. There were two coin tosses in Des Moines and four more in Ames, Newton, West Branch and Davenport, the Des Moines Register reported. Clinton won all of these.  

But why determine outcomes by coin tosses? The answer inheres in the nature of the antiquated caucus process held by Iowa Dems.  Rather than counting actual popular votes like the GOP, only percentages are assessed at a given caucus by a precinct captain. As I noted in a previous blog post, caucus goers assemble in distinct groups to support their candidate at different precincts. Each group must reach at least 15 percent or it is "non-viable" . Hence, O'Malley's supporters were quickly left non-viable at all precincts so either had to join an "undecided" group or merge with Sanders or Clinton's. It is clear from seeing the course of events that 0.5% of O'Malley supporters remained but never joined to the extent that the respective percentage support for the two main candidates could be broken. To resolve the percentage equivalences for Sanders and Clinton, at least seven precinct captains resorted to coin tosses. (Another video, which the Des Moines Register did not report on, also emerged, showing a seventh coin toss in Johnson County.)

But this was not Las Vegas, it was a venue for election, a democratic process - not a random one. To have therefore awarded Hillary the overall  'win' by virtue of taking 6 of 7 random coin flips going was an abomination and an affront to democratic principles.

The events Monday night clearly call out not only for a full investigation by Sanders's' team but also the Iowa Dems changing their caucus procedures to make them consistent with those used by the GOP. As I also noted, the GOP caucus goers also assemble, and may listen to a brief spiel for one or other candidate, but at the end simply write the names down on ballots and tabulate them. 'Ties' are averted by the simple expedient of blending caucus vote counts from different precincts if, for example, all the numbers are equal at one precinct. They don't do coin tosses.

Clinton ultimately got 700.59 state delegate equivalents, while Sanders got 696.82 state delegate equivalents, a mere 3.77 point difference, according to the Iowa Democratic Party. In other words, although six is a small fraction of the thousands of overall county delegates, these coin tosses — all of which Clinton reportedly won (despite the low probability)  - effectively pushed her over the edge, giving her the extra statewide delegate equivalents that granted her an additional Iowa delegate.

 It is time now that Iowa Democrats raise a hue and a cry and demand the absurd caucus procedures -  including the "tradition" of delegate equivalents - be put to rest and  instead employ simpler direct paper ballot tabulations like the Republicans. We don't need cumbersome, draconian baloney in  our voting processes and we sure as hell don't need random chance determining winners at the level of state caucuses!

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/sam-husseini/65816/iowa-the-media-and-political-establishment-lose

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/dave-johnson/65810/some-surprises-and-warnings-in-the-iowa-numbers

Why Caucuses Are So Difficult - For Democrats

In five days the Iowa caucuses will be held and we will know for once who really has the energy and endorsement of voters  (not newspapers) in the 2016 presidential race. In the case of Bernie Sanders, winning Iowa would be a mighty first step in validating his campaign, as it was for Obama back in 2008. He definitely has the backing of most Iowans under 45, nearly 77%.. The challenge is to translate that energy into caucus outcomes in his favor.

The underlying problem is that caucusing is much more difficult for Democrats than Republicans, since it embodies genuine participatory democracy - not just stuffing ballots into boxes. In the latter (R) case,  the voter writes the name of his preferred candidate on a piece of paper, hands it in and then the various paper ballots are counted. The winner is announced and delegates are then awarded.

For Democrats it's not so simple, or isolated. Some pundits have described it as a "game of political musical chairs".  First, a campaign representative shows up for each candidate,  adjacent to their designated areas, and makes a pitch. The pitch person's job here is to briefly sound off on the great qualities of the candidate that should make him or her the preferred choice of caucus goers.

After that, caucus goers break into groups for their candidate, flocking to the areas designated. The undecided voters are shepherded to a separate area of the precinct floor.  The numbers are eventually counted for support of that candidate, A, B or C.  The percentages of support are then calculated and a candidate's support is deemed viable if (for the vast majority of caucus locations) they get 15 percent or more.

Caucus goers whose candidate doesn't make the cut can re-align to another campaign, or try to reach the 15 percent viability by recruiting additional supporters. For example, if O'Malley's supporters fail to get to the 15 percent mark on Monday night they can engage Sanders' or Hillary supporters to try to convince them to move their way - to increase the percentage to the magic number.


The other option is to go to the undecided area and be recruited from there, say by having excellent pitches made from the supporters of the two candidates who reached viability. This process repeats until all the remaining candidates are viable, i.e. at 15 percent or over. Then delegates are awarded according to the percentages.

The process, unlike the Republican one, can take hours - though in most cases a caucus finishes in under an hour. But it does require a commitment of time and patience and this is why the turnout for the Iowa caucus has historically been low (e.g. 16 percent back in 2012).

Barack Obama secured his victory  from his youthful supporters back in 2008, but it remains to be seen if Bernie Sanders can do the same. One thing that would help is getting young voters together for 'teaching moments' on the caucus process so they know what to expect and don't enter the precincts looking like they just stepped off a space ship onto an alien planet.