IOWA

Iowa and technology apparently do not go well together.  The Iowa caucus, the first in the nation has been criticized for often setting the stage for the candidate selection although it is not considered a microcosm of the United States as a whole.  Has the caucus process outlived its usefulness?  Iowa Democrat leadership may now be regretting the use of the application Shadow.

I am not sure, but in my mind a company named Shadow should be suspect.  The company is affiliated with a firm called ACRONYM, a Democratic non-profit.  The New York Times has apparently reported that Shadow's leadership is composed of persons connected to the former Hillary Clinton campaign.  It notes that the alphabetic acronyms of leadership:  CEO, COO and CTO are all former Clintonites, or depending upon your point of view Clintonistas.  The Iowa Democratic Party (IDP) was charged with running the Monday, February 3 caucus and they, and Nevada (after New Hampshire) paid about $60,000 for the application.  On Monday night I first read reports that there was a problem with the application, app for short.  Monday morning, the talking points were that the app was not the problem but that they were reconciling three different aspects that recorded the votes in caucus--the other two being photos and paper ballots. Why the need to reconcile, and the level of differences was not explained.  Later in the day they said the application worked, but that it did not properly record everything.  Is partially getting it right now the new normal?  If a cars transmission does not work, but all other aspects work, the car, as a whole, does not work.  Nevada has chosen to simply dump the app.

The backup was a phone line, but there were problems with that too.  I suppose they did not have sufficient personnel to handle phone calls.  Some precinct reporters were said to be on hold for over two hours.  Chris Cuomo of New York noted that the Iowa Democratic party had one thing to do and do it right and it did not do that.  He went on to say that millions of dollars are spent in Iowa and they have deprived the winner of claim, and strength as the campaigns head to New Hampshire.  Although, Pete Butttigieg claimed victory, apparently believing in the anchoring tendency, but getting some grief for claiming victory with no votes recorded.  I guess at this point Beto could claim victory.

The real loser may be Bernie Sanders.  Early predictions had him doing well in Iowa, although a number of his supporters noted a concerted effort by the other campaigns to deny his votes.  Reports noted that Mayor Pete supporters defaced signs of where Bernie supporters were to gather (at  at least once precinct) to get a head count to meet the 15% viability threshold. Another report noted that Sanders had received 20% more of the vote in one precinct, but given only one delegate, that same as four others some who barely made the threshold.  They walked out.   Given comments by John Kerry and others in the party, perhaps before ABT (anybody but Trump) there is ABB, anybody but Bernie.  Not unlike 2016 when election Democrat election rules favored Hillary Clinton, are they now working against Bernie.  Bernie apparently has headwinds wherever he goes.  

Of course, with delay there will be charges of tampering.  Joe Biden, who on Monday was not thought to be doing well in Iowa has already made comments about the election process.  If he does not do well he will blame the app, not unlike San Francisco 49er fans blaming the referees for their meltdown in the Super Bowl on Groundhog Day.  Elizabeth Warren's campaign noted that for every second of not announcing the votes, there is the possibility of tampering.  IDP officials noted that the app was not hacked.  Russia took a pass on this.  But, did Pete B?  Besides supporters vandalizing Bernie signs, Pete B paid Shadow $42,500 for software rights and information.    I guess there is not such thing as a conflict of interest with IDP and the candidates running.  

For fifty years Iowa has had the preeminent role in presidential elections with its caucus.  For fifty years they have set the tone.  Would Obama have moved ahead if he had not secured an Iowa victory?  Besides spending a great deal of money on ads, organization and events, many candidates spent over 60 days in Iowa.   No other state receives that much attention.  Will the IDP and their actions this year have set Iowa caucus on a death spiral?  Claims have been made that Iowa, since it is not "like" the nation as a whole does not deserve to be the first state to hold a primary or caucus. Will they be relegated to a later time in the candidate process?  (It is not always the democrats, several years ago Mitt Romney was declared the winner of Iowa, that is until Rick Santorum actually won.  Romney go the early press and the nomination, Santorum went to oblivion.)

The nation has a variety of soci-economic, demographic and geographic metrics that could be used to determine, "most like the nation."  Add even more if one gets to less hard to quantify measures of belief.  I examined two metrics, race and urbanization.  Iowa is the fifth most Caucasian (non-Hispanic) state in the nation (2010 census) at 92.4% compared to 70% for the nation.  The second metric was urbanization, which Iowa is at 64% while the nation as a whole is 80%.  However, New Hampshire, which has held the first primary in the nation for 100 years is not any better on those two metrics.  It is actually worse compared to the national figures than is Iowa; it comes in at 95% Caucasian, and 60.3% rural.  By my analysis of these two metrics, if you wish a state that most signifies the nation Oregon should be the first at 78.5% white and 81% urban, or Washington at 72.5% Caucasian and 84% urban.   Although, overall, I would say those two states are more like each other than the nation as a whole.  

This was the first time the application was used, and it was not good.  Perhaps the same software engineers worked on the Boeing 737 software.  There is a saying that Iowa stands for I Owe the World and Apology. Since many in the US have a view of the US to the world, as New York residents have a view of NY to the US, world is correct.  It is a matter of perception.  I have long said, that perception is 99% of reality. Poor Iowa has little going for it but for being the first voting in the presidential primary, and perhaps the Iowa writer's workshop.  Interesting, showing concern in the application the Department of Homeland Security offered to vet the application, the request was turned down.  I believe it was Winston Churchill who once said that democracy is messy until one compares it to the alternatives. It seems that Iowa is in a time wrap, not unlike the movie "Groundhog Day."   Many waiting.  

As I post this, Iowa is promising release of at least one half of the vote totals. 

Revision at 5:12.  Preliminary votes totals have Pete with a slight lead over Bernie and Biden in fourth.  Statistician Nate Silver provided an analysis of Bounce for a winner after a primary.  Super Tuesday, with 15 states and Samoa, including heavy weights CA and TX, the winner gets a 30 Bounce magnitude of +30, while Iowa, a lone state, gives a bounce of +23.  So, yes, Iowa carries a great deal of weight in the election process.