Still waiting for an audit of Iowa results.

[Skwmom]

From the paper that endorsed Clinton:

Editorial: Something smells in the Democratic Party

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.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/editorials/caucus/2016/02/03/editorial-something-smells-democratic-party/79777580/

[Bluzmann57]

1. We had a HUGE turnout

106-104 Sanders. We had to convince the O'Malley people and they went 4-2 with one abstention for Sanders. The one abstention happens to be my Alderman. Not really sure what to think about that.

[NWCorona]

2. Out of all the states this is the one for me that's most probable

[elleng]

3. Interesting.

Has anything happened since February 5, the date of this editorial?

'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.'

[marions ghost]

4. K&R

election integrity--

[brooklynite]

5. Has Bernie Sanders had a follow-up comment?

Maybe they determined that there's not "there" there...

[CoffeeCat]

6. Before this editorial came out

The Iowa Democratic Party, headed by Andy McGuire, refused to allow any sort of examination of the Iowa caucus results. It was "case closed" and everyone was told to move on.

What was happening behind the scenes, is that Iowans were discovering errors. This is key: The Iowa Democratic Party had a PDF on the front page of their website. That PDF listed every Iowa precinct and the delegates that were apportioned for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley from the Iowa caucuses. Precinct captains and others looked at this PDF and spotted errors. Most of these errors were in Clinton's favor.

For example, in Grinnell, Iowa, a professor (who was a Sander's precinct captain) knew that his precinct results were Sanders 6, Clinton 3. The results were reported on the IDP site as Sanders 4, Clinton 5.

Others came forward too. And McGuire continued to say, "Case closed."

This is when the Des Moines Register wrote their scathing article that you posted. Only because she was under pressure, did McGuire relent and agree to look at the mistakes. The info released from the IDP reported that mistakes twere a mix of errors in favor of Bernie and Clinton. And they were corrected.

The corrections were a wash. The results moved the numbers, but barely.

All of the aforementioned happened within 4 days of the Iowa caucus. Iowans were outraged and just learning about possible problems, then the DSR editorial sparked publicity and further interest from Iowans. But guess what happened.

Remember that PDF that I was telling you about that was on the front page of the IDP website? The caucuses were on Tuesday. The PDF was removed from the front page on Sunday. Just when publicity was ramping up--and people were learning that that errors may have been a problem, the PDF was no longer readily available on the IDP site.

In effect, no way to check for errors or discrepancies.

In my mind, that was the stopping point for further examination. Other Iowans may have come forward, or found errors. Now, with that PDF gone, there was no way to do it.

After that time, everyone--including the Des Moines Register--moved on.