Sanders camp accuses Democratic establishment of attempting to undermine his campaign…
(Claire Russel, Liberty Headlines) The Iowa Democratic Party released partial results from this week’s primary caucus, but they are riddled with “errors and inconsistencies,” according to the New York Times.
Due to technological complications and human error, the Democratic Party was unable to immediately release the results of Monday’s caucus.
But after evaluating the results, the Times concluded that the official results released by the Iowa Democratic Party did not match the results reported by more than 100 Iowa precincts.
In some cases, the vote tallies reported by the Democratic Party don’t add up.
In others, the precincts reported the wrong number of delegates to certain candidates.
The Times concluded that the errors “do not indicate an intentional effort to compromise or rig the result,” but the Sanders camp has already begun to accuse the Democratic establishment of attempting to undermine his campaign.
So Iowa Dems get caught undercutting Bernie in Black Hawk county and we only know because Black Hawk county released their info on their own? And now Iowa Dems are forced to fix. This is out of this world.
— Secular Talk (@KyleKulinski) February 5, 2020
I have some questions about the reliability of these results.
— Nate Cohn (@Nate_Cohn) February 5, 2020
Mandy McClure, the communications director for the Iowa Democratic Party, told the Times the party isn’t aware of any errors and said they reported the caucus results as they were submitted.
“The caucus math work sheet is the official report on caucus night to the I.D.P., and the I.D.P. reports the results as delivered by the precinct chair,” McClure said in a statement.
One of the errors identified by the Times showed Sanders and Warren picking up support in Warren County’s final realignment, despite the fact that neither had qualified as viable in the first alignment.
In that same precinct, Tom Steyer and Deval Patrick lost votes in the final alignment even though both had qualified during the first alignment.
In both cases, the Times concluded that these results are inconsistent and a technical violation of caucus rules.