All eyes… still on Iowa
Well it’s been more than 12 hours since we were supposed to have results from the Iowa Caucus, and it doesn’t look like we’re much closer to a resolution than we were back then.
After the New York Times reported the first 1-2% of results, everything just paused.
Reports started trickling out about caucus chairs sitting on hold with the state party for up to an hour – just trying to provide results.
Word eventually broke that the software designed to report and share the first and second alignment totals were experiencing some nonspecified issues. Users reported crashing on switching screens or going to sleep mode, and rumors surfaced that the database was down or incorrectly tallying the data.
Buttigieg and Klobuchar seized on the opportunity to declare a victory for themselves, while the Sanders campaign posted their totals for the precincts where they had captains who recorded results. Sander’s numbers showed him in first with about 28% of the delegates, and Buttigieg posted very similar data showing him with a similar 28% lead in the districts he had captains at.
Rumors have circulated about Shadow Inc, the publisher of the software that seems to be at the center of this mess. Several campaigns, including Buttigieg and Gillibrand, purchased software services from the firm, as did the Iowa and Nevada state parties. The founder of Shadow Inc also expressed personal enthusiasm for Pete, so his early declaration of victory coupled with operational breakdown and the appearance of impropriety has already turned quite a few campaigns sour.
As of noon, there is no official word from the state party on who won or when results will be available. Last night they were claiming all the data was available and merely needed to be confirmed, and today the latest report from WaPo is that staffers are being dispatched to retrieve the physical paper ballots to confirm the data.
They claim the results will be “as soon as possible” and that their goal is to publish them today, but there’s likely to be a lot of further contention about what those results say and whether or not they can be trusted.