tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-40614832024-03-07T18:20:33.562-06:00John Deeth BlogThe worst.Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.comBlogger6529125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-44198561249594249552021-07-16T04:20:00.229-05:002021-10-09T14:19:53.368-05:00Fixing The Caucuses, Part 5: Friendly (?) Advice<p>Because I'm openly in favor of ending the caucuses and going to a primary, even if it costs Iowa First, I've been persona non grata at Iowa Democratic Party headquarters since the Dvorsky Administration. It was worst while Andy McGuire was chair, when I was very pointedly and publicly excluded from a caucus review committee, even when they re-opened it to add more members. I'm well aware that the 2016 committee was a Remain Calm, All Is Well sham, but excluding me was still a slap in the face.</p><p><br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DDT_IBk7hAA" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">Actual footage of caucus sign in at Iowa City Precinct 17.<br /></span></p><p></p><p>So for the last few years, since I'm not allowed behind closed doors and no one ever reaches out to me, I've had to make my case in public. I don't have a lot of followers, but I know that the people who do hear what I say are people who matter in this process.</p><p>I've know new IDP chair Ross Wilburn a long time, back before his Iowa City mayor days, and I like him. I know he's reasonable, but I also know he has to deal with a certain set of expectations regarding First. So I'm still going public here, but I look forward to talking with anyone who will listen.</p><p>So here's my suggestions for how we can improve the caucuses, in decreasing order of severity. </p><b>Have a primary.</b><p></p><p>I won't go too deep into that here, especially since that would require legislation and bipartisan cooperation, and the Republicans have no interest in changing the process. But the bottom line is, a primary is a more democratic process than a caucus. We need to talk about this and we need to stop the denial. </p><p><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Even if the Iowa political/media establishment will not give up First and the caucuses willingly, we need to prepare for the likelihood that it will be taken from us. </span>At some point soon, the DNC is going to ban caucuses, and we will need to adapt. <span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">In fact, assuming President Biden runs again, a re-election year when the stakes in the nomination contest are low would be the best opportunity for the DNC to make that change.</span></p><p>I'd like to see legislative Democrats make an actual effort to go along and introduce primary legislation, even though, given the Republican trifecta and their party's commitment to not changing the caucuses, it would be doomed to fail. Still, I would like us to be national team players. <br /></p><p>Maybe you could still have a small, off-year style caucus for party business. I don't really care. I've long argued that the whole platform process should be abolished, because it's not binding on candidates and officials and thus, to me, meaningless. And in other states, the delegates and party committee members are either slated by the campaigns or appear on the primary ballot itself. You can argue about those things if you want - but presidential preference should be handled in the most democratic way possible.</p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuzqzgks2CuN9cqFvE_lVBpZ8j1C4WWE3sljS_7ZoQxDmKvBgYCkDw7WpNL7DfoPjRi1m209vsUhcuKsruaeTbl-v_IfB7S8Y-8hSqxQ3mz4QLQH5idvR7N4evxUjhBCR_tvNG/s681/14608107_1180665285312703_1558693314_n.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="445" data-original-width="681" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuzqzgks2CuN9cqFvE_lVBpZ8j1C4WWE3sljS_7ZoQxDmKvBgYCkDw7WpNL7DfoPjRi1m209vsUhcuKsruaeTbl-v_IfB7S8Y-8hSqxQ3mz4QLQH5idvR7N4evxUjhBCR_tvNG/s320/14608107_1180665285312703_1558693314_n.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The math is easier with a primary, too.<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><p></p>But I'm not just about "have a primary." If we are going to have a 2024
caucus, which I expect even if the DNC bans caucuses, I want a better
caucus. So let's keep improving...<br /><p><b>Put the needs of ordinary voters first, not the needs of the political and media elite.</b></p><p>Who cares about first? </p><p>The bipartisan political elite - the inner circle
of activists and the next circle out who love the attention and the selfies and the big
names at small county fundraisers and the personal phone calls from
senators. And the state news media who love to play out their national
anchor fantasies. That's a big part of why the state media downplays
anti-caucus views. </p><p>I know how much losing First would cost these elites,
because I'm one of them. I know that losing First means we will
never see a presidential candidate again. And I'm not going to
argue that my adopted home state should<i> not </i>be first. <br /></p><p>But
most Normal People do not care about First. They don't attend candidate
events. They don't meet candidates. Regular people have busy lives and
busy schedules outside of politics. They just want to vote, and we
should give them what they want.</p><p><b>Stop caring about what New Hampshire thinks.</b> </p><p>F🤬🤬k New Hampshire. It's not 1984 anymore and New Hampshire is not our friend. We need to plan a nomination process that works best for <i>Iowans</i>, and not worry about what a vain and self-important official in another state is going to do. <br /></p><p>I don't see any scenario where we keep First. But let's say by some lightning strikes chance that we do. If we make a change to our nomination process that benefits Iowans, and the DNC OKs it, then we've played by the rules. Then if the New Hampshire Secretary of State says "nope, that's a primary," and moves ahead of us, then it's New Hampshire breaking the rules and New Hampshire that should be sanctioned. <br /></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">(When we lose First, which we will, I want New Hampshire to die with us.)<br /></span></p><p>In that regard: <br /></p><p><b>Absentee Ballots. REAL absentee ballots, pre-printed with candidate names, that you can mark in secret at home. </b> <br /></p><p>We are the party of voting rights. Every election cycle we push voters to get their vote in early, fill out ABRs or come to an early voting site.</p><p>Except on caucus night, when we insist you show up. And some people just can't.</p><p>We need absentee ballots for the sake of fairness and access, and we need absentee ballots to get people out of our most overcrowded caucus rooms. This is the best and fairest solution for rank and file non-activist Iowans.<br /></p><p><b>Virtual Caucus 2.0.</b></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNHEW22IsyJ07ujMR7JYrzH0wBHITbUemXu51ZEdBmxNY73xHKFZHQLLGXeduXHkNNIKUZ8zsoFO8Ypyahnbxi6Hba5i9_4L74PAq9G58PPqR-tyucHtw80zIqrPPxwrYzBjdH/s597/ironic.jpeg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="418" data-original-width="597" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNHEW22IsyJ07ujMR7JYrzH0wBHITbUemXu51ZEdBmxNY73xHKFZHQLLGXeduXHkNNIKUZ8zsoFO8Ypyahnbxi6Hba5i9_4L74PAq9G58PPqR-tyucHtw80zIqrPPxwrYzBjdH/s320/ironic.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>It's ra-a-aaaain on your wedding day ironic that just months after Iowa Democrat's phone-in "Virtual Caucus" was shot down as a "security risk," the entire world adapted overnight to virtual meetings - including the Democratic Party, which held virtual conventions from the local to the national level. A Zoom-trained world might be more ready to handle some sort of virtual caucus. It won't work for everyone, but it's better than nothing. Real absentees are better - but if for some reason that's not an option, Virtual Caucus 2.0 is worth reconsidering.<br /><p></p><p><b>One person one vote. </b></p><p><a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2021/07/fixing-caucuses-part-4-apportionment.html">As I've been pointing out for years</a>, Iowa's complicated "state delegate equivalent" formula that allocates delegates by county based on past general election voting skews the results. It undercounts high turnout, high growth, increasingly blue counties, and rewards low turnout, population losing, increasingly red counties. <span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">In 2020, Johnson County had 12.3% of statewide Democratic caucus attendance, but only got 7.7% of the state convention delegates.</span></p>The convoluted math formula is one of the things the rest of the nation, the press especially, hates the most about Iowa. It's time to end it. We need to lose all the state delegate equivalent crap and just report the vote totals. Base the national delegates on one person, one vote at the congressional district level that the DNC allocates delegates. <br /><p>That's what the public wants, that's what the press wants, that's what everybody except a tiny handful of small county caucus activists wants. </p><p>If the small counties don't like it, they can do what Johnson County does and show up.</p><p><b>Any absentee process needs to be counted on an equal basis as in-person attendance.</b></p><p>Before the DNC, out of the blue, banned Virtual Caucus, IDP had made a decision that the phone-in process would only count for 10% of the delegate allocation, no matter how many people attended. That was even though up to a third of caucus goers were interested in the option - I think in the end, as word got out, it would have been much higher.</p><p>As I was meeting with organizers, I learned that every campaign was downplaying Virtual Caucus, because it "counted less." I argued loudly against it and it's still unacceptable.</p><p>I was never able to figure out the math on satellite caucuses, the absentee plan that IDP had to pull off the shelf when Virtual Caucus was killed. I had enough other stuff I was doing. But it was also not weighted 1:1 with in person attendance. </p><p>If absentees aren't counted equally, people won't use them and will continue to show up at the most overcrowded sites...<br /></p><p><b>Overcrowding needs to be taken seriously.</b></p><p>I have been telling higher ups since at least 2008 that the overcrowding in my county was at crisis levels. This concern has been repeatedly and consistently dismissed by IDP. At one time we were directly told, "that's just a Johnson County problem."</p><p>Which does not solve the problem.</p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKGtsR_jtr6okEVgU6A50sscwvzntoDFUPLnim_iUoTMYpNMKO2Ppu5L2Ont6IB-IgxO-nDSq9JiHiWEe1UQNdriFpYKm8VBlrE4FUuivV0_oTaQpynvgUS25rDLyN2YxdQ1hG/s1024/2020-02-04T041407Z_405579392_MT1USATODAY13994428_RTRMADP_3_762-UNIVERSITY-OF-IOWA-STUDENTS-CAUCUS-MONDAY-FEB-3-1024x683.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="683" data-original-width="1024" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKGtsR_jtr6okEVgU6A50sscwvzntoDFUPLnim_iUoTMYpNMKO2Ppu5L2Ont6IB-IgxO-nDSq9JiHiWEe1UQNdriFpYKm8VBlrE4FUuivV0_oTaQpynvgUS25rDLyN2YxdQ1hG/w640-h426/2020-02-04T041407Z_405579392_MT1USATODAY13994428_RTRMADP_3_762-UNIVERSITY-OF-IOWA-STUDENTS-CAUCUS-MONDAY-FEB-3-1024x683.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">754 people at my Iowa City Precinct 5 caucus.<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><br />Unfortunately, IDP has put the demands of rural counties first here.
They insist that mandatory meeting attendance is critical, because
otherwise they will be unable to fill their committees. It's possible that one size does not fit all here - but our problem, and the problem in some precincts in other metro counties, is that we literally cannot fit everyone who wants to attend into the biggest room in or near the precinct.<br /><p></p><p>It's simply not possible to conduct a meaningful process, which is designed for 30 people in a living room, when you have crowds of 500, 600, 700... up to 945 in our biggest precinct in 2016. And since we're already in the biggest rooms that exist, the only solution is to get some bodies out of the rooms. Which is also important because...<br /></p><p><b>90% of attendees do not want to be at a meeting. Give them what they want.</b></p><p>Everyone has seen this every caucus cycle: the moment the delegate allocation is locked in, the overwhelming majority of people leave. The crowd dwindles down to the same 30 people who would have been in the living room in 1976, and who will be at the governor year caucus in 2022.</p><p>At my 2016 caucus, 430 people crammed into and overflowed a room meant for 200. As soon as I announced the delegate count, 400 left.<br /></p><p>Why are we making those 400 people stay for two hours? They're not interested in the platform or the central committee or "party building." They want to vote and go home. <i>Let them.</i> If you are not going to have absentees, and are going to insist on in-person attendance, give people the option of voting at sign-in and leaving.</p><p>Literally every person I have talked to who has attended both a Democratic and a Republican caucus prefers the Republican process. You sign in, you vote, you leave if you want. We can probably streamline it even more as I'll explain below.</p><p><b>If we are going to insist on doing this the hard way, we need buy-in from all the key institutions in the state, by law if necessary.</b></p><p>Let's say all my suggestions above are rejected and the IDP is going to continue to require mass in person attendance at a long meeting, we need all hands on deck, and I don't just mean all Democrats or all political people. This is civics. not politics.</p><p>We need to stop everything else in the state that night. We need every large indoor space. I've worked on this for years and it's hard. Some publicly funded locations who are on paper required to offer space have found ways to refuse, or provide sub-optimal spaces. Usually the claim is that school events take precedence. My interpretation of the code is that "shall provide" means <i>shall</i> provide, not "<i>may</i> provide unless there's a ball game or choir practice," but we've never had time to test that in court.<br /></p><p>We could clear that up in the law. <i>We need to require the schools, pre-K through grad school, to cancel all classes, events, games, and practices and open their doors at no charge.</i> (This has been proposed in legislation that hasn't advanced.) We need to strongly encourage the churches to do the same and we need to work across the aisle to make sure parishioners of one party don't scream at the pastor for letting the other party have a meeting space. Stores and non-essential services need to shut down so people can attend. Absentees would be better, but if we're rejecting that because oh noes, it might make New Hampshire mad, then we need this.</p><p><b>Stop giving lip service to accessibility, especially child care.</b></p><p>We're the state of Tom Harkin, the father of the ADA, but when it comes to caucus night we treat accessibility as an inconvenient box to check off. It's expensive and impractical, but by rights every site should have a sound system, a sign interpreter, adequate parking, and unblocked entrances. I think my county did better this time, but we had a long way to go. And of course nothing is truly accessible when 700 people are in the room. </p><p>Accessibility also includes child care. But even if there is sufficient space for a Kid Room on site, who's going to leave their kid with J. Random Volunteer? Do it the simple way: just give people who need child care the money to pay their regular provider (and give those providers absentee ballots - or, hear me out, just give the parent the absentee ballot in the first place).<br /></p><p><b>Give the locals money.<br /></b></p><p>All those space rentals and disability accommodations we mentioned cost money. We managed, but it was a big expense and luckily we're a big rich county. But we had four figure rental bills for some sites. Once you get up over the size of a grade school gym, space is rare and expensive. As for smaller counties, budgets are one of the reasons some of these items get short shrift.<br /></p><p>If the state party is going to insist on continuing this difficult and expensive process instead of supporting a tax funded primary election, and if the state party is going to refuse to let us have absentee ballots and force us to book large venues, then <b>the state party should pay for sites and sound systems and other necessities, not locals.</b></p><p>(Also: End the old school legal publication in a dead tree newspaper requirement. It's the 21st century. Post it on line. The print papers should be running the list of sites as a community service anyway.)</p><p><b>Expand the use of out of precinct volunteers.</b></p><p>Some precincts have a surplus of activists, while others just don't have a person who can handle running a caucus. We had a very limited program in 2020, which was kind of a holdover from the canceled Virtual Caucus: Local parties were allowed to name one chair and one secretary per precinct from outside the precinct. That's why my wife and I caucused in a campus precinct rather than where we live - we had a student chair, but he was a rookie and wanted help, so we were "chair" and "secretary" on paper until the caucus elected the real chair.</p><p>For that matter, assuming we have a one person one vote system (which we should) and assuming we are still requiring in person attendance (which we shouldn't), just let people caucus at any precinct in the county. If you have to be present to vote, you can't be in two places at once. People could avoid known overcrowded places and go someplace with more space and better parking. (Of course, <i>every</i> precinct in our county is overcrowded, but they could go someplace less bad.)<br /></p><p><b>Make the "preference cards" more intuitive.</b></p><p><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I knew this was going to happen as soon as I saw them: </span></p><p><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">You're really going to give a person who has waited in line an hour something that looks like a ballot, and that a reasonable person not versed in the nuanced history of Iowa vs. New Hampshire would call a "ballot," and then tell them, "don't mark it yet"? </span></p><p><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">You're really going to tell people that if they spell "Butigeieieiegegegeg"</span> wrong you have to spoil your ballot - oops, preference card? You're really going to tell people "Mayor Pete" or "Bernie" doesn't count?<br /></p><p>You're really going to expect a person managing the chaos of a 300 person mob to carefully log all of that?<br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">Here's how we should have done it: </p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><blockquote>"Welcome to the caucus. Here's your ballot. Write your first choice on side one. Do you have a second choice? Side two. Do you want to stay for the platform and stuff? No? OK, you can go home now. Thanks for voting." <span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span></blockquote><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span><p></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">That would make us more like a Republican caucus. And literally every independent-swing-go-where-the-interesting-contest-is voter who I have ever spoken to who has attended both a Democratic and a Republican </span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-b88u0q r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">caucus</span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> likes the GOP process better and expects that kind of process: Show up, vote a secret ballot, leave right away. </span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Vote-and-leave at the sign in table would also mean not everyone would have to cram into the room at the same time, so you could get by with smaller spaces.</span> <br /></span></p><p><b>Accept that many supporters of non-viable candidates do not want to make a second choice, and make the math easier.<br /></b></p><p>This one is really small, but turned into a big deal in one of our precincts.</p><p>Under caucus rules, at final delegate allocation, you divide attendees in the viable groups by the grand total of attendees, and because you can't have a fractional delegate, you round up or down based on largest remainders. The problem with that formula is, some of the original attendees are not in viable preference groups. Some people go home, and others refuse to realign. </p><p>In the past, to make any choice at all, you had to stick around until final alignment was done. Sure, a handful of people still left, but not a statistically huge share. </p><p>It became a much larger issue in 2020 because we began reporting the
first alignment vote totals. Many, many, many supporters of non-viable
candidates considered that first alignment number, not the Delegate Equivalents, to be their real vote, and
having expressed their support decided to leave. IDP did not anticipate this.</p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn6tkp6bDxf0KLZfapQnJuth9Tz41SogWCwUu2YwKA4aO2OunNHwD1hNqvZMwPZgIXUnaVw8oJZwJHr19FU7QwDngzZq8k0c6fDCq2pSWEzihAFF0v0IP2udezSdJ2pKBs-RxU/s480/cookbook.gif" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn6tkp6bDxf0KLZfapQnJuth9Tz41SogWCwUu2YwKA4aO2OunNHwD1hNqvZMwPZgIXUnaVw8oJZwJHr19FU7QwDngzZq8k0c6fDCq2pSWEzihAFF0v0IP2udezSdJ2pKBs-RxU/s320/cookbook.gif" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">We had some problems with the caucus manuals.<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p> The problem is, when more than a delegate's worth of people leave, the math breaks. You end up not allocating all your delegates and having to round up three or even <b>four</b> times. Here's the math in our problem precinct:</p><p>
</p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 384px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 7387; mso-width-source: userset; width: 152pt;" width="202"></col>
<col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4315; mso-width-source: userset; width: 89pt;" width="118"></col>
</colgroup><tbody><tr height="25" style="height: 18.75pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="25" style="height: 18.75pt; width: 152pt;" width="202">Delegates</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; width: 48pt;" width="64">11</td>
<td class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; width: 89pt;" width="118"> </td>
</tr>
<tr height="25" style="height: 18.75pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18.75pt;">Total
attendance</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">395</td>
<td class="xl70" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> Delegates</td>
</tr>
<tr height="24" style="height: 18pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18pt;">Candidate A</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">138</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">3.8430</td>
</tr>
<tr height="24" style="height: 18pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18pt;">Candidate B</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">107</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">2.9797</td>
</tr>
<tr height="25" style="height: 18.75pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18.75pt;">Candidate C</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">104</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">2.8962</td>
</tr>
<tr height="25" style="height: 18.75pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18.75pt;">left or did
not realign</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">46</td>
<td class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table><p>Viability was 60 people, but in this 11 delegate precinct, 36 people were 1/11 or a delegate worth, and 46 people left or did not realign. <br /></p><p>Following the written instructions, our team - a good, smart team including an elected official - rounded up the largest remaining fraction - three times, for all three remaining viable candidates - and still had allocated only 10 of their 11 delegates. There was no guidance on what to do when you had already rounded up all the viable candidates, and still had delegate(s) left to allocate. They called for help, sat on hold for an hour, got bad advice, and eventually got attacked after the fact by the campaigns and the national press. "Never again," says the elected official.<br /></p><p>Change the rules for a simple solution: Instead of using total, beginning of the night attendance, divide the number of people in each preference group by <i>the number of people still in attendance and in viable preference groups</i>. Here's how that would work in our problem precinct.</p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 384px;"><colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 7387; mso-width-source: userset; width: 152pt;" width="202"></col>
<col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4315; mso-width-source: userset; width: 89pt;" width="118"></col>
</colgroup><tbody><tr height="25" style="height: 18.75pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="25" style="height: 18.75pt; width: 152pt;" width="202">Delegates</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; width: 48pt;" width="64">11</td>
<td class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; width: 89pt;" width="118"> </td>
</tr>
<tr height="24" style="height: 18pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18pt;">Remaining
attendance</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">349 <br /></td>
<td class="xl70" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;"> Delegates</td>
</tr>
<tr height="24" style="height: 18pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18pt;">Candidate A</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">138</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">4.3496</td>
</tr>
<tr height="24" style="height: 18pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18pt;">Candidate B</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">107</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">3.3725</td>
</tr>
<tr height="24" style="height: 18pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 18pt;">Candidate C</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">104</td>
<td align="right" class="xl69" style="border-left: medium none; border-top: medium none;">3.2779</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">(For our purposes, "remaining attendance" means "in viable groups." There may or may not have been a Candidate D supporter who refused to realign but was sticking around for platform.) </span><br /></p><p>Here, we only have to round up <i>once</i> to give the 11th delegate to Candidate B. That gives you a fair ratio of delegates and support, while not requiring multiple rounds of rounding.</p><p><b>Let people realign at the higher level conventions.</b></p><p>By the time of our district and state (virtual) conventions, my caucus night candidate had dropped out. I wanted to support our nominee, Joe Biden. But I was not allowed to change my preference. </p><p>From the beginning of time through 2016, delegates were allowed to change preference at the different levels of convention, but in 2020, for vague reasons that supposedly had something to do with First, we changed. Changing back won't affect many people, but will go a long way toward unity.</p><p><b>Go rogue</b><b>.</b></p><p></p><p>Johnson County gets screwed in every possible way at caucus time. We have to manage our massive turnout with a process that's designed for small counties, yet we are not rewarded for that turnout because the delegate math also favors small counties. Since we can't change the formula, maybe we just have to go rogue.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikc5wZGkeOCoD4wqPao_NJaDptD8Ty9ayDRgxEYiSAI739a4ToR8GaDo5Hj655M8aCAuKRJm1SGQ_20IUnnKsVT-ufMtvUMzHdPFiqk1bSXhkqTnjjlVQNqbDo0-2ydmPS4FOv/s640/belushi.gif" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="346" data-original-width="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikc5wZGkeOCoD4wqPao_NJaDptD8Ty9ayDRgxEYiSAI739a4ToR8GaDo5Hj655M8aCAuKRJm1SGQ_20IUnnKsVT-ufMtvUMzHdPFiqk1bSXhkqTnjjlVQNqbDo0-2ydmPS4FOv/s320/belushi.gif" width="320" /></a></div> <p></p><p>If the state party won't let us do any of these things I suggest, and we go into another contested nomination cycle with the present system and present calendar, and if the state party is still making the locals pay for the venues... </p><p>...then we need to vote people at the sign in table. If we can't have absentee ballots, there's no other way we'll be able to fit into the rooms. </p><p></p><blockquote>"Welcome to the caucus. Here's your ballot. Write your first choice on
side one. Do you have a second choice? Side two. Do you want to stay for
the platform and stuff? No? OK, you can go home now. Thanks for
voting." <br /></blockquote><p></p><p></p><p>That will no doubt mean a credentials fight at the district and state conventions, with the small counties and with whichever presidential campaign would benefit by throwing out our delegates. That's a fight worth having - I dare them to throw out the best Democratic county in the state. </p><p>And if the DNC bans caucuses and/or moves Iowa out of the early state carve-out, but Iowa has a rogue caucus anyway (because the GOP legislature won't authorize a primary), how can the rest of the state attack Johnson or other big counties for breaking rules?<br /></p><p>If we decide to make our own rules which will work better for our crowds and more importantly our voters, that fight will require some solidarity within Johnson County, and with the other big counties that are negatively affected.</p><p> <br /></p><p>This system is broken. I hope that this week I've stated my case clearly. I've invested a lot of thinking and time, both in this and in making the caucuses happen - and I feel like that thought and that work has earned an equally thoughtful and serious response from IDP and from state leaders in general. You know where to find me.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-88569891792927664552021-07-15T04:20:00.055-05:002021-08-21T19:41:58.155-05:00Fixing The Caucuses, Part 4: The Apportionment ProblemIowa Democratic caucuses defenders, which I used to be, will argue that the caucuses are a representative democracy, much like the House of Representatives, where representation is allocated, rather than a direct democracy. <br /><p>
The Iowa Democratic Party's delegate allocation formula is based on past general election voting for the top of the ticket. In effect, the caucuses
take place in a mythical, projected version of a general election voting
population. In 2020, allocation was based on votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Fred Hubbell in 2018.</p>
This means candidates can't run up the score with big wins in big
counties, and it mutes the impact of isolated turnout waves. No matter
how many people show up, the same number of delegates are
at stake. That means a caucus vote varies in its impact depending on where you live. Because turnout varies a lot, not every caucus vote carries equal
weight. <p>This is a rewrite of a post I write every cycle:</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2007/12/rural-counties-less-caucus-goers-per.html">2004 Caucuses</a> </li><li><a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2016/01/in-2008-rural-counties-had-less-caucus.html">2008 Caucuses</a> </li><li><a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2020/01/in-2016-rural-counties-had-less-caucus.html">2016 Caucuses</a></li></ul><p>This data probably hurts my efforts to move away from the caucuses. No
one wants to Disrespect The Rurals, and I can already hear them
screaming "if we go to one person one vote, no one will campaign
anywhere but the big cities." But fair is fair. If Democrats are going to
complain about the malapportionment of the US Senate, where small rural
states have disproportionate power, we need to look in the mirror as
well and implement fairness closer to home. <br /></p><p>Some counties, like mine, are full of go-to-meeting activists who are more likely to attend a caucus. Others have more people who may just <i>vote</i>, sometimes even for Democrats, but are otherwise less active. In general, per capita turnout is lowest in rural areas and highest in cities, especially cities with college campuses.<br />
<br />
You may not call that a problem - indeed, some caucus old timers will tell you that the formula, which is locked into the Iowa Democratic Party's constitution, was specifically designed to under-count the student vote in Iowa City, Ames, and other college towns.<br />
<br />
Obviously, from my perspective here in Johnson County, that's a problem. In fact, the obscure allocation formula likely skewed the national interpretation of the outcome in both 2016 and 2020.</p><p>In 2020, for the first time, IDP released the raw vote count from the caucuses - not because we wanted to, but because the DNC forced the issue. Yet we insisted on declaring Pete Buttigeig the "winner" (once we finally figured things out) based on the same tired "state delegate equivalent" (SDE) metric we always used. </p><p>SDEs are an inherently artificial measure, because it breaks delegates into decimal fractions at the precinct and county level in a way that doesn't reflect the reality of the county, district, and state conventions, where delegates are whole bodies.<br /></p><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YnrB9Bi17rI" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe><br /><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">(If you really need 0.375 of a delegate, I know a guy - but it's gonna be a while before you eat anything from Satriale's.)</span> <br /></p><p>I can't stand Bernie Sanders, and I think he should never have been allowed to run in the Democratic nomination process without formally joining the Democratic Party. But dammit, <i>he got the most votes</i>, and I consider him the 2020 caucus winner. </p><p>Sanders almost certainly got the most raw votes in Iowa in 2016 as well, but those totals weren't officially released (though we know the numbers exist in some IDP memory hole, because precincts were required to report alignment totals on caucus night 2016). In both 2016 and 2020, Sanders (and to a lesser extent Elizabeth Warren in 2020) did well in the college towns - which, as you'll see, had a higher share of the turnout than they did of the delegates.
A vote in high turnout Johnson County mattered less than the vote of an Iowan in a low turnout rural county. </p><p>But exactly how much less?<br />
<br />
An analysis of
2020 caucus attendance shows that, on average statewide, it took 81.67 people attending a caucus to elect a state delegate equivalent. But that varied dramatically by county, and by precinct within counties.</p><p>(For this analysis I'm leaving aside the satellite caucuses, which accounted for just 2.4% of the grand total attendance. Though it's worth noting that the two biggest satellites, at the UI campus and the Oaknoll senior complex, were both in Johnson County.)<br />
<br />
The easiest
place to elect a delegate was Osceola County, where it took just 23.33
attendees to elect a state delegate equivalent. Two other counties, Taylor and Adams were at or below 40 people per SDE, less than half the statewide average. The bottom ten is filled with
small, rural, population losing, Republican counties.<br />
<br />
And as always, the same places stood out as the most difficult places to elect a delegate: campus communities most of all, urban areas, and high growth suburbs.<br />
</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfJTcnaCkgYugA9eRfQEau9d5G9otBk8BgQkmgVlfHS5KeRyWnp4EyHVwq4193jtJrSvL1zLg70x81obbQ3-aG1-KHXusLkdKBPyrC1DhMHtzZwrW78Jo6nDMHlQvew0xMmDjL/s550/goldendomes.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="367" data-original-width="550" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjfJTcnaCkgYugA9eRfQEau9d5G9otBk8BgQkmgVlfHS5KeRyWnp4EyHVwq4193jtJrSvL1zLg70x81obbQ3-aG1-KHXusLkdKBPyrC1DhMHtzZwrW78Jo6nDMHlQvew0xMmDjL/s320/goldendomes.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>Jefferson County, with its very active meditator community and Maharishi International University, was at the very top at 147.42 attendees per SDE. The People's Republic Of Johnson County was a close second at 131.22. Poweshiek County was third - and that statistic was almost entirely driven by the 830 people who attended the caucus for the Grinnell College precinct. <br />
<br />Ten counties were above the statewide average of 81.67 bodies per SDE -
these counties accounted for half of the total attendance. They include all the usual suspects - the campus counties and the largest counties. The top ten also includes, again, Sioux County, the most Republican in the state. My theory there is that being a Democrat in a place like that, like being a Republican in Johnson County, is a <i>statement</i>, and the few-but-proud Democrats are activist types who show up.<br />
<br />
And three of the top ten were high growth suburban Dallas, Madison, and Warren counties. High growth makes it harder to elect a delegate from your county. A voter who moved to Dallas County
three years ago won't count in the county's presidential
vote totals used to calculate delegates, because they voted somewhere
else. A voter who moved in after the gubernatorial election wouldn't
count at all toward the delegate count.<br />
<br />
The flip side
is, people in shrinking rural counties who moved away or passed away
still contribute to the county's delegate allocation, meaning it takes
fewer LIVE bodies to win delegates.<p></p><p>The gap is less than it's been in past years, in part because Democrats did so poorly in the rural counties in 2018 and 2020 that those places lost delegates, and because Johnson County did so much better for Clinton and Hubbell than anyplace else that we were rewarded with more delegates. Still, it took six times more people to elect a delegate out of Poweshiek than out of Osceola, and that's not defensible.</p><p>If you want to drill really deep, to the precinct level, the easiest place to earn a delegate was Sherman Township in rural Story County, where it took just 9.6 people to earn an SDE. In Ames Precinct 4-4, it took 176 people. That's an 18 to 1 difference <i>within the same county</i>.</p><p>The single hardest precinct in the state to get a delegate was that Grinnell
campus precinct, where it took 247 people to earn an SDE. The caucus I
attended in Iowa City Precinct 5, also a campus precinct, was fourth
hardest, at 205 attendees per SDE.</p><p>I'd like to see someone take on the delegate allocation formula at the state convention next year. If we're going to keep having a caucus, which I don't think we should, we could at least get closer to one person one vote. If the rural counties don't like it, they can do what my county does and show up.<br />
<br />
<b>State Delegates and Caucus Attendance, 2020 Democratic Caucuses</b><br />
<br />
</p><table border="1" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse: collapse;">
<colgroup>
<col width="37"></col>
<col width="100"></col>
<col width="69"></col>
<col width="164"></col>
</colgroup>
<tbody><tr>
<td align="left" bgcolor="#FFFF00" bordercolor="#000000" width="20%">
Rank</td>
<td align="left" bgcolor="#FFFF00" bordercolor="#000000" width="20%">
County</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00" bordercolor="#000000" width="20%">
Delegates</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00" bordercolor="#000000" width="20%">
Attendance</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00" bordercolor="#000000" width="20%">
Attendance per delegate</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
1</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Jefferson</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
12</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1769</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
147.42</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
2</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Johnson</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
162</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
21257</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
131.22</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Poweshiek</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
14</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1768</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
126.29</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Story</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
83</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
9877</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
119.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Winneshiek</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
16</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1874</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
117.13</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Dallas</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
58</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5804</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
100.07</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
7</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Polk</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
392</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
37834</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
96.52</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
8</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Sioux</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
7</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
668</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
95.43</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
9</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Warren</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
35</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
2944</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
84.11</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
10</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Madison</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
9</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
740</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
82.22</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
11</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Linn</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
189</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
15113</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
79.96</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
12</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Decatur</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
317</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
79.25</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
13</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Mahaska</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
8</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
624</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
78.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
14</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Bremer</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
17</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1292</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
76.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
15</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Washington</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
13</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
976</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
75.08</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
16</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Marion</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
18</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1336</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
74.22</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
17</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Dubuque</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
72</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5186</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
72.03</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
18</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Allamakee</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
7</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
501</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
71.57</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
19</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Boone</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
19</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1356</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
71.37</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
20</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Scott</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
125</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
8862</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
70.90</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
21</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Cedar</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
12</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
849</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
70.75</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
22</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Iowa</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
10</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
701</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
70.10</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
23</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Black Hawk</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
101</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
7033</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
69.63</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
24</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Henry</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
10</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
688</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
68.80</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
25</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Jasper</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
23</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1582</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
68.78</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
26</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Muscatine</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
25</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1711</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
68.44</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
27</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Des Moines</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
27</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1832</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
67.85</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
28</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Keokuk</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
271</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
67.75</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
29</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Audubon</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
203</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
67.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
30</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Page</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
404</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
67.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
31</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Dickinson</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
10</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
666</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
66.60</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
32</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Plymouth</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
9</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
596</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
66.22</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
33</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Winnebago</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
395</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
65.83</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
34</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Jackson</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
12</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
781</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
65.08</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
35</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Emmet</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
260</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
65.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
36</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Clay</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
8</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
514</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
64.25</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
37</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Fayette</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
12</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
768</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
64.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
38</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Montgomery</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
256</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
64.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
39</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Clayton</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
10</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
638</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
63.80</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
40</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Clarke</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
255</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
63.75</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
41</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Davis</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
191</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
63.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
42</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Woodbury</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
51</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3234</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
63.41</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
43</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Pottawattamie</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
48</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3043</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
63.40</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
44</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Cass</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
376</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
62.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
45</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Hardin</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
9</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
558</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
62.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
46</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
O'Brien</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
248</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
62.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
47</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Lyon</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
185</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
61.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
48</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Grundy</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
368</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
61.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
49</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Louisa</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
306</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
61.20</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
50</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Butler</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
7</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
428</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
61.14</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
51</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Wapello</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
18</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1093</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.72</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
52</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Fremont</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
182</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
53</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Buena Vista</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
9</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
545</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.56</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
54</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Humboldt</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
242</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.50</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
55</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Mills</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
7</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
423</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.43</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
56</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Greene</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
362</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
57</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Hamilton</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
9</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
543</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
58</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Marshall</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
24</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1446</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.25</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
59</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Appanoose</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
360</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
60</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Pocahontas</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
180</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
60.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
61</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Guthrie</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
358</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
59.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
62</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Floyd</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
10</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
594</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
59.40</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
63</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Harrison</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
7</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
413</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
59.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
64</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Webster</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
20</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1180</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
59.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
65</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Cerro Gordo</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
31</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1828</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
58.97</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
66</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Buchanan</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
13</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
762</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
58.62</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
67</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Lee</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
21</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1227</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
58.43</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
68</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Union</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
348</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
58.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
69</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Mitchell</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
347</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
57.83</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
70</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Adair</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
229</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
57.25</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
71</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Kossuth</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
8</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
456</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
57.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
72</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Carroll</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
11</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
624</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
56.73</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
73</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Sac</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
225</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
56.25</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
74</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Wright</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
336</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
56.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
75</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Chickasaw</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
7</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
389</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
55.57</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
76</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Clinton</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
31</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
1719</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
55.45</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
77</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Worth</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
276</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
55.20</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
78</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Lucas</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
220</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
55.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
79</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Crawford</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
329</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
54.83</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
80</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Monroe</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
164</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
54.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
81</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Benton</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
15</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
813</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
54.20</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
82</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Howard</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
270</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
54.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
83</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Hancock</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
268</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
53.60</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
84</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Shelby</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
266</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
53.20</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
85</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Tama</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
11</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
580</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
52.73</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
86</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Monona</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
4</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
207</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
51.75</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
87</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Jones</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
12</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
614</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
51.17</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
88</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Calhoun</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
255</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
51.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
89</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Palo Alto</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
255</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
51.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
90</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Franklin</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
5</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
248</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
49.60</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
91</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Ida</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
147</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
49.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
92</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Van Buren</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
147</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
49.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
93</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Ringgold</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
146</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
48.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
94</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Delaware</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
9</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
433</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
48.11</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
95</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Wayne</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
135</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
45.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
96</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Cherokee</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
6</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
266</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
44.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
97</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Adams</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
107</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
35.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
98</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Taylor</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
97</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
32.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" width="20%">
99</td>
<td align="left" width="20%">
Osceola</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
3</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
70</td>
<td align="right" width="20%">
23.33</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-68329563751720699092021-07-14T04:20:00.022-05:002022-04-20T20:21:16.630-05:00Fixing The Caucuses, Part 3: The Crowd Crisis<p>Defenders of the caucuses have for decades argued that an in-person meeting is a great organizing opportunity for local parties. </p><p>Maybe it used to be, back in the living room days. However, as turnout has grown and and as the caucuses have expanded beyond the original core activist base into become a mass participation event, a de facto primary just with difficult voting rules, the organizing has gotten lost. An overwhelming majority of attendees leave the moment presidential preference is locked in, and many resent the time they've spent.<br /></p><p>Nothing about the post-2000 caucuses is set up for the good caucus night experience of an average person who just wants to cast their vote. The kind of mega-caucuses we see in Johnson County do active damage to our organizing efforts.</p><p>Sometimes at work people don't know Who I Am, so I hear over and over again in the spring of leap years: "The caucuses were so crowded and disorganized! I'm never going to anything for the Johnson County Democrats again." Never "the Iowa Democratic Party." Never "the DNC." Always "<i>the Johnson County Democrats</i>." We locals don't make the rules that require in-person attendance with no absentee option, but we're the ones who get blamed.</p><p>We don't lose Democratic votes over it in the fall, and eventually they caucus again, only because they have no choice. But we lose <i>people</i>. People who might be donors or volunteers instead sit on the sidelines because they are convinced the local Democrats are a shit show - because their first experience when they try to join is getting told "go stand in the corner for three hours to vote."</p><p>The rules and process that still work sorta OK for small rural counties
(for people who are able to attend, that is) are hopelessly broken in
cities and on campus. <br /></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVlVxJy-YvMl9uUyIeNo4x04A93oMyXu7eTPYfn_42OMYr1ghCc-rhmUgfujbU4kGFrvaBZnztR_wurZeE637BiieC5g4kTz6JaLR777C8Gdj3U0qEQatNQYviajY1cYSnvknI/s1200/IC17.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="675" data-original-width="1200" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVlVxJy-YvMl9uUyIeNo4x04A93oMyXu7eTPYfn_42OMYr1ghCc-rhmUgfujbU4kGFrvaBZnztR_wurZeE637BiieC5g4kTz6JaLR777C8Gdj3U0qEQatNQYviajY1cYSnvknI/w640-h360/IC17.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p>This is the
biggest 2020 caucus in the state: 860 people in Iowa City Precinct 17. You don't see an
<i>entire upper auditorium level</i> in the photo. There were 72 <i>whole
counties</i> that had fewer people attend their caucuses. 860 people isn't a caucus - it's a state
convention.<br /></p><p></p><p>At the state level, caucus turnout ramped up and peaked in 2008, then leveled off for 2016 and 2020.<br /></p>1984 75,010<br />1988 124,955<br />2004 124,331<br />2008 239,000<br />2016 171,290<br />2020 176,352<p>However, turnout has continued to grow in the biggest counties and precincts. As far back as 2004 in Johnson County, we started to exceed the capacity of the rooms, and it's only gotten worse even as we rent bigger spaces. Johnson County turnout was artificially low in the state record 2008
cycle, because the January 3 date excluded most University of Iowa students, who were away on winter break. We set a new local record in
2016 and again in 2020, even as state turnout declined.<br /></p><p>2004 11,169<br />2008 18,363<br />2016 19,404<br />2020 21,436</p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">The 2016 and 2020 Johnson County numbers do not include satellite caucuses. </span></p><p>Show your work, you said? OK, let's get into numbers.</p><p>When we learn statistics we learn basics of mode (most commonly occurring total), median (the number in the middle of the set), and mean (add them all up, divide by number of items).<br /><br />(I'm setting aside the satellite caucuses for now to make this easier and just looking at the 1678 precinct caucuses.)<br /><br />The mode - the most common precinct caucus attendance total - was just 15, which tells us little except that there are a lot of small rural precincts. The halfway point, the median, tells us pretty much the same thing. Half the caucuses had 61 or more people, half had 60 or less.<br /><br />60 is on the high end of the traditional, "living room" size caucuses. It's the size group a caucus is designed for. But that smaller half of caucus <i>sites</i> only accounted for 14% of total <i>attendance</i>.<br /><br />The statistical mean caucus attendance, what most would call the "average," was just under 103 people. Not a living room, but maybe a comfortable grade school gym.<br /><br />But 71.8% of caucus goers had something bigger yet.<br /><br /><b>Half of all 2020 caucus goers attended just 260 of the 1678 precinct caucuses</b>, precincts with attendance of 191 people or higher. That's close to the point where a grade school gym is fire-code overcrowded, and close to the point where a meaningful meeting doesn't work well. </p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHuG_zsaHNqi0_1rcDbEG0PiO8Ipi7Lxf7HXCC5KLHQaLh6k0oCtROJx8QixwDyfjN9zRLc-Tf-hHvRrF7Kq0o8mhP0TffzbTxVRh7dOp3e7kEglcyDTW2YGvLKcpydKCzi5xe/s1024/fire.jpeg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="1024" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHuG_zsaHNqi0_1rcDbEG0PiO8Ipi7Lxf7HXCC5KLHQaLh6k0oCtROJx8QixwDyfjN9zRLc-Tf-hHvRrF7Kq0o8mhP0TffzbTxVRh7dOp3e7kEglcyDTW2YGvLKcpydKCzi5xe/w200-h200/fire.jpeg" width="200" /></a></div><p></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">(We don't like to talk about the Fire Marshal. We think they have a don't ask don't tell policy on Johnson County caucuses. If I weren't a team player I would have called them myself on some of our precincts. We did get a threat in 2004 from the University that they were going to have the fire marshal shut down a caucus at the Iowa Memorial Union, but we fast-talked our way out of it.) </span><br /></p><p>Even if you're lucky and the room size is still comfortable, the sign-in line is longer, and thus the event starts later and takes longer. Big rooms often have bad acoustics, that often aren't helped by amplified sound, so people have trouble hearing and understanding directions. The parking is harder and farther away. More people means more new people, and more new people means more people who don't know that this is not a show up, vote, and leave thing (presidential campaigns, in their own self interest, tend to set the expectations a little too easy). All these things put people in a grouchier mood.<br /><br />A quarter of all caucus goers were at just 88 precincts, with 339 or more attendance. </p><p>And 12% were at one of the 33 mega-precincts that had <b>500 or more</b> people in the room.</p><p>It's a training and public education question, with
contradictory needs. The average caucus <i>chair</i> is dealing with crowds in
the range of 60 to 100 or smaller. But the average caucus <i>attendee</i> is at
a site with 200 or more. If we train merely for what the average chair needs, we're not preparing the chairs, or the caucus goers, for what most attendees will experience.<br /><br />Now let's break out those 33 caucuses with 500+ attendance by county.</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>One in Poweshiek (the Grinnell College campus)</li><li>One in Linn.</li><li>Four in Story.</li><li>Ten in Polk.</li><li><b>Seventeen</b> in Johnson. <br /></li></ul><p>Johnson County had 34 caucuses (out of 57) with more than 300 in attendance, and 42 that were larger than the 191 attendance that the average caucus attendee experienced.</p><p>Yet despite our dominance of the highest attendance, caucus overcrowding is not "just a Johnson County problem," which I've heard countless times over the years, and which <i>does nothing to actually solve the problem. </i><br /><br />Seventeen counties had at least one caucus over that 191 attendance midpoint of what a typical caucus goer experienced, and even that size of a caucus is far, far bigger than this process was ever meant to be. Yet the Iowa Democratic Party insists on playing up the idyllic, median, 60 or less living room town meeting stereotype. </p><p>Of course they do. Because deep in their hearts, despite the desire for First, they know that <b>this is not a way to vote.</b></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1coQkAqNmcEe2WtgacG-t82r5dlL1RIgXAWemiSJTEM4oFwxcE7tWWLwMWg_bjDCZdVglY8Oh0iN7MOD7CnAAk7jZKCSEcBfxTk09fVIoW6SdjeOlFYOr6G2xLTDuI3Z09W7Y/s640/IC05.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1coQkAqNmcEe2WtgacG-t82r5dlL1RIgXAWemiSJTEM4oFwxcE7tWWLwMWg_bjDCZdVglY8Oh0iN7MOD7CnAAk7jZKCSEcBfxTk09fVIoW6SdjeOlFYOr6G2xLTDuI3Z09W7Y/w640-h480/IC05.JPG" width="640" /></a></div><p>This is the caucus I attended in Iowa City precinct 5 (mostly dorms). It was tied for 6th biggest at 754, and was the 4th hardest in the state to get a delegate (207 attendees per state delegate equivalent). Most of these attendees were first time caucus goers, and most were frustrated by the long waits - it was 7:45 before sign in was finished, since nearly everyone had to register to vote or update their address. It took at least another two hours to sort and count and complete alignment.</p><p>This is unacceptable.<br /></p><p>There's nothing more we big counties can do within the existing rules to make this better. We can't just
"get a bigger room." We have already gotten the biggest rooms that
exist, without any financial help from the state party that forces this task onto us, and they are still not big enough. And even if the room is big
enough, the process itself falls apart into a cluster of crowd control
and anger management. Maybe we are failing - but we are being <i>set up to fail</i>, because the task we've been assigned is impossible.</p><p>The reputation of our worst caucuses precedes us. I'm one
of the few people bilingual in both Election and Caucus, and I have seen
this scenario many times:</p><p>An elderly voter from the east side of
Iowa City. She is a loyal Democrat who has voted in every election since
Adlai Stevenson. She knows what to expect. She went to the 700 person
caucus four years ago and knows this one will be even worse. She just
<i>can't</i> anymore. She cares just as much but she can't stand for three
hours. She can't walk six blocks from the nearest available parking
space. She is standing at the auditor's counter near tears, not knowing I
am Caucus Guy, begging: "can't you please send me an absentee ballot?"</p><p>And
I have to stay in character and say "Sorry ma'am, but the parties run
the caucuses, not our office. They make the rules and they require
in-person attendance. You need to talk to the party." (Sometimes I just have to break
character and let them know I am Caucus Guy and that I know the situation is just plain morally wrong.) <br /></p><p>She is more important than your collection of candidate selfies, or your county fundraiser, or your byline. </p>She is more important than First. <br /><p>When the biggest room in or near the precinct is no longer big enough to hold the people who want to attend, the only solution is getting people out of the rooms. <b>We need absentee ballots </b>- real ones, with pre-printed candidate names, that you can vote at home in secret, no matter what the New Hampshire Secretary of State thinks.<br /></p><p>And, importantly,<b> these absentees need to count equally to ballots cast in person</b>. Even before the plug was pulled, Virtual Caucus was fizzling. The presidential campaigns were not buying in and were actively discouraging participation because "it counts less." I didn't blame them - their job was to win, not to solve my space crunch. Instead I blamed the proposed rules, and fought in vain to change them.<br /></p><p>In the summer of 2019, when we were arguing about whether votes at Virtual Caucus should have equal weight to in person votes, rural advocates argued: "If we count Virtual votes equally, then all of my people will vote that way, no one will show up at the 'real' caucus, and I won't be able to organize my central committee." I<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">f our only model for rural organizing is a mandatory meeting, </span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">then we've got worse problems than I feared</span></p><p>The state party and the rural counties have deliberately closed their eyes to the overcrowding crisis that's happening in the cities and on the campuses - and when we complain, they say that we aren't showing enough "respect" and that we "don't care" about rural counties. "You have it easy over there in deep blue Johnson County. Try being out here where our people are scared to put up yard signs because the neighbors will use them for target practice."</p><p>Hey, I understand. It's been a long time, but I ran for the legislature in a rural district once. I know that we can't win if we don't win together and if we don't turn around our rural problem. I know that our legislators in our safe blue seats can't do a damn thing without a majority. </p><p>We want to help. Johnson County is working harder at raising money to export across the state, and to send volunteer crews out to neighboring purple and red areas. We've increased our winning margins to 71% for Joe Biden, 15 points more than any other county in the state, just by opening the polls and getting out of the way as the voters stampede in. We aren't looking for trophies.</p><p>But we can do better. Could we get to 75% for the top of the ticket if we didn't alienate hundreds or thousands of potential volunteers and donors because they had to endure a 500 body caucus?</p><p>The caucuses, as they exist in Johnson County especially but also in other urban and campus areas, are hurting us. On this item, <i>we're</i> the ones who need help from the rest of the state. We just can't function with rules and processes that were made for a different time and place. You need to let us do things our way, and maybe you need to adapt a little bit to allow us to do that.<br /><br />Tomorrow, we'll see another way that the rules are punishing the best Democratic counties.<br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-90265260877732837672021-07-13T04:20:00.021-05:002021-08-21T20:15:27.889-05:00Fixing The Caucuses, Part 2: The Access Problem<p>Voting rights are a critical civil rights issue in the post (?) - Trump era. Election law has increasingly become a partisan fight in the two decades since <i>Bush v. Gore</i>, and that trend has accelerated to unprecedented and dangerous levels in 2021, with Iowa unfortunately at the forefront.</p><p>Through all this, Democrats in general, and Iowa Democrats specifically, have positioned themselves as The Party Of Voting Rights. We want to encourage voting by mail and longer in person early voting and more drop boxes and satellite sites and more ID flexibility. We want to make voting easy, not hard. </p><p>Unless it's a Monday in February. Then Iowa Democrats say no, you have to show up in person, at one time and one place only, and attend a long meeting in order to vote. If you can't? Well, then, as one IDP chair said in the late 2000s decade, "you can always caucus next cycle."<br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAxabPJ7J0Gx1njXSIjwtMNSEffBZbZdf1HseFy8w8hmO1w6Ua8WuxiGPiepRwYGv45_UUfGb1YFks1n3sKdQhnAfBfofzpQZNmfPEwR1OBcX4gm_Eon3rxA2sNY3Q13T0XwQ6/s500/precious.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="380" data-original-width="500" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAxabPJ7J0Gx1njXSIjwtMNSEffBZbZdf1HseFy8w8hmO1w6Ua8WuxiGPiepRwYGv45_UUfGb1YFks1n3sKdQhnAfBfofzpQZNmfPEwR1OBcX4gm_Eon3rxA2sNY3Q13T0XwQ6/s320/precious.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>The reason for this hypocrisy, as I discussed in part one, is that Iowa's political leaders (of both parties) are afraid that any process that too closely resembles an "election" will trigger the New Hampshire Secretary of State, who would respond by moving his state's primary ahead of the caucuses and take First, Our Precious, away.<p></p><p></p><p>I was still a pretty enthusiastic Caucuses! and First! person through the Obama era, and I still fell into the group-think of not wanting to upset New Hampshire. As I look back, I was seeing the warning signs as long ago as 2004, when turnout took a Great Leap Forward and we started to over-fill rooms, which I'll discuss more later.</p><p>2016 was the deal breaker for me. We made yet another Great Leap Forward in crowd size, and after the caucuses we went through a long and nasty nomination fight with three levels of contentious conventions and the accompanying game-playing. </p><p></p><p>But I have to be honest, the real last straw for me was when disenfranchisement hit me close to home. My wife got hit with last minute mandatory overtime on February 1, 2016, and was not able to attend the caucuses.</p><p>I was aware of the issue before that, of course. A caucus process disenfranchises many classes of people, not just people who have to work that night. People with child or adult care issues - my wife also opted out of 2008 because our sons were young and didn't want to attend a long boring grownup meeting. (Child care at caucuses has generally been lip service rather than real.)</p><p>Other people who get left out include people with transportation issues. Either they have no wheels and the site is too far away, or they simply aren't comfortable driving at night. I tried to address geographic accessibility as best I could in 2020, but the bottom line was the main factor in site decisions was capacity. In some cases we had to take a farther out room that would hold (or almost hold) the crowd over a more geographically accessible but smaller space. We made efforts to line up free shuttle buses, but the effectiveness of that depends so much on people happening to hear about it.<br /></p><p>Disabilities, of all sorts, are also an issue. Nothing is truly "accessible" when crowds grow over room capacity. It's not just physical disabilities. As someone on the autism spectrum, the noise and crowding and confusion and uncertainty of caucus night are challenging for me.</p><p>Snowbirds were also left out. It's a little harder for me to fret about people who can afford a winter and summer home, but I do want everyone to vote. <br /></p><p>There's also the anonymity issue. While Iowa Republicans have a secret ballot at their caucuses, Democrats do not and the act of voting is a very public walk to a corner of the room - subject to intimidation by bosses or abusive partners or bullies from an opposing campaign. </p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGg4NIhHlK1jD3XZoD1p1_x7rRzWyNbhZ53TsZAO_ZqOSgtkxjnknbwaz4mlW9hORUGbaj7cgIiSQX-6S9EebuHvQ9LCPcCAWFXk4KNpQFHq16YYzRefsFigxgDISJ4LN7SgqG/s1024/sopranos.webp" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="617" data-original-width="1024" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGg4NIhHlK1jD3XZoD1p1_x7rRzWyNbhZ53TsZAO_ZqOSgtkxjnknbwaz4mlW9hORUGbaj7cgIiSQX-6S9EebuHvQ9LCPcCAWFXk4KNpQFHq16YYzRefsFigxgDISJ4LN7SgqG/w400-h241/sopranos.webp" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">These guys have "suggestions." You gotta problem wid dat?<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><p>The DNC was also well aware of these issues and passed a rules change for 2020: any state with a caucus was required to offer an absentee process.<br /></p><p>Nevada had a very successful caucus early voting program with real absentee ballots in 2020. But under the current calendar, they're the <i>third</i> state in the nominating process, so they were not dealing with a New Hampshire Secretary of State looking for any excuse to move to an earlier date. Given our terminal fear of Losing First, Iowa needed another approach.<br /></p><p>Iowa learned a few things about New Hampshire Secretary Of State For Life Bill Gardner in 2018 and 2019. The most relevant item here is that Gardner considers preparation of a ballot, printing of a ballot, and the process of qualifying for a ballot, to be key elements of an "election" as opposed to a caucus. </p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">(My personal theory about that is that New Hampshire has a ritual of candidates filing for the primary in person at Gardner's office, and Gardner loves the publicity and cameras and does not want to share that with Iowa. Rest assured, no one in Iowa is interested in that.)</span><br /></p><p>That's why the paper documentation of Iowa caucus votes in 2020 did not included any pre-printed names, and why it was called a "preference card" and never, Never, NEVER a "ballot."</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7HTBH6vuL2XjCOhcLG6upJnQ4QuiOgysk38J7-DUDW4IzMqC-Z-sHDIw-tt6AhKdFbtjLqM-J84DEWgr56_KVrsawyS7j9UH6eS5oBobN-SNx1SxChWeOszhtOBm1caI3GhN0/s817/nevadacard.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="545" data-original-width="817" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7HTBH6vuL2XjCOhcLG6upJnQ4QuiOgysk38J7-DUDW4IzMqC-Z-sHDIw-tt6AhKdFbtjLqM-J84DEWgr56_KVrsawyS7j9UH6eS5oBobN-SNx1SxChWeOszhtOBm1caI3GhN0/w400-h266/nevadacard.jpg" width="400" /> </a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"> <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4C-7LsZX1VTciCIOMjzrsreQHxBj-V5U1Yv3t04DYzmo5zI_3aEIpx5roG6YhX7M_4ijsP3Ua0OGKTvWUYch3yt_VHqSrOs-OgIWYfcdhJKQ-Q1R4g4Co0WxygXLa3guzQSxs/s947/iowacard.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="533" data-original-width="947" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4C-7LsZX1VTciCIOMjzrsreQHxBj-V5U1Yv3t04DYzmo5zI_3aEIpx5roG6YhX7M_4ijsP3Ua0OGKTvWUYch3yt_VHqSrOs-OgIWYfcdhJKQ-Q1R4g4Co0WxygXLa3guzQSxs/w400-h225/iowacard.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>Nevada caucus ballot with printed names, Iowa "preference card" with no names<br /></div><br />It's also assumed that Gardner considers holding a meeting to be a key component of a caucus, and that's why Iowa took the approach it took to the new, mandatory absentee process: a phone-in "Virtual Caucus." As designed, it was not a simple vote by phone process; it was more of a teleconference. <p></p><p>Virtual Caucus had its flaws, the biggest of which was that votes would almost certainly have counted for less than votes cast in person at a traditional caucus. Because of that, the presidential campaigns were not buying in. But with multiple dates and times offered, it was a definite improvement over not being able to vote at all.</p><p>The Iowa Democratic Party invested many months into Virtual Caucus, and was reassured all along the way by both the DNC and New Hampshire that it was a creative and acceptable idea...</p><p>...until early in the fall of 2019. At a public meeting, with no advance heads up to the IDP, DNC technical staff declared that Virtual Caucus was an unacceptable security risk, and the plug was pulled immediately. (Ironically, when COVID hit immediately after the 2020 caucuses, the whole world immediately adapted to virtual meetings, and every level of Democratic convention from the county to the national was held virtually.)</p><p>Since it was very late in the process, IDP had to come up with a quick Plan B.<br /></p><p>I first heard of the concept of satellite caucuses in late 2007 from the late Art Small, a giant of local Democratic politics. He had moved to Iowa City's big Oaknoll senior complex and was concerned that he and his neighbors were reluctant and/or unable to venture out at night and travel the few blocks to the local elementary school holding that precinct's caucuses. He asked if we could simply have a separate caucus at Oaknoll, and phone the attendance numbers over to the school.</p><p>The 2008 rules didn't allow for that. But Nevada had satellite caucuses in 2008 to address a different problem, casino staff working the evening shift. There were some problems in execution, but Iowa cribbed the idea for 2016.</p><p>The 2016 satellite caucuses were more of a pilot program than a real option. There were only four in the state, and the only one that drew significant attendance was at Oaknoll. The idea was abandoned for 2020... until Virtual Caucus was killed. At that point, satellite caucuses were the only thing IDP had on the shelf, so they were quickly dusted off.</p><p>Satellite caucuses were just a drop in the total attendance bucket, at 2.4% of the grand total attendance. They may have helped a few people, and they had some impact on the results as the Sanders campaign was more successful at organizing and leveraging a few sites. Some of the sites were absurd, the most ludicrous being held for three people at
private home in the Republic of Georgia. At least they got voted, but it really begs the question of why not just send them absentee ballots. Oh, right, because New Hampshire says we can't.<br /></p><p>But there were three big flaws with satellite caucuses. The first is, <i>you still had to be one specific place at one specific time</i>. There were a couple exceptions by a couple hours, but the satellite caucuses were all in-person events on Monday night.<br /><br />The other two big flaws were both related to the need for more advance planning than many people can manage. Attendees at most sites had to pre-register two weeks out. It's human nature, which I've experienced a lot in elections, that people don't plan ahead. A lot of people don't get work schedules that far out. <br /></p><p>The bigger issue was that the petitioning window for satellite caucuses was narrow and obscure, just a few weeks in October and November. If you weren't insider enough to know in that short time frame that you needed to ask for a satellite caucus, you didn't get one.</p><p>I found this out the hard way. I was especially proud of lining up, at some expense, the Englert Theatre to host the Iowa City 20 caucus. The Englert is one of the gems of downtown Iowa City and was big enough to host my estimated crowd of up to 700 (we got 617). In the past we had held that precinct's caucus at the Public Library, which had burst at the seams and melted down in 2016, or at the Iowa City Senior Center.</p><p>The Senior Center is the regular polling place for the precinct, and is located very close to two large, lower income senior housing centers. The rest of the precinct is mostly students. <br /></p><p>A couple weeks before the 2020 caucuses, I started getting unhappy calls from residents of the senior complexes, most of whom were Biden supporters, who very much did <i>not</i> want to go to the Englert. They could not walk there, and parking was non-existent. They wanted to caucus at the place they usually voted, the Senior Center. </p><p>The biggest room at the Senior Center has a capacity of a couple hundred, so it wasn't big enough to hold the crowd we expected for the whole precinct. But the Senior Center would have been a nice spot for a satellite caucus - had anyone asked. </p><p>The point is, <b>no one knew to ask</b>. The more connected and higher income seniors at Oaknoll knew how and when to ask for a satellite caucus, and they had a very nice one with 190 people in attendance. The guy in the Republic of Georgia was insider enough to know to ask, and his vote was counted. The Florida and Arizona snowbirds who could afford a winter residence knew to ask. </p><p>But the working class seniors at Ecumenical Towers did not know to ask until it was too late.</p><p>I blame myself in part for that - granted, I was very busy juggling the big picture of 57 regular precinct caucus sites, and IDP was managing the satellites - but I should have thought of it and had someone reach out and I didn't. I won't forget again. And when people called, I explained the crowd capacity issues, but no one went away happy and I suspect that a lot of those folks just didn't attend.</p><p>It's those crowd capacity issues, which I'll detail in the next installment, that are the biggest and hardest to solve problem with the caucuses. </p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-44472766305925007002021-07-12T04:20:00.008-05:002021-10-09T13:53:44.201-05:00Fixing The Caucuses, Part 1: "The Caucuses" vs. "First"<p>Time to get the beret out of mothballs, dust off the old blog, and settle in for some longer discussion.</p><p></p><p>As those of you who follow me on my main medium, Twitter, know, I've spent much of the year and a half since the Democratic caucus results collapsed arguing for an end to the caucuses. This week, I got some numbers and in subsequent posts I'll quantify my main objections. <br /><br />But before I get into that, I'm going to explain what I mean by "the caucuses." I often make the mistake of assuming too much background knowledge, and assuming too much background knowledge is one of the problems the caucuses have.</p><p></p><p>When people who defend the caucuses talk about benefits like "a candidate with little money and name ID can
break out of the pack and win" or "anyone can just walk up to the
candidate and ask a question," or "it's a big boost to our tourism
economy" or "it keeps national attention on Iowa's issues," they are not
talking about the same thing I am talking about when I say "end the caucuses."</p><p>They are talking
about <b>First</b>. First In The Nation, to be exact.</p><p></p><p>Through a historic accident that centers around obscure rules about numbers of days between conventions, and the limitations of 1970's printing and copying technology, Iowa found itself hosting its caucuses before the New Hampshire primary, which had long been considered the beginning of the presidential nomination contest. Jimmy Carter noticed this and rode a breakout second place finish - behind "Uncommitted"! - to the nomination and the White House. </p><p>After that, what had long been a small and obscure set of living room meetings of a dozen people a precinct became a major national news story and a must-stop event for candidates, who spend more time in Iowa the year before the nomination contest than any other state (with one exception). </p><p>For Iowans, and this will be important in later posts, it grew. The caucuses are still a small and obscure set of living room meetings of a dozen people a precinct who pass platform resolutions and elect each other to committees in governor years, though the ADA has moved us out of living rooms and into public buildings. </p><p></p><p>But once the media and the candidates showed up, the caucuses grew into a mass participation event that's become the functional equivalent of a primary - which it was never meant or designed to be - while keeping almost exactly the same rules that were designed for a living room.</p><p>When I talk about "The Caucuses" I am not talking about First: The Year
Before. I am talking about Caucuses: Caucus Night Itself. I am talking
about the process that requires people to attend a party meeting to
express their presidential choice, instead of simply voting in an
election.</p><p></p><p>New Hampshire gets many of these same advantages of attention from having the first primary, usually eight days after Iowa. Since the 1980s this has been an unofficial alliance, less friendly in recent years, in a tacit agreement that lets both states claim "First." And even as nearly every other state that had caucuses has abandoned them for a primary, Iowa has stuck with them.<br /><br />A lot of defenders of Caucuses: The Institution argue that First: The Year and Caucuses: The Night are the same thing: "If we got rid of The Caucuses and had a primary, we would lose First." That argument is based on New Hampshire's pit-bull insistence on staying First as they see it, and on their objections to anything resembling an election-like process occurring before their state. </p><p>Why can't Iowans get absentee ballots for the caucuses? Why were we prohibited from releasing our raw vote totals from the caucuses until 2020 when the DNC made it mandatory? Because the New Hampshire Secretary of State said so, that's why. And Iowa's party leaders, of both parties, live in fear of upsetting the New Hampshire Secretary of State, lest he wish us into the cornfield.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipGM15-hqgmXcySEFvjuzkZaEw3IAtz0yRekMWxwZjEhCSnWzy43zP5wCLoMoUCUviN9bJGfJsAHwFvSYAFfyITlHBuEa566FZZ5fvaC6BB3hOjuvc7eqivQ7gNTMufqSv0czs/s666/qxt7y.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="666" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipGM15-hqgmXcySEFvjuzkZaEw3IAtz0yRekMWxwZjEhCSnWzy43zP5wCLoMoUCUviN9bJGfJsAHwFvSYAFfyITlHBuEa566FZZ5fvaC6BB3hOjuvc7eqivQ7gNTMufqSv0czs/s320/qxt7y.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I think we're already IN the cornfield.<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p>The silliest argument of all for the caucuses is New Hampshire's state law requiring their primary to occur before "any similar contest," and Iowa's corresponding law regarding caucuses. What is stopping 48 other states from passing the exact same law? One already did - Nevada, which has been third the last few cycles but earlier this year switched from a caucus to a primary and announced plans to go before both New Hampshire and Iowa.</p><p>Both Iowa and New Hampshire have bigger threats to First than each
other. The other 48 states, especially on the Democratic side, are not
happy that two demographically unrepresentative states have monopolized
First. Iowa faces additional hostility to caucuses as a process, for all
the reasons I've been saying and will flesh out in subsequent posts.</p><p>Scheduling the nominating calendar is the prerogative of the party national committees, although election scheduling is also a matter of state law and the parties have weak and ineffective enforcement tools. In the past, parties have been unwilling to use the most effective tool, the nuclear option of refusing to seat a state's delegation if they have their nominating contest on a too-soon date. The threat is even emptier after 2008, when both Florida and Michigan cut in line and - because they were big swing states - walked away with no meaningful penalties.</p><p>New Hampshire and Nevada, about as purple a pair of states as still exists and with two Democratic Senators - might get away with rule breaking too, if the DNC decides to start elsewhere. (It should be noted that the other early state in recent cycles is South Carolina - home of new DNC chair Jamie Harrison.) But it would be very easy to make an example of Iowa. We're now safely red and we have no one in a really powerful position to fight for First the way Tom Harkin used to. And unlike Barack Obama, with his breakthrough at the 2008 caucuses and two Iowa general election wins, Joe Biden did very poorly in Iowa both in the caucuses and last November - so he owes us nothing.<br /></p><p>Iowa Democrats are in a jam because, if the DNC decides, as I expect, to ban caucuses and only allow primaries, that decision is not binding on a Republican-led legislature and a Republican governor. And Iowa Republicans are clearly committed both to First and to a caucus process (which is much simpler on their side). The long bipartisan tradition of caucus cooperation, which has been good to me locally, may end this cycle.<br /><br />I'm not here to argue about First. I like some things about First, although some of them are overrated. I like the idea of starting in small states, especially
coming off a cycle that had billionaires Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer as
candidates.</p><p>But in a nationalized, online political climate, little-know Pete Buttigeig and Andrew Yang were able to break out of a very large pack long before we actually went to our caucus sites. </p><p>The much ballyhooed in person events "where anyone can ask a question" are full of a lot of repeat customers, gadflies, and, my pet peeve, selfie collectors. </p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEih5bNDiFYsBQuEksZnstlPWzgfILg3Zkho9AUzjFrhnDJt19Hu2ZZvM1RPZbwHyHJHKndv7eLEldFNevhrXMyVU3P8-8EjzNpgWdCxweexZJv9IazUtZxyxCoxOTCcuutDsDGo/s960/warrendeeth.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="464" data-original-width="960" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEih5bNDiFYsBQuEksZnstlPWzgfILg3Zkho9AUzjFrhnDJt19Hu2ZZvM1RPZbwHyHJHKndv7eLEldFNevhrXMyVU3P8-8EjzNpgWdCxweexZJv9IazUtZxyxCoxOTCcuutDsDGo/s320/warrendeeth.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Guilty. (Though I did in fact caucus for her.)<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p><br />A lot of people who brag up the in person campaign events are the inner and second circle of party activists, and "anyone can ask a question" really means "I can get four senators and two ex-governors as guests at my small county fundraiser, and maybe the New York Times will interview me.*" It's that class of activists, and the local journalists playing out their network anchor fantasies*, that First is really, really good for.</p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">(* Disclaimer: I interviewed many candidates when I was a professional journalist, and I've been interviewed by many national media outlets including, yes, the New York Times. And yes, I admit, that stuff's fun. But I'm privileged enough to be in the inner circle, or at least my friends are in the inner circle and I'm in the next layer out.)</span><br /><br />I'm certainly not going to argue <i>against</i> Iowa being first. Someone has to, may as well be us. <i>But what I am arguing against is the idea that First and The Caucuses are the same thing, because they're not.</i> My idea scenario would be Iowa keeping First as a primary, though that's not going to happen for all the reasons I list above.<br /><br />I'm also - because someone always brings this up - I'm not going to argue against caucuses for things like committee seats and the platform. Personally. I'd do away with the platform entirely. Because it's it's not binding on Democratic elected officials, it's an empty gesture. The real platform is winning a majority and whatever you can pass as the best legislation. I'll also note that some states elect their party committee members in a primary, which some states do and which is more small d democratic than leaving the job to the handful of people who stay at the caucus to the bitter end. </p><p></p><p>But I'm not gonna die on that hill. If we want to have a caucus for the Party Business, sure, the 12 activists who show up in the governor years can get together in the coffee shops or classrooms that replaced the living rooms. <br /></p><p>What I am really, really arguing against is Caucuses: The Night as an experience for rank and file Iowans who are <i>only interested in voting for president</i> - which is roughly 90% of attendees - and who have to fight massive crowds and work through a process that was never meant to be this big. </p><p>I've come to the reluctant conclusion that the benefits of First: The Year are outweighed by the pain of Caucuses: The Night. In the next installments, we'll see that the caucus as it exists:<br /></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2021/07/fixing-caucuses-part-2-access-problem.html">is not inclusive</a></li><li><a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2021/07/fixing-caucuses-part-3-crowd-crisis.html">it's overcrowded </a><br /></li><li><a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2021/07/fixing-caucuses-part-4-apportionment.html">has an unrepresentative allocation formula</a><br /></li><li>and while <a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2021/07/fixing-caucuses-part-5-friendly-advice.html">minor repairs could help</a> they don't solve those fundamental problems. <br /></li></ul><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-37386378565357139762021-03-31T19:40:00.006-05:002021-03-31T20:59:28.330-05:00Last Thoughts On The Second District<p>I was subpoenaed late last week and was preparing to give a deposition this week on the Rita Hart challenge to Mariannette Miller-Meeks and the 2nd CD election results. I have expected that for about four months now, and that's why I've been mostly silent on the 2nd District race.</p><p>That ended abruptly about 3 PM today as Hart dropped the challenge and conceded. I am feeling all sorts of things - professional, political, and personal - right now, but my immediate feeling is personal relief. I've been biting my tongue bloody not commenting on this except to family and co-workers, and now I can finally speak my mind. It's not going to make everyone happy - but in my mind there's no real winners.</p><p><b>The Rhetorical Trap</b></p><p>After the recount that left her six votes short was canvassed on November 30, Hart had an extremely short timeline, just over a week to request and complete a state level challenge to the election. Team Hart decided, and they weren't wrong, that a week was insufficient time. The challenge process is designed for small city councils or maybe a legislative district, not for a quarter of the state.</p><p>Instead, Hart decided to bypass the state process and appeal the election directly to the House of Representatives, which under the Constitution - not even an amendment, but the original Founder's text - is the final judge of its own elections.</p><p>We may never know the legal reasoning behind that decision. But politically, it was a trap, and Iowa and DC Republicans were unanimous in their rhetoric: Hart and Nancy Pelosi are trying to use a partisan process to overturn an election that a bipartisan Iowa canvass board certified. </p><p>Almost verbatim. Over and over again. It was really an impressive feat of messaging. But don't give the Republicans too much credit because...</p><p><b>The Republicans disingenuously refused to answer the underlying questions.</b></p><p>As I write, the Republicans are touchdown dancing just a little too vigorously, considering they only "won"* by six freakin' votes.</p><p>Packer fans, of which as you know I am one, are still not over the September 2012 Monday Night Football game against Seattle. There was a referee strike underway, and the game was being officiated by replacement refs ("scabs" for my union friends).<br /></p><p><br /><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wXGFZkIEMK0" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></p><p>In a Hail Mary situation with time expired, one referee signaled Seattle touchdown, one signaled Packer interception. The call went to the Seahawks and the Packers lost. The next day league officials admitted the touchdown call was wrong, but refused to reverse the outcome of the game. It has gone down in Packer lore as the "Fail Mary." (The referee strike was immediately settled.)<br /></p><p>Is it right that a team should lose a game because an inexperienced official made a mistake? The NFL never really answered that.</p><p>Is it right that a voter should lose their vote, and that a candidate should lose a seat in Congress, because a precinct official or a temp worker made a mistake? The Iowa Republicans have never really answered that either. They've fallen back on "the call on the field stands." They "won"* this election on a bad call - a Fail Mariannette.</p><p>As near as I could tell, there was never serious media push on this. Every story I saw was Both Sides. Trump challenged the election, Hart challenged the election. Same thing. "These are two totally different things" may have been too complicated for the masses, but the press should have understood. No one ever pushed: </p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><blockquote><p style="text-align: left;">"This person was incorrectly told by a part time temp worker to re-open the envelope they got that had arrived already sealed, tape it back shut, and sign over it. Is it fair that their vote didn't count?"</p><p style="text-align: left;">"Hart and Nancy Pelosi are trying to use a partisan process to overturn
an election that a bipartisan Iowa canvass board certified."</p></blockquote><p style="text-align: left;"></p><p><b>The auditors were thrown under the bus. </b><br /></p><p></p><p>Are you perfect at your job?</p><p>Do you know anyone who is perfect at their job?</p><p>I'm not perfect at my job. But after 23 years I am very good at it. So are my boss and my co-workers. We are damn proud of it. </p><p>We had the best crew of temp workers we've ever had. They worked endless hours and risked their health in a pandemic to help people vote, through the mail and from their cars as we cranked 18,000 people through a parking ramp in four weeks. We also had, and these are the people I most worked with, our best ever mail room team that checked in mailed ballots, found the mistakes, and contacted the voters as fast as they could. We had remarkably few unfixed problems that we had to reject.</p><p>We also had a great team of Election Day poll workers - there were a lot of new faces because many of our elderly workers were literally afraid for their lives during COVID.<br /></p><p>We had a great absentee board - we've had years like 2004 where there were mass challenges and rejections, but this team worked hard to count every vote. We also had wonderful party vote protection observers from outside the office on both sides - my Republican friends were not focused on challenging ballots but on helping their problem voters get their problems fixed.</p><p>I don't want to play nit-picky games over trivial bureaucratic issues. I
do what I do for a career because I deeply believe in helping people
vote. But even the greatest doctor can't save every life, and even the best election team can't save every vote - and it's heartbreaking when we can't.</p><p>But for three solid weeks in December and January, after Pelosi had made the decision to "provisionally" seat Miller-Meeks, the Hart Campaign and the Iowa Democratic Party sent out daily press releases featuring the problem voters, and almost always including some tone implying election workers are incompetent and some variation of "22 ballots were <i>illegally</i> not counted."<br /></p><p>Maybe I'm too defensive, but I took offense at that. </p><p>We weren't perfect, but in my objective professional judgement we did the best we ever have. And as I'll explain, it's entirely possible for a ballot to be legally cast, and yet at the same time legally not counted. </p><p><b>What I was preparing to testify about</b></p><p>My job the morning after the election is organizing paperwork from the precincts. I have to track down, open, and sort 57 yellow bags, our technical term for which is "yellow bags," of paperwork, one from each precinct. Some of them are neatly organized, others are a mess. I organize piles of election day registrations, address changes, and other minor items, but the most important things are the provisional ballots. I need to post a list of how many, and I need to start researching the circumstances to see if we can count any.</p><p>We have changed our polling place printing procedures from labels to full sheets, and one of the newer instructions to poll workers is to attach the voter's provisional ballot paperwork to the envelope containing their ballot. We have tape and glue sticks and paper clips.</p><p>So I opened a yellow bag and started organizing, and I found in no particular order a pair of voted provisional ballots and two sets of paperwork not attached. By the time I knew there was a problem, there was no way to know if things had been in a particular order, and no way to identify which ballot belonged to which voter.<br /></p><p>I was not happy. This was a serious mistake. It could only be repaired if both voters brought in their ID materials to cure the problem. It's actually kind of uncommon for provisional voters to come in and fix things - they usually feel like they "voted" and "the election" (by which I mean "for president" which is how most voters see it) wasn't close.</p><p>And the worst thing possible happened. One voter brought her materials in. The other voter had made an unfixable mistake and voted at the wrong precinct - Iowa code specifically says provisionals at the wrong precinct can't count. So one ballot was good and one was not, but we had no way to know which was which.</p><p>Permanent staff does not make these final decisions. But the absentee board looks to us for guidance. I presented all the provisional ballots to the team, which I always do grouped by nature of problem so that decisions can be consistent. At the end I had to tell the team this story, both ballots in hand, and recommend that they be rejected, which the team did.</p><p>So that's basically my testimony. I wrote this instead so my prep work wasn't all wasted. <br /></p><p>It wasn't <i>fair</i>, but as a lawyer once told me fair and the law aren't always the same thing. And we feel bad enough about it without being told we broke the law. That was not "illegally not counting the votes." It would have been illegal for me to do otherwise. </p><p><b>Rita Hart had no choice but to take one for the team.</b></p><p>Hart had the worst possible luck. It wasn't just that she had the closest congressional race in at least 40 years, and that it turned on minor clerical errors.</p><p>It was that this happened at the same time as a defeated president lied about massive voter fraud, refused to concede, and gave aid and comfort to criminals who invaded our Capitol and murdered police officers.</p><p>If it weren't for that, the 2nd District challenge would still have been bitter and partisan and controversial. But it would have been possible. Instead, we had an environment where immeasurable imaginary fraud and 22 very specific examples of minor mistakes were treated as Both Sides Identical.<br /></p><p>Nancy Pelosi had bigger problems in late December than one seat in Iowa. She had to defend the legitimacy of democracy itself, when it was still not entirely clear what was going to happen with Trump's intransigence (and before it was even possible to imagine how bad it actually turned out). </p><p>And Nancy Pelosi also counts votes better than anyone. The last time there was a challenge like this, Tip O'Neill lost ten Democratic votes on the final floor vote - and Pelosi didn't have ten to spare, and she hates to lose in public.</p><p></p><p>I'm sure there was a long heart to Hart talk before Pelosi announced the decision to provisionally seat Miller-Meeks. But Hart wasn't having it and continued on. The fight was escalating as the committee prepared to launch into the challenge and as people like me were getting called on for testimony. We were getting closer to crisis time, and as we all know there are some rather unstable and weapon-obsessed House members. It was scary enough on TV in January - Madame Speaker was there and being literally hunted.<br /></p><p>This is only speculation, but my best guess as to why Hart suddenly dropped her challenge today is that the Speaker reached out for help to someone higher up - and you know who I mean by that - to once again ask Rita Hart to take one for the team. It was an unpleasant situation where what was right wasn't politically possible, and that is entirely the fault of Donald Trump and his lies about a stolen election.</p><p><b>Rita Hart's loss is NOT Johnson County's fault.</b></p><p>In the one comment I have already made about this race, I took issue with the speading conventional "wisdom" that Hart lost because of under-voting in Johnson County. Instead <a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2020/11/notes-on-undervotes.html">I demonstrated that our undervote in the congressional race was on a par with past elections</a>, which smart campaign number crunchers would understand. Her "underperformance" of Biden was more likely Biden's OVER-performance with Never Trump Republicans who are more numerous here than in more rural areas.<br /></p><p>Instead of blaming the county where Hart performed nearly 15 points better than anywhere else, Iowa Democrats would spend better time trying to find more votes in the counties where Miller-Meeks won three to one.</p><p><b>What Next?</b></p><p>The future of Iowa's congressional delegation is more up in the air than in most states. Barring massive changes to our redistricting system (which might have happened if not for the late census and compressed timeline), Iowa legislators have less control over district lines than in most states, and are generally more worried about their own seats than about the congressional lines.</p><p>Rita Hart lives in a mid-sized county on the edge of a district that has grown and needs to shed population. If she should run again, she could very easily find herself running not against Miller-Meeks, but on almost entirely new turf against Ashley Hinson - and Abby Finkenauer is acting very much like someone who wants to make a comeback.</p><p>The other question is whether the election challenge, and media acceptance of the Republican "Iowa certified this election" rhetoric, has done long term damage to Hart.</p><p><b>No Real Winners</b></p><p>Maybe on paper you can call Miller-Meeks a "winner" here. But her party's refusal to address the underlying questions of voter disenfranchisement, on the spurious grounds that "the call on the field should stand," is a bad look. Also a bad look: the media buying the GOP rhetoric and refusing to press for answers on the disenfranchisement issues.<br /></p><p>When you only win by six votes, you go into the next cycle with a big target on your back. Also, calling your political action committee "Six PAC" is a bad look when you won the game on a bad call.<br /></p><p>Iowa Democrats, meanwhile, have lost a seat that the underrated and underappreciated Dave Loebsack had for 14 years, and have gotten perhaps unfairly a Sore Loser label. Also unfairly, this fight undercut the very important message that Joe Biden's election was legitimate. Rita Hart took one for the team, but it may have been too little too late.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-7346596605433513092021-02-27T13:33:00.009-06:002021-02-28T11:11:47.656-06:00Bad News By The Numbers<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="bb.jpg" class="CToWUd a6T" data-image-whitelisted="" height="142" src="https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ui=2&ik=2e5c88459e&attid=0.1&permmsgid=msg-a:r8986681987866477195&th=177dccb03a311edf&view=fimg&sz=s0-l75-ft&attbid=ANGjdJ_xLBHFoTMkPoL-jW3aJUEhhVppvkdGfdhXaiGI9Hy6VCb6KAMU5hHcoPGOuv2VVOmUtHHquN_R9vtlda1KSWRQjoreDNPGl7lxqfDambFWKtWSWXCCaKHjvr8&disp=emb&realattid=ii_kllu87pf0" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" tabindex="0" width="190" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Smith and Kaufmann discuss additional amendments</span></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><p></p><p>In the words of the great philosopher Beavis, that sucked. </p><p>Led by Sen. Roby Smith and Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, Iowa Republican legislators raced through a bill, <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=SF413&ga=89">Senate File 413</a>, that among other things shrinks the voting and voter registration timeline. <br /><br />Kaufmann angrily argued that none of the changes were "voter suppression." But these kinds of bills are <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J1wKrvdLkg">death by a thousand cuts</a>. Each change that makes it just a little bit harder, each day lost, means some people just won't be able to make it work.<br /></p><p>How many? Assuming the changes aren't overturned by the inevitable lawsuits, or federal bills don't arrive like the cavalry to save us, here's how the changes could affect the numbers here in Johnson County.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsMHJXPaDtSrLij43gShEvgNYGXTufe5x2VqmB12d1iaMUkFkFFhigRKebqGvqro4XEloVVree3Jlasu0uXXQpHTqQRjeLXHJuUvINW41ajixe0qoKdZuxF0Aem0UKwY9WbB0h/s800/6-mathematicia.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="800" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsMHJXPaDtSrLij43gShEvgNYGXTufe5x2VqmB12d1iaMUkFkFFhigRKebqGvqro4XEloVVree3Jlasu0uXXQpHTqQRjeLXHJuUvINW41ajixe0qoKdZuxF0Aem0UKwY9WbB0h/s320/6-mathematicia.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Consider this a warning.</span><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p><a href="https://www.johnsoncountyiowa.gov/dept_auditor_elections.aspx?id=27268">Johnson County's total 2020 turnout was 84,198</a>. 72% of the county vote was cast early. That includes all voting plans - mail, in-person, satellite, and overseas - and those voters went 80% for Joe Biden. Donald Trump won - yes, in Johnson County, won - the 28% who voted on Election Day by a 51-45% margin.<br /><br />The general assumptions below are that people stick with their 2020 voting plan, unless the context indicates otherwise.<br /> <br /><b>Voter caging: Inactivation after missing one general election<br /></b><br />Current Johnson County active status registration is at 97,704. That's immediately after the annual post office National Change Of Address (NCOA) update, which already inactivated about 2850 voters. That's been standard procedure since 1995, under the 1993 federal Motor Voter law. <br /><br />Of the 97,704 active registered, there are 5655 who 1) last updated their registration before the 2018 general election and 2) did not vote in the 2020 general. Under the new law, these voters would be inactivated without advance notice, and only after being inactivated would be sent a must-respond card in order to not get totally cancelled after 2024.<br /><br />That compares to 2486 who 1) have a last update date before the 2016 general and 2) have not voted since before the 2018 general. Under previous law, these 2486 voters would get a Four Year No Activity reminder card. They would not be inactivated unless that card was returned by the post office as undeliverable or if the current resident indicated the person had moved. (The voter could also sign and return the card and either be OK or be correctly canceled, whichever applied.) If the card was not returned, we were to assume that the voter still lived there.<br /><br />So those 2486 people lose their advance notice, and an additional 3169 would be inactivated, before being sent a notice, two years sooner.<br /><br />Some of these people really do need to get inactivated and cancelled. Despite Johnson County's years of proactive alerts before mailings are sent, we still have a small handful of very old active registrations. The two main issues are 1) Greek houses, who sort their own mail and generally pitch stuff addressed to alumni. (The dorms are very good about getting stuff back to us.) 2) Townie adults who have moved away but still get mail delivered at their parents. The parents are generally more concerned about this than the voters, but we can't fix it without the voter's own signature.<br /></p><p>But some infrequent voters don't need to get purged. In 2020 we had 5651 voters who had last voted in the 2016 general and skipped 2018, and another 2697 who had not voted since before 2016 (there was a lot of "I don't like either of them" that year.) All these folks would have had more problems under the new law. This is a case where the cure is worse than the illness.<br /><br /><b>Change in pre-registration deadline from 10 days to 15<br /></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyr2VAM43-nNMpktT4h0CNqLfVqpjZaZhe9drN2N0fEkTb7fnOUEgOEeYnzRrT4FVc7jKjHz24hp_By1oYpBpASn6HamtG-rRpxZ9QBGg2mhz-HpYOYhGaSpDEvAdAABbZWeUR/s307/its_not_a_bug_its_a_feature_jigsaw_puzzle-r16a52ebdfa004c29a3cec8cc24fe7323_ambtl_8byvr_307.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="307" data-original-width="307" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyr2VAM43-nNMpktT4h0CNqLfVqpjZaZhe9drN2N0fEkTb7fnOUEgOEeYnzRrT4FVc7jKjHz24hp_By1oYpBpASn6HamtG-rRpxZ9QBGg2mhz-HpYOYhGaSpDEvAdAABbZWeUR/w200-h200/its_not_a_bug_its_a_feature_jigsaw_puzzle-r16a52ebdfa004c29a3cec8cc24fe7323_ambtl_8byvr_307.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>Iowa's registration deadline was 10 days before a general election for decades. This became a "pre-registration" deadline after the Election Day Registration (EDR) law took effect in 2008. There had not been a serious effort to change this deadline in many years. But this week, in a late amendment the day <i>after</i> the House hearing, the bill was amended to move the deadline back to 15 days. <br /><br />Last year Johnson County had 1121 new registrations from Day 14 (October 20) to Day 10 (October 24). <p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>376 voted at the polls (includes one provisional ballot)</li><li>290 voted at satellites</li><li>286 voted in person at the office<br /></li><li>46 voted by mail</li><li>123 didn’t follow through and vote (or tried and failed)</li></ul><p>Assuming these people still try to vote, that’s about 1000 more voters who will have to use the more difficult EDR or provisional voting procedures, on top of the roughly 3000 EDRs we had in 2020. That takes longer, which slows down the line for everyone. Of course, some will be Not Votes.<br /><br /><b>Change in vote by mail request period</b></p><p>(Note that most changes in mail ballot procedure do not affect military and overseas voters, who are covered under federal law.) <br /></p><p>Through the 2002 cycle, the first day for domestic civilian voters to request a mailed ballot was 70 days out. From 2004 to 2016 there was no first day specified in the law, and auditors had to keep requests on file indefinitely. My personal record was close to two years. <br /></p><p>I wasn't a fan of this because too-soon requests cause a lot of problems. In the 2004 cycle, requests were coming in from caucus night in January, and student neighborhoods were getting doorknocked in June. Every lease in Iowa City turns over on August 1. When we started mailing ballots out in late September (those were the good old days), many went to bad addresses. We managed to explain this to campaigns in future cycles (I still had to personally remove the request forms from the Johnson County caucus packets), so it got a bit better, but the problem still popped up.<br /></p><p>So when the law changed in 2017 to 120 days (early July) I didn't shed many tears. Now we're back to 70 and that affects the workload. We had 35,504 total non-voided vote by mail requests (not counting ones that were later voided when voters changed their voting plan). 10,454 were received and data-entered on days 120 through 71. <br /></p><p>Assuming all these voters still choose vote by mail, this data entry
work from Days 120 through 71 is added to the workload of Days 70
through 15. We'll be processing 30% more requests per day.<br /><br /><img alt="640.webp" class="CToWUd a6T" data-image-whitelisted="" height="180" src="https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ui=2&ik=2e5c88459e&attid=0.2&permmsgid=msg-a:r8986681987866477195&th=177dccb03a311edf&view=fimg&sz=s0-l75-ft&attbid=ANGjdJ9To_4-oHfWsTobKzCLNYi4c6fs-ecNQ3JeXjwmH4f1LIC-U5y_e6XbX4Vi8Ui00jS9rFTKDlvV44OlkFItFPdxVPYgIZ-LZz0ZA5rMKe-UAcsSD0ANjp-sVWY&disp=emb&realattid=ii_klluc3jz1" tabindex="0" width="300" /><br /><br />This also places the initial load of absentee data entry into late August - the same time as the back to campus registration drives. With campus largely locked down, these were relatively small in 2020. But in 2016, total Johnson County registration increased by about 2500 in the two weeks at the beginning of the semester. Two big piles of work that used to be at different times will now be at the same time.<br /><br />We've also lost summer doorknocking for absentee requests. Back in the 1990s, campaigns could knock all summer, hang onto the forms, and turn them all in on Day 70. </p><p>But in an earlier change to the law, campaigns must now turn forms in within 72 hours of collecting them. That means they can't start asking until Day 73. Luckily that's a Saturday, so there will be a kickoff weekend, assuming campaigns are doorknocking in 2022. At the rate Iowa is going we'll still be in COVID mode.<br /><br />The last day to request a ballot has also changed. When I started working for the auditor in 1997, there was no deadline; we had to honor requests that arrived the day before the election. In that era of faster mail delivery, it sometimes worked. <br /></p><p>When a deadline was added to the law, it was originally four days, then changed to 10 or 11 days (depending on election type) in 2017. But in another last-second change, amendments to SF413 moved the deadline to 15 days out.<br /><br />In Johnson County, 969 voters successfully sent requests and returned counted mailed ballots on days 14 through 10. (There were another 63 voided requests, mostly people who changed their voting plan, and another 62 who didn’t return the ballot.) These people would have to choose a different voting plan - if possible. Of the 969 successful requests, 128 were mailed out of town. Those people would likely not have been able to vote.<br /><br /><b>Later start date for mailing out ballots<br /></b><br />As noted above, in 2020 Johnson County had 35,504 total non-voided domestic vote by mail requests. (704 of those were not returned.)<br /><br />The vast majority, 29,432, were mailed on the first day allowed, October 5, 29 days before the election. SF413 changes the first day to mail ballots to just 20 days before the election. That means all these voters would have eight fewer days to vote and return their ballots. Another 3293 ballots were mailed on days 28 through 21, and those voters would see a corresponding drop in turnaround time. </p><p>Of the total 32,724 ballots mailed before Day 20, 1060 were sent to a different mailing address than their registration street address. Some of those were sent to local post office boxes, which are very common in our smaller towns. But the majority were the more time-sensitive ballots mailed to addresses outside the county. (I would have to go line by line through the list to get an exact number.)</p><p></p><p>The biggest issue with the shorter mailing window is voters with complications: mail delivery problems (which we don't even learn about for several days), spoiled ballots, or damaged packets. <br /></p><p>It’s a little hard to tell but my best estimate is that roughly 700 voters who initially requested a ballot by mail had some kind of problem that required a void and re-issue. (This excludes people who simply changed their voting plan and voted in person.) Some of these were easy, some hard. Some of these were local, some were long distance and could only be dealt with through mail. Some were people with mobility or transportation issues and could only be dealt with through mail.</p><p>Some problems are just not going to get fixed. We have lost eight calendar days on the front end for helping these voters...<br /><br /><b>Drop dead deadline - all ballots must arrive by close of polls<br /></b><br />...and we've also lost days on the back end. <br /></p><p>Longtime Iowa law has been that ballots postmarked by the day before the election <i>and</i> which arrive in the first few days after the election (usually the Monday after) could be counted. For one election cycle, 2020, we incorporated intelligent bar code tracking into that day before election rule.</p><p>All that's gone now and Iowa will have what is called a "Sure Count" deadline by its advocates or a "Drop Dead" deadline by its opponents. Ballots that don't arrive before the polls close don't count. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">(That close will now be an hour earlier, at 8 PM rather than 9. That change has been in the works for a long time and I'm amazed it took this long. We tracked some data on voters between 8 and 9 PM in the 1990s and 2000s and determined that the final hour wasn't much different than the average hour: a little busier than average in campus precincts but almost completely dead in farm rural precincts.)<br /></p><p>Johnson County only had 33 counted domestic mail ballots that were postmarked after Election Day, but that’s mostly due to a heroic extra effort by the Iowa City post office who made a second mail delivery on both Monday and Election Day. A lot of ballots where the postmark would have been an issue were already in our hands when the polls closed.</p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZJx4Wq8a9QIntf8wiJL_xToZGt831gfPmzUr-37HPwx_1HiPu-5ZR6h3mhrZ0tG9Q_RlkQx_RV4Tvz-aMbE64eDQgy_ALn4FD854kMZgGW6Wsa5eUb5yOC27NrKfbpA4k1h-Q/s240/ballot_box_dumpster.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="218" data-original-width="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZJx4Wq8a9QIntf8wiJL_xToZGt831gfPmzUr-37HPwx_1HiPu-5ZR6h3mhrZ0tG9Q_RlkQx_RV4Tvz-aMbE64eDQgy_ALn4FD854kMZgGW6Wsa5eUb5yOC27NrKfbpA4k1h-Q/s0/ballot_box_dumpster.jpg" /></a>In 2016, we got 117 countable domestic mail ballots after Election Day,
and that's more typical. This number will likely increase with out of
town voters getting their ballots nine days later. However many it is,
they don't count.<br /><br />In a gap that Kaufmann and Smith plugged mostly for appearance's sake, there's exceptions in the law for overseas ballots and for the Safe At Home ballots sent to some domestic violence survivors. <br /></p><p>Johnson County had a total of 667 overseas ballots counted. Most were returned by email. Under a COVID emergency ruling, all overseas voters could return ballots by email. Normally, only military voters or civilians in a very few high risk areas can return ballots by email. In any case, federal law applies here and overseas and military voters will still be sent their ballots 45 days out and will still be counted based on postmarks.<br /><br />Despite the postmark exception, eight fewer days on the front end will still make it harder for Safe At Home voters. No statistical data is available on Safe At Home but the numbers are very small.<br /><br /><b>Later Start Date For In Person Voting</b><br /></p><p>When no-excuse early voting began in Iowa in the early 1990s, we could begin voting 40 days before primary and general elections. That early start date let the committed partisans get their business out of the way and made the line shorter for those who decided later.</p><p>But Roby Smith decided that we shouldn't vote before watching debates, at least that was the on the record excuse. So in 2017, Republicans shortened this to 29 days. SF413 chops this even more, to 20 days. This time, the excuse was "to be more in line with other states."<br /></p><p>Johnson County adapted to COVID by moving our office voting operation to a drive-thru setup at our building's parking ramp. Voters loved it. In 25 working days, we had 18,006 total voters at the ramp. </p><p>5089 of those were in the first seven voting days and would have to vote later. Assuming no one changes their voting plan, and that we have a seven day a week schedule, that’s 267 more voters in the line each day. <br /><br /><b>Satellites<br /></b><br />I'm still surprised Republicans have not banned satellite voting entirely. (My theory is that some mega-churches are interested in the possibility of satellite sites.) Historically, Johnson County has had the biggest satellite program, and satellite voters have trended the most heavily Democratic. There's no separate vote total data, but looking at party affiliation data, margins of 10 to 1 Democratic at the Iowa City Public Library are not uncommon. <br /></p><p>There's been a slight trend away from satellites and toward the office and mail in recent cycles, but we still saw 7457 satellite voters in 2020. 494 of those were at sites on Day 22 and Day 21, which would no longer be allowed.<br /></p><p>The new law takes away the auditor's ability to schedule sites on their own. From now on only petitioned sites will be allowed. The petitions for the traditional popular Johnson County sites will undoubtedly happen, but the change increases the chances that we'll also see more petitions for less effective sites. </p><p>We've already seen the worst case scenario: In 2010, when the 21 Bar issue was on the ballot, we were petitioned for <a href="https://www.johnsoncountyiowa.gov/auditor/returns/1011satfull.htm">23 separate locations</a>, primarily on
campus. And at that time we had five weeks, not three, to get it all done.<br /></p><p>Campus is the biggest problem, and no doubt the biggest reason for the change. Rural Republican legislators are, laughably, convinced that the reason Johnson County is The People's Republic is undergrad student votes. It's not - it's faculty and staff that make Johnson County so blue - but there's also many who have an ideological belief (despite a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symm_v._United_States">1978 Supreme Court ruling</a>) that college students should simply not be allowed to vote in their college town and should only vote absentee ballots from their parental address. </p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;">(Sadly, some Johnson County residents think so too. They begrudgingly accept that the students should get to vote for president, but they draw the line at local elections. We haven't had a student on the city council in 40 years.) </span></p><p>All of our historic data going back to the beginning of unrestricted early voting in Iowa 30 years ago shows that a student is more able to successfully vote a counted ballot in their college town rather than Back Home, and that campus voting sites are more effective before the pre-registration deadline. The only effective ways to get students to vote are pre-deadline sites on campus or Election Day Registration at the polls.<br /><br />In 2016 we had 2000 voters at the Iowa Memorial Union in a five day run from Day 15 through Day 11, plus another 500 total at three other campus sites. </p><p>With campus being half empty, that dropped to 1217 IMU voters on those same five days this cycle. Only 117 of that was on Monday, Day 15, which is the new pre-registration deadline. The totals increased each day as people learned about the site through word of mouth, and of course students are very deadline-driven. We had over 500 voters on the last day.</p><p>Of the exactly 1100 IMU voters from Tuesday through Friday, 195 were completely new registrations to Johnson County. I can't easily get an exact number but most of the rest were changing their address. The number of completely new registrations is lower than it normally would be, because of the high registration from the caucuses. We won't see that in 2022, and probably not in 2024 because either the caucuses will die or President Biden will running again or both.<br /><br />In any event, these voters would all be shifting from a very simple pre-registration process - complete the form and vote - to a harder EDR process requiring proof of address. That's not insurmountable for on-campus students who have electronic access to their dorm contracts. But off-campus students often don't have bills in their name, and no one habitually carries their paper lease with them.<br /></p><p>With fewer days and opportunities, this is where a lot of voters will be
pushed into different voting plans. Library voters will likely end up
at the office, and the campus vote will turn into EDRs at the polls - or
into Not Votes. </p><p>UPDATE: <a href="https://twitter.com/StoryCoAuditor/status/1365803982438957059">Story County Auditor Lucy Martin</a> reminded me "It all applies to Story County as well except here the county seat and the population center are not the same (which makes things more complicated)." Our office is several blocks from the campus area. Out of the way, out of the cultural comfort zone, and less convenient - but possible. </p><p>But the Story County courthouse is in Nevada, several miles away from Ames. It would be like having to go from Iowa City to Solon to vote early. Grinnell students also face an out of town trek to the Poweshiek County seat in Montezuma. UNI students would have to travel about five miles across town from the campus in west Cedar Falls to the Black Hawk County courthouse in downtown Waterloo.</p><p><b>Impact on Election Day<br /></b><br />It’s hard to predict how post-COVID and changes in the law will change people’s voting plans. But just as a numbers exercise:<br /><br />72.37% of Johnson County voters voted early in 2020: 60,934 early (all voting plans) and 23,264 at the polls. Our previous general election record for highest absentee percentage was 57.93% in 2012. Personally I don’t think we’ll ever drop that low again in a general election and that we will settle into a range of around 65% early. But let’s say we do. <br /><br />Take our 2020 turnout of 84,198, and apply the 2012 absentee rate of 57.93% early, and you get 48,776 early and 35,422 at the polls. That’s 12,158 more voters at the polls, and roughly 1.5 times the number poll workers to take care of 1.5 times the number of voters.<br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9zknvPS2zkSgfOcbO_rN0IhBuYH8xdnwO8TqJXmTSROv0ugJlvUlUmBFYIatJUGFmM_X7qsCOuwobh0sjgIWow1MAVnZxOslf1GYASwhRSkS08IMKaYrJo_gaowKgQkVAFzFS/s358/why-you-gotta-be-so-mean.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="353" data-original-width="358" height="198" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9zknvPS2zkSgfOcbO_rN0IhBuYH8xdnwO8TqJXmTSROv0ugJlvUlUmBFYIatJUGFmM_X7qsCOuwobh0sjgIWow1MAVnZxOslf1GYASwhRSkS08IMKaYrJo_gaowKgQkVAFzFS/w200-h198/why-you-gotta-be-so-mean.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>That will vary a lot by precinct. It will also mean space crunches in some places, especially the campus precincts.<p></p><p>So more workers, when we're already having trouble keeping enough, and additional Scary Laws about poll watchers to scare them. It's part of the Big Lie mythology that election workers blocked Republican observers, so Smith and Kaufmann added draconian penalties for "interference." That's the kind of thing that makes poll workers quit - nobody wants to risk jail for trying to manage a bullying poll watcher.</p><p><b>Ballot Chasing Banned </b><br /></p><p></p><p>Ballot chasing - I never heard the term "harvesting" until 2018 - has been clean and honest in Iowa, and was well regulated by existing law. But there have been incidents in other states, most notoriously in North Carolina in 2018 where Republican operatives were collecting Democratic ballots and not bringing them in. And the media in particular is very suspicious of the practice. </p><p>So it's not the hill I want to die on, but it still hurts some voters. I don't have numbers, but there's going to be some non-zero number of people who have no one else to
help them, or who just won't get it done without the personal
persuasion. <br /></p><p>I thought there was going to be a fix so that a voter could have anyone
they wanted, other than a campaign, return a ballot. That didn't happen,
and now only caregivers or immediate family members can drop off your
ballot. This eliminates a lot of helpers that seniors rely on like neighbors, church members, or just random people. My parents get a lot of informal help from my mom's hairdresser and her husband.</p><p>Maybe I should have prepped these numbers before the debate, but turtles move
very fast when they want to, and it wouldn't have changed the votes
anyway. 🐢 <br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-31155909844904019732021-02-16T17:01:00.007-06:002021-02-16T18:24:01.825-06:00Bad Election Bill Is Bad<div dir="auto"><div class="ecm0bbzt hv4rvrfc ihqw7lf3 dati1w0a" data-ad-comet-preview="message" data-ad-preview="message" id="jsc_c_1f7"><div class="j83agx80 cbu4d94t ew0dbk1b irj2b8pg"><div class="qzhwtbm6 knvmm38d"><span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql gk29lw5a a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d9wwppkn fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb hrzyx87i jq4qci2q a3bd9o3v knj5qynh oo9gr5id hzawbc8m" dir="auto"><div class="kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><a href="https://legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=SSB1199&ga=89"></a><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=SSB1199&ga=89"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfA9aJrXnTtNGCd15bMJQ-ZpZVqi_fxCcWjc61LKHx4xiM7rsV1jojvp9Dus20Dl8kaNwLxXnTHh-GioWVZbPiM-G3j0hqNY6piGzma1BvUF4fUW6R6t8V01z4GSod0R_oF-Yj/s227/18days.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="222" data-original-width="227" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfA9aJrXnTtNGCd15bMJQ-ZpZVqi_fxCcWjc61LKHx4xiM7rsV1jojvp9Dus20Dl8kaNwLxXnTHh-GioWVZbPiM-G3j0hqNY6piGzma1BvUF4fUW6R6t8V01z4GSod0R_oF-Yj/s0/18days.png" /></a></div>The Roby Smith Bad Election Bill is here and it's bad.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span></span>SSB1199 or HSB213 (text looks the same) would cut early voting - mail and in person - to 18 days, down from 29 last year and from 40 in 2016. And that's not even the worst item: <br /></div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><blockquote><b>"The (county) commissioner shall not send an absentee ballot application to a voter." </b> <br /></blockquote></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">My read of that is: AT ALL, not even if the voter specifically asks. Shut In Great Grandma with no printer calls and asks for a request form, and we can't help.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Other lowlights include a lot of micromanaging of auditors to address imaginary problems like dead voters or auditors not doing list maintenance. Speaking of which...</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Voters would be inactivated after missing ONE general election, not two. And that's just for not voting, not for mail getting returned. They're inactivated THEN sent a card they have to respond to. Miss one governor election and the cancellation clock starts ticking.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">In a nod to the Libertarians, petition requirements are once again raised. This is about Cindy Axne winning twice with under 50% because a Libertarian in a tricorner hat pulls votes away from David Young. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Requirements for nominating convention attendance are also increased, to a point where even the major parties would have difficulty seating enough delegates to fill a legislative district vacancy (25 people).</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Satellite voting would, to my surprise, not be completely banned, but auditors could not set sites on their own. Only petitioned sites would be allowed. That'll increase costs - a lot of times, people ask nice for a satellite and we schedule the three or four hours they really want. A petition obligates the auditor to six hours.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">The bill would eliminate the use of USPS postmarks to decide if a ballot is on time, and instead would only allow intelligent barcodes. Overseas mail does not have these barcode, though I'm not sure if federal law would overrule this item.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPBa22BIqrwsgCpTf2SKWzFsN_rdG5n0CxhHdpKZwsNbF8r13kMapagawEjx_leQUM5EqDisUw882hPRvUAeRC-rbW5R77DtUBrxD4s3Qz1B__OPk3mlwei0epRwc6-NUDMK51/s410/dropbox.jpeg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="273" data-original-width="410" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPBa22BIqrwsgCpTf2SKWzFsN_rdG5n0CxhHdpKZwsNbF8r13kMapagawEjx_leQUM5EqDisUw882hPRvUAeRC-rbW5R77DtUBrxD4s3Qz1B__OPk3mlwei0epRwc6-NUDMK51/s320/dropbox.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>Ballot chasing (often called "harvesting" though "chasing" is the Iowa vernacular) would be banned. Only relatives, caregivers, or housemates could return your ballot - you can't hep your neighbor. <br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Remember that couple days last fall when it looked like dropboxes were banned? This bill does codify the use of dropboxes, but limits them to one per county and only at the auditor's office. There's also some regulation which doesn't differ much from our actual practice.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">The first day to request a ballot would move to 70 days prior to the election, which was the law through 2002. From 2004 to 2016 there was no first day, we had to hold forms for literally years (my record was 18 months). Then it was moved to 120 days in 2017.<br /><br /></span> <span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">My professional and political feelings differ here. In a college town where every lease turns over on August 1, way-too-soon requests are a problem, and were a big problem in 2004. (I was living in a high turnover apartment complex that year, and we were doorknocked in JUNE.) People request the ballot then move, and we mail the ballot to a bad address. </span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">So I liked the old 70 day law. </span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-poiln3 r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">But: Combined with later laws requiring forms to be handed in within 72 hours, 70 days would basically kill summer doorknocking for ABRs.</span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">One thing I don't see is an 8 PM poll close, but that's in the SOS "technical" bill already. That bill also shortens the time-off on election day requirement from 3 hours to two, in order to facilitate the 8 PM close. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">(The only reason 8 PM close got shot down last election bill was because business was looking at the three hours off to vote requirement. A lot of plants run 6 to 6 shifts, and the 9 PM poll close gave people the required three hours off.)</span><br /> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">18 days is bad for in person voting: longer lines and bigger crowds.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5p2Dw5gR3UVLSxiC7yGtu4TvLNu_11E1BIYbEFW6H_gUmNndVf2R1kdR6z9H3W99nflzJTwRBPo12Q6thmbYM0pbF2kufA1J2eClysg3P2s1LsRjtEWGzXAjGErZhmOjDbZw-/s955/longline.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="955" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5p2Dw5gR3UVLSxiC7yGtu4TvLNu_11E1BIYbEFW6H_gUmNndVf2R1kdR6z9H3W99nflzJTwRBPo12Q6thmbYM0pbF2kufA1J2eClysg3P2s1LsRjtEWGzXAjGErZhmOjDbZw-/s320/longline.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">18 days is absolutely unacceptable for mailed voting. 29 days was just barely enough time, IF everything went well with no problems. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">18 days means anyone who is out of town or shut in who has ANY kind of problem - mail delay, spoiled ballot, any problem at all - is just out of luck. 18 days also compresses all the mailing out into ONE WEEK, burdening both the post offices and the election staffs.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">(It's DOA of course, but my senator, Democratic leader Zach Wahls, <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=SF382&ga=89">introduced a bill</a> that would expand the early voting window to 45 days, which is consistent with what overseas voters get under federal law.) <br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">This bill could have been even worse, but it's bad enough. That's what I got for now. Watch closely, fight to stop it, fight to make it less bad. Don't make me tell Great Grandma I can't mail her an ABR. <br /></div></div></span></div></div></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-44242377115217181042020-12-17T16:20:00.002-06:002020-12-18T08:52:42.647-06:00Johnson County Number Crunching, Part 4: Who Voted<p>Six weeks post-election I'm well on the road to recovery. I went non-stop for about a year and a half - from the time I started booking caucus rooms in April 2019, through the primary and into the presidential. That's three whole Taylor Swift albums if that's how you keep score.<br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdIxxOjfjqpFfoBbX5qhYH_8fNy-P2mYGCV6PH2jke9RE1VJcncurt5w-BvCW1wLQ0GBYDTtwQW7njwixXmV05yMdGAhGzfmJoOmqHZ41Z6Ay5GekH6BLWRLx2NqPrGN_4QuuK/s800/bidenMao.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="482" data-original-width="800" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdIxxOjfjqpFfoBbX5qhYH_8fNy-P2mYGCV6PH2jke9RE1VJcncurt5w-BvCW1wLQ0GBYDTtwQW7njwixXmV05yMdGAhGzfmJoOmqHZ41Z6Ay5GekH6BLWRLx2NqPrGN_4QuuK/s320/bidenMao.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>It takes some time post-election to process voter history records - a recount slows that down a bit - but we wrapped up a couple weeks back and now I've had some time to figure out who voted by party, how they voted by method, and I've done some guessing about how the no party voters went here in the People's Republic.<p></p><p></p><p>Voter history records are a different thing than canvassed vote totals, and the two different sets of numbers are rarely a perfect match. The main problem is that 99 counties are all balancing the books at once and that registration activity is constant. So sometimes another county takes a voter away from us before we can give them credit for voting - which is NOT the same thing as counting the vote. The statistical report for our county is within 20 of the canvassed number of voters, which is about as close as it ever gets.<br /></p><p>Here's the party breakdown of voters by party, with a grand total and split into by election day and early voting. <br /></p><table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <colgroup>
<col></col><col></col>
<col></col> <col></col> </colgroup><tbody><tr>
<td>
Voters</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Early</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Eday</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Total</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
total</td>
<td align="right">
60915</td>
<td>
</td>
<td align="right">
23262</td>
<td>
</td>
<td align="right">
84177</td>
<td>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#000080">
<font color="#FFFFFF">Democratic</font></td>
<td align="right">
39034</td>
<td align="right">
64.08%</td>
<td align="right">
7150</td>
<td align="right">
30.74%</td>
<td align="right">
46184</td>
<td align="right">
54.87%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">
<font color="#FFFF00">Republican</font></td>
<td align="right">
8714</td>
<td align="right">
14.31%</td>
<td align="right">
7114</td>
<td align="right">
30.58%</td>
<td align="right">
15828</td>
<td align="right">
18.80%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">
Libertarian</td>
<td align="right">
250</td>
<td align="right">
0.41%</td>
<td align="right">
271</td>
<td align="right">
1.16%</td>
<td align="right">
521</td>
<td align="right">
0.62%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#008080">
<font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right">
100</td>
<td align="right">
0.16%</td>
<td align="right">
51</td>
<td align="right">
0.22%</td>
<td align="right">
151</td>
<td align="right">
0.18%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#800080">
<font color="#FFFF00">No Party</font></td>
<td align="right">
12817</td>
<td align="right">
21.04%</td>
<td align="right">
8676</td>
<td align="right">
37.30%</td>
<td align="right">
21493</td>
<td align="right">
25.53%</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div> </div><div>The post-election registration percentages were 52.2% Democratic, 18.4% Republican, and 28.5% no party. Overall
turnout is very, very close to that. It's just a little more Democratic and a little less no party. <br /><p>While the early voters were overwhelmingly Democratic, the Democrats and
Republicans were nearly tied on Election Day. More no party people voted on Election Day than either major party. Libertarians were the only voters more likely to vote on Election Day than early. I suspect
that's student-age election day registrations; statistically Libertarians lean very young. </p>
<p>The 72.4% of the total vote that was cast early is down a little bit from the record 76.7% from the primary,
probably due to the mail scare and due to COVID fatigue. The primary voting window in May was during the peak
of what little semi-shutdown down Iowa had.(One stat we didn't keep: how many mailed-out ballots were returned through the postal system vs. our drop boxes.)<br /></p>
<hr /> </div><div>There's four voting plans available to most voters: the polls, mail, satellite sites, and in person at our office - which this year was actually drive-thru voting in our parking ramp. There's also "UOCAVA" voting, which stands for Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. People outside auditor's offices often call these "military" ballots, but a lot of overseas civilians get them too. In most years there are also "absentee team" ballots, sometimes called "nursing home" ballots. We had a tiny number of these, to hospital in-patients; I lumped them into in-person below.<br /></div><div> </div><div>Here's how voters in each party chose their voting plan. </div><div><br /></div><div><div>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <colgroup>
<col></col><col></col>
<col></col> <col></col>
</colgroup><tbody><tr>
<td><span style="font-size: x-small;">
Party</span></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Overseas</span></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Mail</span></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> In-Person</span></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Satellite</span></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> total early</span></td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Polls</span></td>
<td align="center"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> Total</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#000080">
<font color="#FFFFFF" size="2">Democratic</font></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
424</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
0.92%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
23619</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
51.14%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
10696</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
23.16%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
4282</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
9.27%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
39021</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
84.49%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
7163</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
15.51%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
46184</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">
<font color="#FFFF00" size="2">Republican</font></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 58</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
0.37%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 4504</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
28.46%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 2974</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
18.79%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 1174</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
7.42%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
8710</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
55.03%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 7118</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
44.97%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 15828</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
Libertarian</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 4</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
0.77%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 87</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
16.70%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 112</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
21.50%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 47</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
9.02%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
250</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
47.98%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 271</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
52.02%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 521</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#008080">
<font color="#FFFF00" size="2">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 1</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
0.66%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 44</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
29.14%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 33</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
21.85%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 22</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
14.57%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
100</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
66.23%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 51</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
33.77%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 151</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#800080">
<font color="#FFFF00" size="2">No Party</font></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 180</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
0.84%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 6515</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
30.31%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 4192</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
19.50%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 1917</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
8.92%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
12804</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
59.57%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 8689</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
40.43%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 21493</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-size: x-small;">
Total</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 667</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
0.79%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 34679</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
41.30%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 18007</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
21.39%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 7442</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
8.84%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
60885</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
72.33%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 23292</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
27.67%</span></td>
<td align="right"><span style="font-size: x-small;"> 84177</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<p>Democrats were much much more likely to vote by mail and much, much less
likely to go to the polls. Everyone was about equally likely to vote at
a satellite or at our drive-thru. No partys (I really hate the word "independent") and Republicans were similar in
behavior - less likely mail, more likely polls. Libertarians were the
only people MORE likely to go to the polls than vote early, <br /></p></div><div>
<hr />
<p>Here's the vote totals, which we're more familiar with. This is also lower than the total turnout of 84,198. There were 347 presidential under-votes, which may seem hard to believe but is in the normal range. Sorry, Kanye, but I've combined the lower tier and the write-ins into an "other" category. <br /></p></div></div><table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <colgroup>
<col></col><col></col>
<col></col> <col></col> </colgroup><tbody><tr>
<td>
Votes</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Early</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Election Day</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Total</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
total</td>
<td align="right">
60672</td>
<td>
</td>
<td align="right">
23179</td>
<td>
</td>
<td align="right">
83851</td>
<td>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#000080">
<font color="#FFFFFF">Biden</font></td>
<td align="right">
48664</td>
<td align="right">
80.21%</td>
<td align="right">
10513</td>
<td align="right">
45.36%</td>
<td align="right">
59177</td>
<td align="right">
70.57%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">
<font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right">
11024</td>
<td align="right">
18.10%</td>
<td align="right">
11901</td>
<td align="right">
51.16%</td>
<td align="right">
22925</td>
<td align="right">
27.23%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">
Libertarian</td>
<td align="right">
522</td>
<td align="right">
0.86%</td>
<td align="right">
442</td>
<td align="right">
1.90%</td>
<td align="right">
964</td>
<td align="right">
1.15%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#008080">
<font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right">
148</td>
<td align="right">
0.24%</td>
<td align="right">
65</td>
<td align="right">
0.28%</td>
<td align="right">
213</td>
<td align="right">
0.25%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#800080">
<font color="#FFFF00">Other/write in</font></td>
<td align="right">
314</td>
<td align="right">
0.52%</td>
<td align="right">
258</td>
<td align="right">
1.11%</td>
<td align="right">
572</td>
<td align="right">
0.68%</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
</div>
<div>
In my years here, Democrats have been more likely to vote early than
Republicans, but this year the trend was especially exaggerated. There seemed to be intent and purpose to Republicans wanting to vote on Election Day. Even though about 3/4 of the vote was early, Trump got more votes on
Election Day than early. He actually <i>won</i> Election Day. </div><div> </div><div><a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2020/11/how-johnson-county-went-democratic-for.html">As I noted earlier, the big voting shift in Johnson County this cycle was voters moving from third parties to Biden</a>. Of those who didn't, Election Day voters were twice as
likely to vote Libertarian or Other Third Party than early voters.</div><div>
<hr />
<p></p>
<p>Now I indulge in sheer speculation and try to figure out what the no partys did. There's no way to tell, of course, but I'll play with numbers and make some false assumptions: that all members of a party voted for their party's
candidate, and that only No Party people did write ins or voted for miscellaneous candidates. Then I just subtracted the difference. <br /></p></div><table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <colgroup>
<col></col><col></col>
<col></col> <col></col> </colgroup><tbody><tr>
<td>
Estimated No Party Votes</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Early</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Election Day</td>
<td align="center" colspan="2"> Total</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
total</td>
<td align="right">
12574</td>
<td>
</td>
<td align="right">
8593</td>
<td>
</td>
<td align="right">
21167</td>
<td>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#000080">
<font color="#FFFFFF">Biden</font></td>
<td align="right">
9630</td>
<td align="right">
76.59%</td>
<td align="right">
3363</td>
<td align="right">
39.14%</td>
<td align="right">
12993</td>
<td align="right">
61.38%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FF0000">
<font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right">
2310</td>
<td align="right">
18.37%</td>
<td align="right">
4787</td>
<td align="right">
55.71%</td>
<td align="right">
7097</td>
<td align="right">
33.53%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">
Libertarian</td>
<td align="right">
272</td>
<td align="right">
2.16%</td>
<td align="right">
171</td>
<td align="right">
1.99%</td>
<td align="right">
443</td>
<td align="right">
2.09%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#008080">
<font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right">
48</td>
<td align="right">
0.38%</td>
<td align="right">
14</td>
<td align="right">
0.16%</td>
<td align="right">
62</td>
<td align="right">
0.29%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td bgcolor="#800080">
<font color="#FFFF00">Other/write in</font></td>
<td align="right">
314</td>
<td align="right">
2.50%</td>
<td align="right">
258</td>
<td align="right">
3.00%</td>
<td align="right">
572</td>
<td align="right">
2.70%</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<p>No party early voters
voted much like the rest of the early voters, nearly four to one Biden, and just a
little bit more third party. But the Election Day no party voters leaned about 5
points more Trump than the rest of election day voters. As we saw, the Election Day
voters by party affiliation leaned disproportionately R as well. </p><p>The Election
Day no partys likely had a lot of weak voters or people who though COVID was
Fake News, both groups that would lean Trump. End result was that no party
overall was very blue by the standards of a normal Iowa place but a little redder
than the standards of the People's Republic.</p><p>This really nails down my long time theory: No party voters are just like partisan voters, they just don't like checking the box for whatever reason, and once you get them in the booth they pretty much behave like partisans.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-2350000105701239172020-12-13T13:34:00.006-06:002020-12-28T17:09:21.603-06:00The Caucuses Greatest Hits Version 5.0 - 2020 Edition<p>In a post I first wrote back in 2006 and have updated periodically. I've
looked at and ranked all the caucus cycles back to 1976. As for
history and the caucuses themselves, a mixed bag. Irrelevant nearly
half the time, critical a little less often. <br />
<br />
<b><big>Not Worth The Airfare To Waterloo</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>21. 1984 and 2004 Republican.</b> The Republican tradition was to hold no presidential vote at all in incumbent re-elect years.That tradition ended in 2020, not because of Trump's minor opponents but because state party leadership seemed to think not having a vote in 2020 would hurt the case for First in 2024. Ironically, this happened as other state Republican parties canceled their contests.<br />
<br />
<b>20. 1996 Democratic.</b>
The word went down from Des Moines to the Democratic county chairs:
“The President would like a unanimous re-nomination and this WILL
happen.” <a href="https://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/returns/caucus/9602cauc.htm">Self-starters in a couple lefty college precincts elected a very small handful of Nader and Uncommitted protest delegates</a>, but those
results got swept under the rug. Clinton came out and campaigned the
final weekend, largely to step on the GOP story (Actually Being
President trumps winning the caucus), but it was in basketball arenas,
not chat n’ chews.<br />
<br />
<b>18 (tie). 2012 Democratic</b>. As
close to an unopposed caucus as possible short of “The President would
like a unanimous re-nomination and this WILL happen.” The state party
went to bat for actually <i>having</i> an alignment, which Chicago didn't want. But without a live
person as an Obama opponent (<a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/bernie-sanders-talks-primary-challenge-obama-good-idea-our-democracy-and-democratic-part/">despite Bernie Sanders' suggestion</a>), the dissenters were split between Uncommitted and
crossing over for Ron Paul. In the end the Uncommitteds, mostly made up of folks allied with the simultaneous Occupy movement, made a lot of
noise out of proportion to their 1.5% of the delegates. Rated up one notch because that 1.5% actually got honestly reported, not suppressed as in 1996.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="background-color: yellow;">18 (tie). 2020 Republican.</span></b> Iowa Republicans broke with tradition in 2020, in part because they were concerned that with no actual vote they would put First at risk (this was before the 2020 Democrats removed all doubt). But even though they counted the votes against Trump, Bill Weld and Joe Walsh proved to be woefully ineffective even as protest vote placeholders. <br />
<br />
<b>17. 1992 Republican.</b> The Pat Buchanan
Brigade was looking like a serious threat to win New Hampshire - he ended up at 37.5% there - but the
inside the Des Moines Beltway crowd stuck with the tradition of not
having a vote in an incumbent year. That decision was a small win for George HW, and that no-vote decision was more important than the 2020 decision to vote. So this gets the highest rank of the de facto uncontested caucuses.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Ultimately Irrelevant</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>16. 1992 Democratic.</b>
Hometown boy Tom Harkin runs and wins big, though not as big as it
looked because of some skilled realignment work at viability time. That
76% Harkin delegate count included a lot of stealth supporters of other
candidates.<br />
<br />
Paul Tsongas was already on the ground in
Iowa when Harkin announced, but he quickly bailed. There were a couple
feints from Bob Kerrey and Jerry Brown but nothing serious. Everyone showed up for the cycle's lone cattle call, the then-Jefferson Jackson dinner, but between low interest and a blizzard the hall was half empty.<br />
<br />
In the end,
Iowa kept first place after `92 only because Tom Harkin was the only Bill Clinton rival who enthusiastically jumped on the bandwagon. The other also-rans could barely hide their obvious
contempt for Clinton. (Kerrey and Brown probably wrote themselves in that
November.)<br />
<br />
The long term importance of the 1992 caucuses may be that Bill, and by extension Hillary, Clinton did not have to retail campaign in Iowa, and that had a ripple effect into 2008 and 2016.</p><p><b><span style="background-color: yellow;">15 (tie). 2020 Democratic.</span></b>
In the end, the importance of the 2020 Democratic caucuses will be that they were the last, but what about the cycle itself, in terms of the traditional momentum and winnowing role? </p><p>The results problem killed the momentum but even early on it was clear there were two leaders. And in the end two winners.</p><p>The delegate count winner, Pete Buttigeig, was a flavor of the week fad who had little traction after Iowa and who at best will end up with a make-work administration role rather than the high level cabinet post he craved. He got his breakout from obscurity not from the caucus “win”, but from pre-Iowa polling and fundraising.</p><p>I don’t have an answer for the Buttigeig problem: someone who, despite being absolutely not ready for the White House, is a rising star stuck in an area where winning a higher race is difficult. But if our rhetoric is Fight Everywhere, he should try. Indiana Senator Todd Young is up in 2022.</p><p>The popular vote winner, Bernie Sanders, lost ground from his 2016 tie, as the Not Hillary voters he had to himself that year dispersed to the rest of the field. Despite his strong core of support, he was most people's Anyone But choice and started losing contests as soon as voters consolidated behind the eventual winner.</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">(As much as I loathe Sanders, who as a non-Democrat should never have been allowed to participate in Democratic nominating contests, I consider him the real winner. We kept score two ways and I consider popular vote the more fair way to call the winner. He probably had more raw votes in 2016, too, but we didn’t keep score that way that year.)</p><p>The eventual president-elect finished a poor fourth, which in prior years would have a drop-out finish. In the end, Joe Biden was the real winner of the caucuses, because he got a mulligan on his poor results. By the time we figured it all out, South Carolina and Super Tuesday had happened and the train had left the station.<br /></p><p>Not a single candidate quit based on the Iowa results. The winnowing happened before Iowans even caucused, on factors like debate qualification, fundraising and national polls. One of those winnowed-out before Iowa candidates, Kamala Harris, became the running mate.</p><p>So the caucus results had no real impact on the nomination outcome at all. It's like we never happened. And for all the “organizing” we did – this is NOT an attack on the organizers and volunteers - in the fall we wound up losing the state to Trump, losing a Senate race we had a shot at, losing two US House seats, and losing ground in the legislature. <br /></p><p><b>14. 2000 Both.</b> On the Democratic side Al Gore easily beat Bill Bradley in what was merely the first moment in the overall national dynamic; <a href="http://www.hoophall.com/halloffamers/Bradley.htm"> Dollar Bill</a> made his stand on friendlier turf in New Hampshire and fell just short there, and that pretty much ended it. (Still mad: Anyone who thinks things were "rigged" against Sanders should have been a Bradley 2000 person. Basically the entire power structure of the party was behind Gore and the prevailing attitude was "how DARE Bradley 'challenge' him.")<br />
<br />
On
the Republican side it was like one of those boycott-era Olympics: W
won but the toughest competitor, McCain, was a no-show playing a Screw Iowa strategy. The truly
significant GOP event was the straw poll that winnowed out more
candidates (E. Dole, Quayle, and Buchanan bolting to Reform) than the
actual caucus (Orrin Hatch, as if that wasn’t obvious). Comic relief:
People who took Gary Bauer seriously, <a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2000-01-28"> Alan Keyes in Michael Moore’s mosh pit</a>.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Secondary event in nomination contest</big></b><br />
<br />
<b><span style="background-color: white;">13. 2016 Republican</span>. </b>Whichever contest was first would have narrowed a field that peaked at 17 candidates. The biggest event of the cycle was actually a non-event - the Ames Straw Poll that had been the dominant pre-caucus event from 1987 to 2011 was first moved out of Ames, then canceled entirely when the leading candidates refused to show up.<br />
<br />
The field was down to a mere 12 by caucus night. Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, and Marco Rubio, in that order, each took about a quarter of the vote, with the other nine splitting the remaining 25%. The immediate two past Iowa winners, Huckabee and Santorum, fizzled, and that effectively ended their campaigns.<br />
<br />
Rand Paul failed to keep his father's coalition, because all of the "he's alternative, dude!" vote was caucusing for Bernie Sanders. The dudebro overlap between Ron/Rand Paul and Sanders supporters, which makes little ideological sense but is clearly a Thing, is a Ph.D. dissertation for someone.<br />
<br />
Cruz's win turned out to be an anomaly and a relatively minor event. Cruz wasn't even Trump's final opposition - that turned out to be John Kasich, merely because he refused to quit.<br />
<br />
<b>12. 1980 Democratic.</b>
The incumbent won the first test of Kennedy-Carter, but that battle of
giants was played out on a national, even global, stage and Iowa was a
bit player.<br />
<br />
<b>11. 2008 Republican.</b> Important to the dynamic of the contest, but not central to the result. <br />
<br />
Mitt
Romney was looking like the guy to beat in December 2007. Which Mike
Huckabee did in January 2008, after first beating Sam Brownback at the
straw poll to win the mantle of THE religious conservative candidate.
Had Iowa Republicans gotten behind the Mitt, they may have headed off
the chaos that was the GOP field in January. Instead, we proved that
there was no there there for Fred Thompson, and that the Ron Paul Яэvo<sub>┘</sub>utionaries
were noisy in disproportion to their actual numbers (but see 2012
below). But really, we just stirred the pot, and the decisive event was
in Florida between two men with Screw Iowa Lite strategies, Rudy
Giuliani and John McCain.<br />
<br />
Our next contest was very similar, but the tiebreaker is that the Iowa winner actually won the nomination:<br />
<br />
<b>10. 1996 Republican.</b>
What might have been: Pat Buchanan was within 3% of Bob Dole, but the
social conservatives in Cedar Rapids backed Alan Keyes instead; Keyes
thus won the second biggest county. One minister at one mega-church
makes a different choice, and we’d have had a major upset.<br />
<br />
Some all too obvious field winnowing (Dick Lugar???) happens. Phil Gramm
gets out too, but his real stumble was in Louisiana’s
jump-the-starting-gun contest a week earlier. <br />
<br />
Comic relief: Easily the funniest caucus! Dole, <a href="http://www.bobdole.org/books/prezwits.html"> genuinely witty</a>
in his non-Satan mode, Steve Forbes the android, Alan Keyes… but they
all pale next to Morrie Taylor, the tire magnate who literally tried to
buy a win one vote at a time. Failed miserably but looked like he had
more fun than the rest put together.<br />
<br />
<b>9. 1988 Democratic.</b>
Other than Tom Harkin's favorite son run which doesn't really count, this is the only time from 1976 to 2016 that Iowa Democrats did not vote for the eventual nominee. The nomination contest came down to Dukakis vs.
Jackson, neither of whose fortunes were affected by Iowa.<br />
<br />
In `88 Al Gore, <a href="https://politics.theonion.com/recently-single-al-gore-finally-able-to-listen-to-w-a-s-1819571657">dirty Prince lyrics still ringing in his ears</a>, was the
first candidate to use the Screw Iowa strategy. It's never worked (save
for the Harkin year), but nevertheless Gore wound up outlasting the
two Iowa leaders.<br />
<br />
There's a story, long told by Paul Simon loyalists, that a county chair
sat on his Simon-friendly results until the Register had printed its
GEPHARDT WINS headline, which mattered in the pre-internet era. Rules got changed after that so that results are reported direct from the precinct to the state without going through a county chair, but this one proved the
winner-take-all-news theory that was prevalent at the time (and which was supposed to be the anchor of my aborted masters' thesis).<br />
<br />
Comic relief:
Gary Hart’s last minute return to the race, campaigning with his wife.<br />
<br />
<b>8. 2012 Republican</b>. The real importance of the 2012 Republican caucuses was not its
relatively small role in designating the nominee. That was always going
to come down to Mitt vs. Not Mitt. Rick Santorum never really got the bump from the
win, because of the dead heat, the botched result announcement, and the recount that delayed the final result. And also because Sheldon Adelson kept Newt Gingrich on life
support far too long,<br />
<br />
No, the real importance was what happened to the Republican Party of Iowa <i>after</i>
the presidential vote. The Romney and Santorum people both said "yay,
we won," went home, and both in turn were right. The Ron Paul people
stuck around, elected themselves as all the delegates and committee people, and
took over the state party structure.<br />
<br />
The consequences
had a huge ripple effect through state, and even national, internal
Republican politics for the next two years, until Terry Branstad, Jeff
Kaufmann and the rest of the grownups took party control back in 2014
(the most important OFF-year caucus). This one may move up the charts depending on the
long-term fate of the caucuses, and so may the next:<br />
<br />
<b><span style="background-color: yellow;"><b>7. </b>2016 Democratic.</span> </b>Iowa was a big deal - in the same way that the first post in an epic flame war that eventually breaks Godwin's Law is a big deal.<br />
<br />
Had Hillary Clinton solidly beaten Bernie
Sanders in Iowa, 2016 would have been over as fast as you can say "Bill Bradley"
and the whole Sanders phenomenon would never have happened. Oh, he
might have stayed on some ballots and accumulated a few votes. But
without the dead heat in Iowa, and the money and attention that followed, he would have been an asterisk, like Dennis Kucinich playing out the string in the late states in 2004 after John Kerry had clinched and everyone else had quit.<br />
<br />
I have long said, and the 2020 results confirmed, that half the Sanders vote was simply Not Hillary, and that
alone would have gotten Martin O'Malley to 30 points in Iowa had Sanders not
run. Indeed, that was probably O'Malley's whole strategy, to be the only person willing to run against Clinton.<br />
<br />
The fact that Sanders was even allowed to run in 2016 without joining the Democratic Party was a decision by the DNC - ironically, headed at the time by the same Debbie Wasserman Schultz who supposedly "rigged" the nomination against Sanders. DWS's inability to take Sanders seriously as a threat to Clinton, and her under-estimation of Clinton's negatives, are just more signs of her ineptitude.<br />
<br />
Sanders himself may have faded (from 49.9999% in Iowa on Caucus Night to about 25% in 2020) but his campaign mainstreamed a progressive stance that other candidates at lower levels are now seeing success with (in places very different than Iowa). The long range ranking of 2016 may move up if this turns out to be a permanent change.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Significant event in nomination contest</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>6. 1988 Republican.</b>
Pat Robertson pushes George HW into third place. Robertson was
insignificant thereafter, but the blow made Bush go on a fight of his
life attack against Bob Dole in New Hampshire. Dole took the bait and
was goaded into “stop lying about my record.” This convinces HW that
hard negative was the way to go. That road went through the flag factory
and Willie Horton, and ended at the White House. Comic relief: Al Haig.<br />
<br />
<b>5. 1984 Democratic.</b>
Gary Hart barely squeaked past his old boss, George McGovern. But
second, no matter how distant, was enough to make him the Not Mondale
and propel him up about 40 points in eight days for a New Hampshire win,
a brief but genuine shot at the nomination, and (pre-Donna Rice) 1988
front-runner status. The Right Stuff sank like Gus Grissom’s capsule,
and you're an old timer if you catch that reference.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Decisive event in nomination contest</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>4. 2004 Democratic.</b><br />
<br />
Iowa was the whole ball game in 2004. Nothing that happened <i>after</i> Iowa mattered nearly as much as what happened <i>in</i> Iowa. The guy who won got the nomination, and the guy in second got VP. And the guy in third? <br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9j6xm7e5bJo" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
The Dean Scream goes down as the single most memorable caucus moment, but everyone forgets The Scream was <i>after</i> The Much More Important Disappointing Third Place. (Which was helped by the most coordinated cross-campaign effort I ever saw, as the other candidates worked together to realign in whatever way hurt Dean the most.) After Dean had been the front-runner for months, Iowans got scared at the last minute - mostly thanks to Dick Gephardt, who went on a suicide attack that took them both out and set Gephardt up for reward in the Kerry Administration.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Made History</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>3. 1976 Democratic</b>.
This one made both Jimmy Carter and the caucuses themselves. Carter
didn’t actually win this, you know. He was second to Uncommitted. But I
know folks who <i>still</i> brag “Jimmy Carter slept on my couch.”<br />
<br />
I’m torn about ranking a caucus that directly produced a president below one that didn't. But read on.<br />
<br />
<b>2. 1980 Republican.</b>
In the first true Iowa Republican caucus, obscure former ambassador,
spy boss, and failed Senate candidate George Herbert Walker Bush
shocked the ten foot tall colossus of the GOP, Ronald Reagan. This one
win puts Poppy on the map and ultimately on the ticket (after the
botched Ford “co-presidency” deal at the `80 convention).<br />
<br />
So
why rank this ahead of Jimmy Carter, especially since Bush Sr. lost
that 1980 nomination? The ripple effect. No Iowa win = no Bush 41. And
with no HW, do you REALLY think Bush 43 or 45 (please clap) would have made it
on their own? 1976 made a president, but 1980 made a dynasty.<br />
<br />
<b>Number 1: 2008 Democratic</b>.
There's no question the 2008 Iowa Democratic caucuses created a
president. Iowa was the honing ground for Barack Obama's message and
appeal and ground game. We eliminated the entire second tier, and proved
that voters in one of the whitest places in America would support a
black candidate. Remember, a lot of African-American voters were
sticking with Hillary Clinton before Iowa, because Obama "couldn't win."
Iowa shattered that myth and the perception of Clinton's inevitability.<br />
<br />
It's too soon to tell, and Trump's win blurred things, but the 2008 caucuses may have ushered in not just one president, but a whole <span style="font-style: italic;">era</span>,
a new alignment of states that ends the 1968 Nixon-Wallace
southern-western coalition for good, at least at the presidential level.<br />
<br />
2008
was a whole new map. As late as the first John Edwards campaign, people
were sill seriously saying it was impossible to break the Republican
"electoral college lock" without southern rural white male voters. Trump has since proven those voters are gone forever - maybe in the urban and exurban North as well.<br />
<br />
But that old
South has been replaced by the new South, driven by suburban voters who migrated from the North, women, and minorities. Florida has disappointed teh last two times, but Virginia is now solid blue,
North Carolina is in play, Georgia flipped in 2020, and even Texas is on the horizon. Barack Obama fueled this alignment, which would not have been possible without that Iowa win.<br />
<br />
The
1976 caucuses made one president, but his victory is a mere footnote to
a Republican era, brought about by the intensity of Watergate and the
Nixon pardon. The 1980 Republican caucuses made two presidents, but they
followed the electoral footsteps of others. <br />
<br />
How many
presidents in an era? Obama wasn't able to transfer
this alignment to an immediate successor, because some anchors of the old coalition fell in 2016 (Trump essentially drew three cards to an inside straight with his narrow Wisconsin-Michigan-Pennsylvania wins), but Biden seems to have partially restored and in some places expanded the Obama coalition. On the other hand, he slipped in others, most notably the rural Upper Midwest. Some of those rural Iowa Obama counties aren't ever coming back - but in the big picture Georgia and Arizona are a nice tradeoff.<br /><br />If the 2008 caucuses ushered in an Obama
Realignment, like the FDR Relignment or the Nixon-Wallace Realignment,
they could lead to four or five presidents.It's a weaker case than it was a few years ago, but 2008 still deserves the number one spot.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-63583596677969672952020-11-19T08:27:00.002-06:002020-11-28T12:08:51.303-06:00Notes on Undervotes<p><b>Johnson County Numbers Part 3 </b><br /></p><p>Despite having the best numbers in the district by 14% above any other county, and with the recount still in progress, Johnson County is getting blamed for Rita Hart's heartbreakingly close (47 votes prior to to the ongoing recount) apparent loss.</p><p>Two items have been noted: 1) That Johnson was the only county in the district where Hart ran behind Joe Biden and 2) the under votes in the congressional race.</p><p>I've already explained most of the presidential vote-shifting pattern in <a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2020/11/johnson-county-election-numbers-part-one.html">prior</a> <a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2020/11/how-johnson-county-went-democratic-for.html">posts</a>:</p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>While Donald Trump gained percentage points in other Iowa counties over 2016, he pulled an almost identical share in Johnson County, dropping 0.01%. </li><li>We had ballpark of 1000 Never Trump Republican votes</li><li>Joe Biden's percentage gains here were due to 3/4 of the 2016 third party and write in vote shifting his way.</li></ul><p>I've waited on voters for 23 years and there are a certain number who loudly proclaim "I only want to vote for president." And as hard as it is for activists to comprehend, folks have got a right to do that. Many, many more ask with a slight embarrassment "do I have to vote for everything?" or "if I skip some races does My Vote still count?" with "My Vote" clearly meaning "For President." Other voters feel, in all good conscience, that they don't want to vote in races they know little about. This pattern is strongest in campus precincts and in our trailer court dominated precincts.<br /></p><p>In general, the lower on the ballot you go, the fewer votes you see. I've been a down ballot candidate in a presidential year, and it is next to impossible, even for a major leaguer like a US Senator, to break through the noise of a presidential race. Square or cube that when you have an attention hound like Donald Trump in the mix.<br /></p><p>But in a race this close, you need the Johnson County numbers - that's why you're reading this, right? Just exactly how many people are skipping contests here in the People's Republic? Let's look back at the last four presidential cycles. (For statistical purposes I'm including the much less common over-votes,
where voters mark more than one target and cancel themselves out, in
with the under votes. Either way, it's a vote not cast in the race.)</p><p>I've chosen six races: first, the three federal races (there was no 2012 Senate contest). I chose sheriff as an example of an uncontested county-wide one party contest in all four cycles (auditor had a Democrat vs. independent contest in 2008). Last, I looked at the first and last judicial retention vote each year. That was not always the bottom of the ballot due to public measures, but those higher profile contests tend to break the pattern and draw more votes. <br /></p><p>What we see is a clear pattern that consistently repeats itself, with minor variation, over the years. </p><table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr>
<td bgcolor="#FFFF00">Votes Cast</td>
<td align="center" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2008</td>
<td align="center" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2012</td>
<td align="center" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2016</td>
<td align="center" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2020</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total Voters</td>
<td align="right"> 73,231</td>
<td align="right"> 76,199</td>
<td align="right"> 77,476</td>
<td align="right"> 84,198</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> President</td>
<td align="right"> 72,989</td>
<td align="right"> 75,977</td>
<td align="right"> 76,940</td>
<td align="right"> 83,851</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Senate</td>
<td align="right"> 70,413</td>
<td align="right" bordercolor="#C0C0C0">-</td>
<td align="right"> 74,833</td>
<td align="right"> 82,633</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> US Rep</td>
<td align="right"> 69,586</td>
<td align="right"> 72,518</td>
<td align="right"> 74,189</td>
<td align="right"> 80,291</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Sheriff</td>
<td align="right"> 51,966</td>
<td align="right"> 54,507</td>
<td align="right"> 59,182</td>
<td align="right"> 65,180</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> First Judge</td>
<td align="right"> 41,929</td>
<td align="right"> 51,194</td>
<td align="right"> 50,240</td>
<td align="right"> 58,878</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Last Judge</td>
<td align="right"> 39,109</td>
<td align="right"> 47,879</td>
<td align="right"> 47,827</td>
<td align="right"> 53,663</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Undervotes</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2008</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2012</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2016</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2020</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> President</td>
<td align="right"> -242</td>
<td align="right"> -222</td>
<td align="right"> -536</td>
<td align="right"> -347</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Senate</td>
<td align="right"> -2818</td>
<td align="right">-</td>
<td align="right"> -2643</td>
<td align="right"> -1565</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> US Rep</td>
<td align="right"> -3645</td>
<td align="right"> -3681</td>
<td align="right"> -3287</td>
<td align="right"> -3907</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Sheriff</td>
<td align="right"> -21,265</td>
<td align="right"> -21,692</td>
<td align="right"> -18,294</td>
<td align="right"> -19,018</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> First Judge</td>
<td align="right"> -31,302</td>
<td align="right"> -25,005</td>
<td align="right"> -27,236</td>
<td align="right"> -25,320</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Last Judge</td>
<td align="right"> -34,122</td>
<td align="right"> -28,320</td>
<td align="right"> -29,649</td>
<td align="right"> -30,535</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Undervote %</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2008</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2012</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2016</td>
<td align="right" bgcolor="#FFFF00"> 2020</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> President</td>
<td align="right"> -0.33%</td>
<td align="right"> -0.29%</td>
<td align="right"> -0.69%</td>
<td align="right"> -0.41%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Senate</td>
<td align="right"> -3.85%</td>
<td align="right">-</td>
<td align="right"> -3.41%</td>
<td align="right"> -1.86%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> US Rep</td>
<td align="right"> -4.98%</td>
<td align="right"> -4.83%</td>
<td align="right"> -4.24%</td>
<td align="right"> -4.64%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Sheriff</td>
<td align="right"> -29.04%</td>
<td align="right"> -28.47%</td>
<td align="right"> -23.61%</td>
<td align="right"> -22.59%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> First Judge</td>
<td align="right"> -42.74%</td>
<td align="right"> -32.82%</td>
<td align="right"> -35.15%</td>
<td align="right"> -30.07%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Last Judge</td>
<td align="right"> -46.60%</td>
<td align="right"> -37.17%</td>
<td align="right"> -38.27%</td>
<td align="right"> -36.27%</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table><p></p><p>For whatever reason, several hundred people vote in a presidential election and do not vote for president. Some unknown share of this is error, some of it is blank ballots, and some is just the stubbornness of "I don't like either of them." </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">(Either? There are generally 8 to 10 presidential candidates listed on Iowa's ballot, covering every niche from tankie to militia. Although this year, for the first time since 1956, we had no candidate on the ballot with the word "Socialist" in their party - since of course Joe Biden was the Socialist in the race 🤣) </p><p>Note that the presidential under vote is highest in 2016, when both Trump and Clinton had high negatives; that year also saw by far the highest write-in vote for president at nearly 1000.</p><p>There's also some number of people who skip races where their party has no candidate, which is common in the Democrat-dominated courthouse races in Johnson County. The sheriff under vote looks slightly higher in 2008 and 2012, where Obama may have drawn more president-only voters who skipped the courthouse contests. The under vote is down a bit in 2020, as the seat was open and Democratic nominee Brad Kunkel had won a high profile primary campaign. In contrast, predecessor Lonny Pulkrabek had no opposition at all the previous three cycles, after winning a contested primary and general election in 2004.</p><p>One thing I see here: the end of straight ticket voting after 2016 does not seem to have had as big an impact as expected. People who were partisan enough to mark that straight ticket target, and it was close to a third of all Johnson County voters, are now just as inclined to work their way down the ballot and mark every contest. So eliminating the straight ticket merely serves as punishment for people who have physical difficulty marking the ballot.</p><p>You see a definite change in judicial voting patterns after the 2010 defeat of three supreme court justices who backed the marriage equality ruling. Under votes dropped from nearly half to closer to a third. Anecdotally, I hear many more voters saying they want to wait to return mailed ballots so they can "study" (read: "party ID") "the judges."<br /></p><p>So that covers the low profile down ballot contests. Let's bounce back up to the top. </p><p>The 2008 Senate race between Tom Harkin and Some Dude Christopher Reed saw a slightly higher under vote because it was seen as non-competitive. The 2016 Grassley-Judge race was not very competitive either, but Patty Judge was at least a well known former statewide official, and Johnson County was the one county she won.</p><p>But we see a definite drop in under votes in the Senate race this year. For a brief moment this looked like the pivotal Senate race for control, and Ernst and Greenfield dominated airwaves for months. In the end, all the money pushed maybe a couple thousand more people in our county to mark that race.<br /></p><p>The open seat 2nd CD race is high profile NOW, now that it's the closest congressional race in the nation <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/12/17/court-declares-democrat-won-in-connecticut/a109f278-3d5a-47fa-a5bc-0517165966a7/">since 1994</a>. But on the October airwaves, it was just a little less prominent than Ernst-Greenfield, and, crucially, it saw just a little less interest.</p><p>But that's <b>normal</b>. <br /></p><p>What we see looking back over four presidential cycles is a remarkable consistency. In three cycles the under vote lands in a very narrow range between 4.64% and 4.98%. The fourth cycle, 2016, is barely an outlier at 4.24%. </p><p>My theory there is that Christopher Peters, the 2016 libertarian-identified Republican challenger, picked up some Libertarian presidential voters who were under-voters in the other three cycles. In 2008, 2012 and 2020 the Republicans were seen as more mainstream, and there was no big-L Libertarian on the ballot in any of these four US House contests. Generally the Iowa Libertarians have a Senate candidate (alive or <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2014/10/14/dubuque-plane-crash-ankeny-flight/17237965/">dead</a>) and that explains part of the drop from Senate to US House over the years. Other third parties, in contrast, usually contest just the presidential race.<br /></p><p>In short, Johnson County voted in the congressional race pretty much the same as it has for some time, with 4 to 5% of voters skipping the race. The professionals working this race would or should have seen these past patterns and accounted for them. I'm not sure what more could have been done to lower that under vote to the Senate race level, other than throwing several tens of millions more at us like Greenfield and Ernst and every interest group in the country did.<br /></p><p>So if you're blaming the county that voted 13 to 14 points better for the Democrat in all the top three races than any other county in the state, like we do every cycle, you're throwing the blame in the wrong direction.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-24422523450077867342020-11-13T19:17:00.005-06:002020-11-13T19:17:57.664-06:00How Johnson County Went Democratic For The 15th Time In A Row Since LBJ <p><b>(Or: how many different ways can I say "Third Party To Democratic") </b> <br /></p><p>Four years ago, Pat Rynard at Iowa Starting Line did an epic, precinct-level post, "<a href="http://iowastartingline.com/2017/01/03/how-dubuque-county-went-republican-for-the-1st-time-since-eisenhower/">How Dubuque County Went Republican For The 1st Time Since Eisenhower</a>," and I blatantly stole the format and <a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2017/01/how-johnson-county-went-democratic-for.html">applied it to Johnson County</a>.</p><p></p><p>With Dubuque flipping red in 2016, and staying flipped this time, Johnson County is the place with the longest consecutive Democratic presidential streak in Iowa. Joe Biden's local record setting win extended that string to 15 in a row, dating back to LBJ in 1964. Yes, despite some Irish Catholic roots here, JFK was the last Democrat to lose Johnson County. Nixon won here while losing the nation, and then lost here while winning the nation.</p><p>Four years ago, even though Hillary Clinton's numbers dipped only
slightly from Barack Obama's 2012 totals, there were a lot of
counter-trends by precincts - from a 20 point swing to the Democrats in
north Coralville's precinct 6 to a 30 point shift to Trump in Oxford -
that coincidentally balanced out.</p><p>This year, the big picture totals change more - but as we'll see the trends changed less.<br /></p><table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
Johnson County</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 22925</td>
<td align="right"> 27.34%</td>
<td align="right"> 21044</td>
<td align="right"> 27.35%</td>
<td align="right">
1,881</td>
<td align="right">
-0.01%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 59177</td>
<td align="right"> 70.57%</td>
<td align="right"> 50200</td>
<td align="right"> 65.25%</td>
<td align="right">
8,977</td>
<td align="right">
5.33%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 213</td>
<td align="right"> 0.25%</td>
<td align="right"> 878</td>
<td align="right"> 1.14%</td>
<td align="right">
-665</td>
<td align="right">
-0.89%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 964</td>
<td align="right"> 1.15%</td>
<td align="right"> 2758</td>
<td align="right"> 3.58%</td>
<td align="right">
-1,794</td>
<td align="right">
-2.43%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 572</td>
<td align="right"> 0.68%</td>
<td align="right"> 2060</td>
<td align="right"> 2.68%</td>
<td align="right">
-1,488</td>
<td align="right">
-2.00%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right">
84,198</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
77,476</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
6,722</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -7096 (-5.34%)<p></p><p>I shouldn't have promised a remake of that post because this cycle, things don't stand out as much. In fact, what stands out is that Donald Trump's Johnson County percentage stayed nearly identical - 27.35 last time, 27.34 this year. Trump was already about as low as a Republican can get; the only one ever to do worse here, by about 0.2%, was Poppy Bush in the Ross Perot 1992 cycle.<br /></p><p>The over-simplified version of the numbers that I offered in <a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2020/11/johnson-county-election-numbers-part-one.html">part one</a> was that roughly 3/4 of the Johnson County third party vote shifted to Biden. There's some variation by precinct, and there were no doubt some Trump to Biden changes that were counterbalanced by some Third Party to Trump. But I feel like I'm reaching harder for less significant differences than four years ago. 2020 feels more like it's consolidating the 2016 pattern, with the third party shift explaining most of the difference.<br /></p><p>Four years ago I broke Johnson County up into nine parts - Coralville, North Liberty
and Tiffin, two rural sections, and five parts of Iowa City. So rather than look at every single precinct as I did in 2016, we'll just look at the nine parts. We'll start with the two parts of Iowa City that people think of when they think "Iowa City."</p>
<p>
<b>Campus and Downtown</b></p><p>(Iowa City precincts 3, 5, 11, 13, 19, 20) <br /></p><p>Precincts 3 and 5 are dorm-dominated; 3 also has a chunk of neighborhood and an apartment chunk of mostly med students. 19 is almost entirely student apartments. 11 and 20 are mainly student apartments though 11 has a chunk of working class neighborhood and 20 has a couple senior buildings. Those are the five traditional "student" precincts. 13 has trended student since the construction of the Hawks Ridge apartment complex. Placing 13 here felt a little off in 2016, but now they're following the student pattern more closely.</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
Campus Area</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 1,661</td>
<td align="right"> 21.66%</td>
<td align="right"> 2,330</td>
<td align="right"> 24.48%</td>
<td align="right">
-669</td>
<td align="right">
-2.82%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 5,824</td>
<td align="right"> 75.94%</td>
<td align="right"> 6,379</td>
<td align="right"> 67.01%</td>
<td align="right">
-555</td>
<td align="right">
8.93%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 34</td>
<td align="right"> 0.44%</td>
<td align="right"> 143</td>
<td align="right"> 1.50%</td>
<td align="right">
-109</td>
<td align="right">
-1.06%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 93</td>
<td align="right"> 1.21%</td>
<td align="right"> 464</td>
<td align="right"> 4.87%</td>
<td align="right">
-371</td>
<td align="right">
-3.66%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 57</td>
<td align="right"> 0.74%</td>
<td align="right"> 203</td>
<td align="right"> 2.13%</td>
<td align="right">
-146</td>
<td align="right">
-1.39%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right">
7,681</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 9,687</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
-2,006</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -114 (-11.75%)<p>The biggest thing we see here is the COVID related drop in overall turnout. Some students simply aren't here - they're remoting into class from Back Home or they're taking a gap year. And with the big push for mailed ballots, some were sending ballots Back Home rather than voting here. There's also the voter ID factor, as the student population is the least likely to have the right ID materials (that's a feature of the voter ID law, not a bug). </p><p></p><p>Everyone lost votes here but Trump lost the most. We saw big percentage shifts to Biden in precinct 3, the west side dorms, where Clinton underperformed last time, and in the downtown apartments of precinct 19 which saw some of the highest third party totals in the county four years ago. Both those precincts also saw stronger Trump declines than the rest of campus, where his share stayed about the same.</p><p>The exception to the turnout decline is precinct 11, which has seen a
lot of new large apartment buildings go up in the last four years.</p><p>As I so often note, it's not undergrads that make Iowa City, or any other college town, a liberal island of blue. Undergrads still tend to follow parental political cues. No, it's grad students and faculty and staff who make college towns liberal, and they live in...<br />
<br />
<b>The People's Republic</b> </p><p>(Iowa City precincts 17, 18, 21) <br /></p><p>The three precincts north and east of downtown are historically the most Democratic in the county. It barely even makes sense to make a walking list, because you'll get a Democrat at every door. This is as blue as it gets outside of majority-minority areas of major cities.<br />
<br />
In 2000, Ralph Nader edged George W. Bush for second place in north side precinct 21, and 21 usually fights with Longfellow neighborhood 18 for bragging rights. Precinct 17 usually has a slightly lower percentage but has the biggest Democratic vote totals.
</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
Peoples Republic</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 584</td>
<td align="right"> 11.24%</td>
<td align="right"> 677</td>
<td align="right"> 12.59%</td>
<td align="right">
-93</td>
<td align="right">
-1.35%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 4,513</td>
<td align="right"> 86.87%</td>
<td align="right"> 4,325</td>
<td align="right"> 80.45%</td>
<td align="right">
188</td>
<td align="right">
6.42%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 26</td>
<td align="right"> 0.50%</td>
<td align="right"> 116</td>
<td align="right"> 2.16%</td>
<td align="right">
-90</td>
<td align="right">
-1.66%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 44</td>
<td align="right"> 0.85%</td>
<td align="right"> 130</td>
<td align="right"> 2.42%</td>
<td align="right">
-86</td>
<td align="right">
-1.57%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 28</td>
<td align="right"> 0.54%</td>
<td align="right"> 128</td>
<td align="right"> 2.38%</td>
<td align="right">
-100</td>
<td align="right">
-1.84%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right">
5,207</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 5,657</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
-450</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -281 (-7.77%)<p></p>
<p>There wasn't much room for Trump to drop here, though he did lose a
couple points in 17 and 18, dropping below 9% and losing by a <i>ten to one margin</i> in
precinct 18 . Trump actually GAINS a point in 21 - though Biden more
than makes it up with the shift from the third parties. These precincts include some student population, which explains turnout being slightly down from 2016. </p><p>
<b>The South/Southeast side</b><br />
<br />(Iowa City precincts 10, 12, 14, 15; Scott and West Lucas)</p><p>Iowa City's southeast side is an odd mix: trailer courts and big non-student working class apartments, interlaced with empty nesters who are not happy about Those People From Chicago. Iowa City, especially this area, has seen a noticeable black in-migration in the past 20 years, and also has a growing Hispanic population centered in these precincts. Included for demographic sake are two trailer-dominated "rural" precincts, Scott and West Lucas townships. </p><p>That demographic combination is less of a fit this year, as the trailer court precinct hold about steady or even shift slightly to the Working Class Tory phenomenon that is Donald Trump. <br /></p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
South/Southeast</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 1,740</td>
<td align="right"> 22.64%</td>
<td align="right"> 1,481</td>
<td align="right"> 21.76%</td>
<td align="right">
259</td>
<td align="right">
0.88%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 5,779</td>
<td align="right"> 75.19%</td>
<td align="right"> 4,816</td>
<td align="right"> 70.75%</td>
<td align="right">
963</td>
<td align="right">
4.44%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 24</td>
<td align="right"> 0.31%</td>
<td align="right"> 117</td>
<td align="right"> 1.72%</td>
<td align="right">
-93</td>
<td align="right">
-1.41%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 94</td>
<td align="right"> 1.22%</td>
<td align="right"> 210</td>
<td align="right"> 3.09%</td>
<td align="right">
-116</td>
<td align="right">
-1.86%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 49</td>
<td align="right"> 0.64%</td>
<td align="right"> 183</td>
<td align="right"> 2.69%</td>
<td align="right">
-134</td>
<td align="right">
-2.05%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right">
7,721</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 6,857</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
864</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -704 (-3.56%)<p>Here we see again the shift away from the third parties, but Biden gains less here than he did in midtown. Biden does gain a bit more in precincts 14 and 15, impressive since there wasn't much TO gain in 14, yet somehow he goes up to 85% from Clinton's 77.<br /></p><p>About half of the turnout jump is from precinct 15, an artifact of the "redevelopment" of a large apartment complex. Long called Lakeside, and later rebranded a couple times, finally as Rose Oaks, it was historically a low income area. The whole complex was empty during the 2016 cycle as developers renovated. It reopened in 2017, gentrified and re-named The Quarters, and marketed to students. Trivia: Precinct 15 dropped from the highest Green Party share in the county in 2016 to literally zero Green votes this year.<br /></p><p><b>East Side</b><br />
<br />(Iowa City precincts 1, 6, 16, 22, 23, 24) <br /></p><p>Now we're starting to get into "townie" Iowa City. There are apartments here and there but most of these voters are homeowners in long-established neighborhoods. Precinct 6 has large senior complexes. Precinct 22 has some new homes in the Peninsula neighborhood and the only population of students here, at the Mayflower dorm. </p><p>
These voters are not usually left wing in local elections, but are solidly Democratic at the top of the ticket.</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
East Side</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 2,391</td>
<td align="right"> 19.90%</td>
<td align="right"> 2,288</td>
<td align="right"> 20.70%</td>
<td align="right">
103</td>
<td align="right">
-0.81%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 9,411</td>
<td align="right"> 78.31%</td>
<td align="right"> 8,039</td>
<td align="right"> 72.74%</td>
<td align="right">
1,372</td>
<td align="right">
5.56%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 35</td>
<td align="right"> 0.29%</td>
<td align="right"> 120</td>
<td align="right"> 1.09%</td>
<td align="right">
-85</td>
<td align="right">
-0.79%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 92</td>
<td align="right"> 0.77%</td>
<td align="right"> 288</td>
<td align="right"> 2.61%</td>
<td align="right">
-196</td>
<td align="right">
-1.84%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 89</td>
<td align="right"> 0.74%</td>
<td align="right"> 316</td>
<td align="right"> 2.86%</td>
<td align="right">
-227</td>
<td align="right">
-2.12%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right"> 12,076</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 11,155</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
921</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -1269 (-6.37%)<p>The big shift here happened from 2012 to 2016, and this cycle the simplified "third party to Democrats" explanation covers most of the story. The one standout is precinct 22, with its student influence leading both to a turnout drop and a 10% jump for Biden.</p><p>Most of the turnout gain is population growth in precinct 24, which covers most of the city east of Scott Boulevard. <br />
<br />
<b>West Side</b><br />
<br />(Iowa City precincts 2, 4, 7, 8, 9; University Heights)<br /></p><p>There's a lot of similarity to the east side here, with Kennedy Parkway in precinct 7 taking the place of Windsor Ridge and Oaknoll in precinct 2 more than taking the place of the senior complexes in precinct 6. Precinct 4 is mostly the doctor/professor dominated very old neighborhood, Manville Heights; the enclaved speed trap University Heights has a similar feel.<br />
<br />But there's a few wild cards here. Precinct 4 also has a chunk of Frat Row, and there's a low income area split between 7 and 9 that includes a large and politically active Sudanese community. <br /></p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
West Side</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 1826</td>
<td align="right"> 19.13%</td>
<td align="right"> 1801</td>
<td align="right"> 20.28%</td>
<td align="right">
25</td>
<td align="right">
-1.15%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 7524</td>
<td align="right"> 78.83%</td>
<td align="right"> 6467</td>
<td align="right"> 72.82%</td>
<td align="right">
1,057</td>
<td align="right">
6.02%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 23</td>
<td align="right"> 0.24%</td>
<td align="right"> 87</td>
<td align="right"> 0.98%</td>
<td align="right">
-64</td>
<td align="right">
-0.74%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 105</td>
<td align="right"> 1.10%</td>
<td align="right"> 286</td>
<td align="right"> 3.22%</td>
<td align="right">
-181</td>
<td align="right">
-2.12%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 66</td>
<td align="right"> 0.69%</td>
<td align="right"> 240</td>
<td align="right"> 2.70%</td>
<td align="right">
-174</td>
<td align="right">
-2.01%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right"> 9601</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 8952</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
649</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -1032 (-7.16%)<p>Again, not much shift here and what shift there was is mainly third party to Biden. Turnout was up the most in precincts 7 and 8 where there's still some new development, and the swing to Biden was strongest in University Heights. </p><p>
<b>Coralville</b><br />
<br />(Coralville precincts 1-7; Penn township) <br /></p><p>Demographically there's really two Coralvilles. South Coralville (precinct 1, 4, and 5) is mostly older homes and apartments. North Coralville (precincts 2, 6, 7 and the demographically similar Penn Township) has bigger and newer homes and more money. Precinct 3 doesn't quite fit either; it's dominated by the Coral Court apartment complex and the Western Hills trailer court (where registration has been in decline).</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
Coralville</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 3443</td>
<td align="right"> 24.77%</td>
<td align="right"> 3,048</td>
<td align="right"> 25.75%</td>
<td align="right">
395</td>
<td align="right">
-0.99%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 10174</td>
<td align="right"> 73.19%</td>
<td align="right"> 7,927</td>
<td align="right"> 66.98%</td>
<td align="right">
2,247</td>
<td align="right">
6.21%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 29</td>
<td align="right"> 0.21%</td>
<td align="right"> 105</td>
<td align="right"> 0.88%</td>
<td align="right">
-76</td>
<td align="right">
-0.67%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 160</td>
<td align="right"> 1.15%</td>
<td align="right"> 409</td>
<td align="right"> 3.46%</td>
<td align="right">
-249</td>
<td align="right">
-2.30%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 95</td>
<td align="right"> 0.68%</td>
<td align="right"> 346</td>
<td align="right"> 2.92%</td>
<td align="right">
-251</td>
<td align="right">
-2.24%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right"> 13977</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 11,935</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
2,042</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -1852 (-7.20%)<p>The biggest shift here is in Coralville 6, which was a little more Hillary skeptical in 2016 but turned away from Trump this time. There was also a turnout jump in Coralville 1 due to new apartments.<br />
<br />
<b>North Liberty and Tiffin</b><br />
<br />(North Liberty precincts 1-6; Clear Creek/Tiffin precinct) <br /></p><p>This is some of the fastest growing turf in the state (and North Liberty finally got its HyVee during this four year cycle... though technically it's in Coralville.)<span style="background-color: white;"> </span>
</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
North Liberty/Tiffin</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 4,767</td>
<td align="right"> 33.44%</td>
<td align="right"> 3,684</td>
<td align="right"> 32.84%</td>
<td align="right">
1,083</td>
<td align="right">
0.61%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 9,146</td>
<td align="right"> 64.16%</td>
<td align="right"> 6506</td>
<td align="right"> 57.99%</td>
<td align="right">
2,640</td>
<td align="right">
6.17%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 22</td>
<td align="right"> 0.15%</td>
<td align="right"> 104</td>
<td align="right"> 0.93%</td>
<td align="right">
-82</td>
<td align="right">
-0.77%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 224</td>
<td align="right"> 1.57%</td>
<td align="right"> 569</td>
<td align="right"> 5.07%</td>
<td align="right">
-345</td>
<td align="right">
-3.50%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 95</td>
<td align="right"> 0.67%</td>
<td align="right"> 356</td>
<td align="right"> 3.17%</td>
<td align="right">
-261</td>
<td align="right">
-2.51%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right"> 14,292</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 11284</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
3,008</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -1557 (-5.57%)<p>
<span style="background-color: white;">North Liberty 3, with a lot of new high end development, topped 11 percent 3rd party in 2016, and that gave them more room for a 8.7% swing to Biden. North Liberty 6, the rapidly developing west side of town, also saw nearly a 9 point swing to Biden. But Tiffin, growing even faster, only saw about a 5 point shift. Trump's actual share stayed very steady in these precincts, with the shift coming entirely out of the third parties. </span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;">Trivia: North Liberty 6 and Tiffin are now two of the three largest (by registration) precincts in the county. The other is Iowa City 24. None of that matters after next year, when we tear up the precinct map and start over.<br /></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;">Trump did even better at holding his own in the last two parts of the county.</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"></span>
<b><span style="background-color: white;">The Greater Solon Metropolitan Area</span></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br />(Big Grove, Cedar, Graham, Jefferson and Newport townships; cities of Shueyville, Swisher and Solon)</span> </p><p>
<span style="background-color: white;">Even the most casual local observers have seen a GOP trend in northeast Johnson County. Retiring sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek only pulled 53% in the Johnson County part of House 73, not nearly enough to offset Bobby Kaufmann's big win in the rest of the district. (Swisher and Shueyville are in Amy Nielsen's House 77, not 73.) <br /></span></p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
Solon Area</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 4,160</td>
<td align="right"> 47.21%</td>
<td align="right"> 3,638</td>
<td align="right"> 46.15%</td>
<td align="right">
522</td>
<td align="right">
1.06%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 4,507</td>
<td align="right"> 51.15%</td>
<td align="right"> 3,759</td>
<td align="right"> 47.68%</td>
<td align="right">
748</td>
<td align="right">
3.47%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 11</td>
<td align="right"> 0.12%</td>
<td align="right"> 48</td>
<td align="right"> 0.61%</td>
<td align="right">
-37</td>
<td align="right">
-0.48%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 85</td>
<td align="right"> 0.96%</td>
<td align="right"> 242</td>
<td align="right"> 3.07%</td>
<td align="right">
-157</td>
<td align="right">
-2.11%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 48</td>
<td align="right"> 0.54%</td>
<td align="right"> 196</td>
<td align="right"> 2.49%</td>
<td align="right">
-148</td>
<td align="right">
-1.94%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right"> 8,849</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 7,933</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
916</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Net shift from Trump -226 (-2.40%)<p>
<span style="background-color: white;">Not as much shift away from Trump here, though Jefferson West (the Swisher precinct) flipped back from Trump in `16 to a narrow 5 vote Biden win. Trump carried Big Grove, Cedar, and Jefferson East (Shueyville), and Biden won the city of Solon, Newport, and by a larger margin Graham township, which has kept its ancestral Democratic voting pattern while the rest of the area has shifted. </span><span style="background-color: white;">Graham (the smallest precinct in the county) is also the only precinct here to see very little turnout growth.</span><br />
<b><br /><i>Rural</i> Rural Johnson County</b><br />
<br />(Fremont, Hardin, Liberty, Lincoln, Oxford Pleasant Valley, Sharon, Union, and Washington townships; cites of Hills, Lone Tree, Oxford)<br /></p><p>The North Corridor precincts we just looked at are mostly suburban, but the final chunk of the county is where the farms and true small towns are. Sharon and Washington townships have always voted like pieces of GOP leaning Washington County that were accidentally surveyed into the wrong county. Now, the rest of the precincts here are following those patterns. Most of the 11 precincts where Republican supervisor candidate Phil Hemingway led the three incumbent Democrats are here.</p><table border="1" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr> <td>
RURAL rural</td>
<td align="center">2020</td>
<td align="center">2020%</td>
<td align="center">2016</td>
<td align="center">2016%</td>
<td align="center"> Vote Diff</td>
<td align="center"> % Diff</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FF0000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Trump</font></td>
<td align="right"> 2,353</td>
<td align="right"> 49.30%</td>
<td align="right"> 2,097</td>
<td align="right"> 48.00%</td>
<td align="right">
256</td>
<td align="right">
1.30%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#0000FF"> <font color="#FFFFFF">Biden/Clinton</font></td>
<td align="right"> 2,299</td>
<td align="right"> 48.17%</td>
<td align="right"> 1,982</td>
<td align="right"> 45.37%</td>
<td align="right">
317</td>
<td align="right">
2.80%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#008000"> <font color="#FFFF00">Green</font></td>
<td align="right"> 9</td>
<td align="right"> 0.19%</td>
<td align="right"> 38</td>
<td align="right"> 0.87%</td>
<td align="right">
-29</td>
<td align="right">
-0.68%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#FFFF00"> Libertarian</td>
<td align="right"> 67</td>
<td align="right"> 1.40%</td>
<td align="right"> 160</td>
<td align="right"> 3.66%</td>
<td align="right">
-93</td>
<td align="right">
-2.26%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td bgcolor="#800080"> <font color="#FFFF00">Other</font></td>
<td align="right"> 45</td>
<td align="right"> 0.94%</td>
<td align="right"> 92</td>
<td align="right"> 2.11%</td>
<td align="right">
-47</td>
<td align="right">
-1.16%</td>
</tr>
<tr> <td> Total</td>
<td align="right"> 4,794</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right"> 4,411</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
<td align="right">
383</td>
<td align="right"> </td>
</tr>
</tbody></table><p>
Net shift from Trump
-61 (-1.50%) </p><p>Last cycle we saw a massive 17 point shift from Obama to Trump here.
That appears to be permanent as Biden only gained back 1.5%. Oxford, which saw the biggest shift in the county last time (a net 30% swing to Trump) swung narrowly back to the blue column this time, though Obama's 63% from 2012 is only a dim memory. <br /></p><p>Trump holds steady and even gains slightly here, while Biden gains just a little more. The only place where Trump sees a significant dip is Union township, which while still mostly Rural rural is close enough in to attract some subdivisions and commuters.</p><p></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-32089597341228483352020-11-11T10:02:00.002-06:002020-11-11T11:05:40.630-06:00Johnson County Election Numbers, Part One<p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEaVn7gRJwt0DSUmEvZ4abQ5ZAWZwtCfQ_o7EN-xpwny_k5Td4cmm5K47I173wiyXx1tLDZfVr1gsShuqX10r-ArS_DzSodkq2xgMi3MPemkzLF7NhApgEbHy3rr2NFH-NcnqI/s1600/P1040599.JPG" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEaVn7gRJwt0DSUmEvZ4abQ5ZAWZwtCfQ_o7EN-xpwny_k5Td4cmm5K47I173wiyXx1tLDZfVr1gsShuqX10r-ArS_DzSodkq2xgMi3MPemkzLF7NhApgEbHy3rr2NFH-NcnqI/s320/P1040599.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Joe Biden at the Hamburg Inn, 2007<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><p></p><p>For the second cycle in a row, election season in Johnson County is
going into overtime. Two years ago it was the sudden death of supervisor
Kurt Friese and the <a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2018/12/porters-win-sign-of-long-term-change-in.html">special election of Royceann Porter</a>, and this year it's a near-certain recount in the de facto tied 2nd Congressional District race. </p><p>This is part one of at least a two-parter; I'll be re-writing <a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2017/01/how-johnson-county-went-democratic-for.html">this</a> deep-deep number cruncher next. For now, let's take a big picture look. <br /></p><p>I've been struggling with profoundly mixed feelings the past week - joy of course for Joe Biden's victory and for our local success. <a href="https://www.johnsoncountyiowa.gov/dept_auditor_elections.aspx?id=27268">All sorts of records were smashed</a> - overall turnout over 84,000, voter
registration topping 100,000 for the first time, and Biden breaking the 70%
barrier that Obama just barely missed. The joy and excitement and determination of those tens of thousands of voters lined up at our drive-thru voting and the countless buckets of ballots I emptied from the drop boxes - those things are built like tanks - made me proud of my community and proud of my career. </p><p>But all of that is tempered by shock and sadness for our state results: the Senate race that was never supposed to be close, but for a few weeks was at center stage; the congressional race that at the moment is just beyond our reach - and worst of all, the strong re-endorsement by Iowans of the four years of cruelty - I'm lumping volumes into that one word - by Donald Trump, the least suited man ever to hold The Job. </p><p>Well, I guess at least they can't just blame Hillary anymore, huh.<br /></p><p>We
couldn't campaign the way Democrats usually campaign. I think no
doorknocking was the right and responsible thing in terms of public
health and in terms of messaging. Trump never took COVID seriously, not
even after he got it himself, and we needed to signal that we did. I
wouldn't change that decision.<br /></p><p>But it was a no-win either way.
It's an unfortunate reality that many of the rural voters we couldn't
reach, who are already mad that "Democrats never show up"... </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">(I have a whole `nother post about that in my head which I may or may not ever post) </p>...many
of the rural voters we couldn't reach, who are already mad that
"Democrats never show up," largely think that COVID is Fake News. So we
got no credit for the responsibility, we lost our most effective
communication tools, and we got blamed Yet Again for Not Showing Up. <p> </p><p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnXx5bLgiVka9HjuSk3Rq8Wckj3tOI5PF3mV50DlJpcVD8Fb2vv5z2Y0Gfqrv6bwHqF3UYmxDfaZ3reteXriakRtYx2w8D44yJqO-OYSOrlh2kOWAqbJJ3THqkxBKfvJ-8P0U-/s300/Iowa_Presidential_Election_Results_2016.svg.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="201" data-original-width="300" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnXx5bLgiVka9HjuSk3Rq8Wckj3tOI5PF3mV50DlJpcVD8Fb2vv5z2Y0Gfqrv6bwHqF3UYmxDfaZ3reteXriakRtYx2w8D44yJqO-OYSOrlh2kOWAqbJJ3THqkxBKfvJ-8P0U-/w400-h268/Iowa_Presidential_Election_Results_2016.svg.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This map looks familiar.<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><p>There was one issue in this election, that issue was Trump (his mis-handling of COVID was a sidebar to that story), and it was nearly impossible for a candidate in a down ballot race to break through that noise. Voters, especially new or infrequent voters, are reluctant to make marks
in races they know little about. That led to some under-voting. Not a lot more than in previous years, but enough to make a difference.<br /></p><p>In Johnson County, Theresa Greenfield ran 2114 votes behind Biden, and Rita Hart was 3053 behind Biden. Some of that was anti-Trump voters who crossed back to the GOP down-ballot. Trump ran 848 votes behind Joni Ernst and 1174 behind Miller-Meeks. So
let's say as a rough measure about 1000 Republicans, about 5% of their
voters, were Never Trump.</p><p>But the most haunting numbers of the whole election, in light of the 40 vote margin as I write, are the 3907 under votes in the congressional race. That share was highest in the student precincts and in trailer court dominated West Lucas. </p><p>But it's wrong to blame undervoting in student precincts - some are already doing that - for the apparent loss, when Johnson County did more for the Democratic ticket than anyone else in the district or state. Johnson County was the top county in the state by 13 to 14 points across the board in all of the top of the ticket races. That same pattern and that same exact margin has been a pattern since the 2014 cycle. There used to be a little more variation, and we used to be more like five or six points ahead of the next best, but ever since 2014 it's been number one in every race and it's been in the ballpark of 13 to 15%.<br /></p><p>Biden's 70.57% narrowly breaks the Johnson County all time presidential record set by Barack Obama in 2008 (69.91%), but Biden didn't hit 60 anywhere else. The closest was 57.19% in Story County, which in an era where education and partisanship are tightly linked seems to be emerging as the state's #2 Democratic county. </p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Anybody else wonder if, in the context of a rural dominated Love The Hawkeyes And Cyclones Hate The Universities state, that the association of the Democrats with the college towns is part of the problem?</span><br /></p><p>I'll dig into the long version of the Johnson County presidential numbers in a part two post. The short version is that the third party vote collapsed and nearly all of the switches were to the Democrats. The third parties, and nearly 1000 write ins, jumped to 7.4% in 2016, but collapsed to 2.1% this year.</p><p>Now, obviously, not every erstwhile Libertarian or Green switched to Joe this time, and there were no doubt some Republicans with regrets who left Trump this time. But remarkably, <i>Trump's Johnson County percentage stayed nearly identical</i> - 27.35 last time, 27.34 this year. So the simplistic "third parties switched to D" works well enough to cover the math.<br /></p><p>There's a lot of reasons for that. We saw a similar but stronger version of it from 2000 to 2004, when the Ralph Nader vote was literally decimated. Without getting into the Holy War of "vote shaming," razor close elections and dramatic unpleasant consequences do that to third party votes. </p><p>Some other stuff happened too. We saw greater cooperation between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden than we saw between Sanders and Clinton. Still too little too late for me, but leaving that aside and looking at numbers, Sanders drew a lot of the write ins in 2016 and we only got about 1/4 as many write-ins this year.<br /><br />Also, the third party candidates on the ballot were less well known than in past years. The exception is Kanye West, whose ego and mental health were cynically exploited but who willingly went along with it. In the end no one was fooled and his numbers were insignificant.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwNucKqumGj_DLssNZshfm_kMLWaFCvSOr5la13qS1_JKzuaF29YKup_SR4S2PPfwZjdb5fas5g2xuuKpT_26mKDYqEJucSRAPRW7j_dVZnmuE1RYYxdl_-4tmHZJq5ojWLCcU/s780/the-time-kanye-west-interrupted-taylor-swift-1559917582.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="439" data-original-width="780" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwNucKqumGj_DLssNZshfm_kMLWaFCvSOr5la13qS1_JKzuaF29YKup_SR4S2PPfwZjdb5fas5g2xuuKpT_26mKDYqEJucSRAPRW7j_dVZnmuE1RYYxdl_-4tmHZJq5ojWLCcU/w400-h225/the-time-kanye-west-interrupted-taylor-swift-1559917582.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div>Yo Kanye, I'm really happy for you, Imma let you finish, but you had one of the worst campaigns of ALL TIME.</div></td></tr></tbody></table><p>As for candidates that actually drew significant numbers:</p><p>In 2016, both Jill Stein and Gary Johnson were on their second consecutive campaigns, and both Johnson and his running mate were former (Republican) governors. In contrast, both the Libertarians and Greens nominated little known party activists this year. Quick, without Googling, name them.<br /></p><p>And there wasn't a candidate in the Never Trump mainstream conservative niche that Evan McMullin filled four years ago. Based on the results from Utah, the one state where McMullin ran strong in 2016, his supporters split about evenly between Trump and Biden.</p><p>The voting process itself showed as intense a polarization in Johnson County as it did elsewhere. Donald Trump actually <b>won</b> the Election Day vote in Johnson County, 51-45%. So many Democrats voted early that there were hardly any left by Election Day, and Republicans made a point of waiting. Biden, meanwhile, carried the early vote by an incredible 80-18%. Overall, 72.4% of the county's votes were cast before Election Day, just a little below the record pace set in the primary (before the post office scare put some people off mailed ballots - and as a side note our local post office did a fantastic job).</p><p></p><p>On the strictly local level, in the one seriously contested race in House 73 retiring sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek took on a tough mission and came up short. The Solon area continued its red shift as Pulkrabek's 435 vote edge out of Johnson was not enough to overcome Bobby Kaufmann's big margins in the Cedar and Muscatine county parts of the district. Kaufmann actually carried the city of Solon and surrounding Cedar and Big Grove townships, while Pulkrabek prevailed in the southern part of the Johnson County turf. Looks like redistricting (maybe) is the only way we'll get Kaufmann out of the county. </p><p>It's a sad coda to Pulkrabek's career but at least there's the consolation of seeing his endorsed successor Brad Kunkel elected, a win Kunkel clinched in the June Democratic primary (he also got enough June write-ins that he could have claimed the Republican nomination if he had wanted). Trivia: Kunkel sets a new record for the most votes ever won by anyone in Johnson County, while Biden sets the new high water mark for a contested race.<br /></p><p>The supervisor race was contested, sort of, with Republican Phil Hemingway arguing for the third time that he could best represent "rural interests." That argument let him finish first ahead of the three Democrats in 11 rural precincts, but there's a lot more votes in town and Hemingway was 19,000 votes behind the third Democrat, Porter.</p><p>That old "<a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-supervisor-special-and-farm-vote.html">farm vote</a>" that dominated the Supervisors for a century is now more or less a protest vote, a reflection of the ever increasing rural-urban split in America. There just aren't enough farm votes in this urban academic county to win, swing, or even be much influence except under <a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2017/08/my-eclipse.html">solar-eclipse</a>-rare circumstances like the <a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2013/03/asleep-at-switch.html">March 2013 special election</a>. With the spikes in June turnout we saw this year and in 2018, the farm vote isn't even enough to swing a primary, which is how Farm Bureau type conservative Democrats dominated the Board up to the 1990s.<br /></p><p>Porter was about 3000 votes behind the second place Democrat, Rod Sullivan, and he was about 2500 behind the ticket leader, Lisa Green-Douglass. That's a shift in order from the primary where Porter was second and Sullivan third, but that only matters for bragging rights.<br /></p><p>Porter did finish first in four precincts - the southeast side's precinct 15, the very liberal 18 and 21, and in Coralville 5. Sullivan carried eight, with no obvious pattern, and Green-Douglass topped the rest.</p><p>We're talking about narrow differences in many cases here. But it's hard not to notice Porter running <i>just</i> a little behind the white colleagues in most if not all places. Not so much in the rural places Hemingway won, where the pattern was Phil well ahead of the three Democrats in what looked like bullet voting. It was just 50 votes here, 100 votes there, not unlike Dierdre DeJear running <i>just</i> a little behind the rest of the ticket in 2018.<br /></p><p></p><p>Anyway, a win is a win is a win for the three Democrats. Sullivan becomes just the second five-term supervisor in memory, joining Sally Stutsman (who left for the legislature two years into her last term). Hemingway is now 1-5 lifetime in elections and 0-3 for the Supervisors. But maybe he can try a fourth time - seems to have worked* for Mariannette Miller-Meeks.</p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-68943046651011229032020-07-17T14:02:00.001-05:002020-07-17T17:07:06.775-05:00Some Of You May Die, But It's A Sacrifice I Am Willing To Make<br />
Let's call it what it is. <br />
<br />
Forcing Iowa schools open isn't about schools. <br />
<br />
It's about Big Ag. <br />
<br />
Agribusiness owns this state and has told its elected officials we're not closing. Their profits are literally more important than life and death. Big Ag wants everyone and everything to stay open and unmasked, and they're forcing their bought and paid for governor to deny local control, because they don't want any jurisdiction to set any precedent that could close a meat packing plant for a day.<br />
<br />
Agribusiness doesn't really care what The People's Republic Of Johnson County does. But if we are allowed to issue closing orders and mask mandates, then Louisa and Muscatine counties are too, and they care a LOT about that.<br />
<br />
See, if we shut down the stores because they're not safe, and we tele-commute to class because it's not safe, we're going to have to acknowledge that working jam-packed into a meat packing plant isn't safe, and we simply can't have that. Our bars and schools have to stay open so their meat packing plants can. I won't see my 85 year old parents in Wisconsin for a year because West Liberty Foods and Tyson in Columbus Junction can't close.<br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Gm2x6CVIXiE" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
If we were able to issue mask mandates and closings, but had to make exemptions for agriculture and meat packing, that would be bad for those workers. But it would at least provide more protection for some of us. Instead, we are all lowered to the least common denominator of the slaughterhouse floor.<br />
<br />
Iowa is literally the worst place in the world to be right now. America is handling COVID worse than any nation, and Iowa is handling it worse than any state. <br />
<br />
We've long known agribusiness sees its workers as disposable.<br />
<br />
Now it's clear they think the rest of us are expendable too.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-31611660483951064402020-05-17T17:10:00.000-05:002020-05-17T20:30:59.335-05:00An election like no other<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<div dir="ltr" lang="en">
My yard signs for the primary <a href="https://t.co/WvzT3ITRBy">pic.twitter.com/WvzT3ITRBy</a></div>
— John Deeth 🐢 (@johndeeth) <a href="https://twitter.com/johndeeth/status/1262116070959259649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 17, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script> We passed a milestone yesterday in Johnson County: we have mailed out more ballots for the June 2 primary - 21,367 - that we have for any other election. That's ANY other election; the old record was 20,951 in the 2012 presidential. We've seen more total early votes, of course, once you add in satellites and voting at the office. But only 99 people (disproportionately county employees and people fixing mail problems) took advantage of drive-thru voting in the first two weeks.<br />
<br />
The request total is also above the TOTAL primary vote of 18,675 that we saw in the record turnout 2018 primary. I'm not calling that record broken yet, not till we see what comes back. Personally, I expect a higher than average rate of unreturned ballots once people realize 1) the presidential race isn't on the ballot 2) there's only one contest on the Republican side, and 3) that contest is NOT the sheriff's race, which is on the Democratic side. To the rest of the state, this is a US Senate and congressional primary, but in Johnson County, where primaries are local, it's a sheriff primary.<br />
<br />
Usually, gigantic vote by mail numbers like 2012 are racked up by months and months of Democratic doorknocking, but the June 2020 primary is being driven by making things easy: a postage paid absentee ballot request in every voter's hands. Not QUITE as easy as letting people sign up to automatically get a mailed ballot every election (a VERY popular item which I hear VERY often on the phones), but better than many other states and WAY better than most Republican run states. As you know I'm not the biggest Paul Pate fan, but in this case I believe he's sincerely motivated by safety and legit trying to do the right thing.<br />
<br />
This sets a precedent, though. Having allowed the traditional 40 days of mail voting, instead of the 29 that the GOP legislature trimmed it to in 2018, and having mass mailed requests, it'll be very hard for Pate to back away from those measures in November.<br />
<br />
Under normal circumstances, which the current plague is certainly not, I don't much care for voting by mail. It adds a third party, the post office, between the voter and the auditor. The post office is rising to the occasion, but more people involved mean more mistakes, and delay is inherent. Handing someone a ballot takes seconds, mailing someone a ballot takes days. (Add another postal round trip and more days to that if the person also needs the request form mailed. Iowa's system of a separate request for each election is the most labor intensive way to do this.)<br />
<br />
If you vote by mail you also don't have the helping hands of the office staff and pollworkers double checking the easy to forget stuff like signatures and seals. It's a process more prone to mistakes.<br />
<br />
But once states go vote by mail, which Iowa de facto has for this election, they don't go back. The birth of All Vote By Mail was a statewide special election in Oregon in early 1996. Voters liked it so much that they passed a 1998 initiative to make ALL Oregon elections all mail.<br />
<br />
I'm predicting that the 2020 cycle will be the last presidential election with any traditional, precinct based polling places. COVID is just the last straw in a trend that's been coming. It's getting harder to get workers and polling places. More and more locations don't want the chaos and the perceived security risk. This is especially true of schools, who would rather play security theater to parents than, well, actually do anything about guns.<br />
<br />
The other issue is an accessibility standard that is above and beyond ADA and a mindset that everyone will be DRIVING to the polls. You can't vote at a dorm because there's not parking or a circle drive for Grandma to drop Grandpa off at the door to go vote - at a COLLEGE DORM. So the 1000 students who would be taking stairs or the elevator to the polls have to go several blocks away instead in order to accommodate Hypothetical Grandpa.<br />
<br />
All these things combined mean that the future of elections is mail and vote centers. I'm also expecting President Biden to put an end to caucuses and to kill off New Hampshire along with us. Why reward two states that blew him off?<br />
<br />
Iowa is in the bizarre position of not only having a bizarre virtual convention cycle - hey, DNC, I though Virtual Caucus was a BAD thing! - but having district and state conventions where the presumptive nominee is not viable. As a district/state delegate I am not allowed to switch, and I have to keep voting for my dropped out candidate, Elizabeth Warren, until the second ballot of the national convention. If there is one.<br />
<br />
Why would I want to go to the national convention, even if it is in my native state? <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, says she has <a href="https://cbs58.com/news/should-milwaukee-ask-for-a-rain-check-on-the-dnc">floated the idea</a> to
DNC Chairman Tom Perez of hosting the party convention in a "gigantic"
stadium.<br />
<br />
“Get a gigantic stadium, and put people six feet apart,"
Pelosi said. "Then maybe instead of having 80,000 people there you
would have 16,000 people there, and just do it all in one day.”<br />
<br />
Miller Park does have
more than twice the capacity of Fiserv Forum at nearly 42,000, but the
type of stadium Pelosi suggested does not exist in Milwaukee. <b>Lambeau
Field</b> and Camp Randall exist as in-state possibilities for this type of a
move. </blockquote>
Oh, THAT'S why. National delegate is highly competitive, but I stand a better chance of that than I do of getting Packers tickets. This may be my only way into the Frozen Tundra. Someone has to DIE for you to get Packers tickets.<br />
<br />
It would be a fun last hurrah for the last caucus season. South Carolina, which was the whole ball game in 2020 (Iowa's result, when we finally got it, was completely irrelevant), will be first in 2024. That should help Vice President Harris get off to a good start. As for me, I'm just glad COVID didn't hit a month earlier in my 750 body caucus room.<br />
<br />
Back to the June primary, the unprecedented turnout makes gaming out the winners especially hard. There are going to be many, many more infrequent voters and de facto No Party (WHY do people love the word "independent" so much? WHY are we taught that?) voters than you usually see in a primary.<br />
<br />
Personally, I'd like to see much stricter timelines and laws on party changes. The deadline should be before candidates file, so you have to actually <i>choose your party</i> based on its overall principles, rather than crossing over for one specific candidate. I'm on the wrong side of history there, with all the trends being toward open primaries and the even worse Top Two, but it's a hill I'll die on. If you're so proud of being an "independent" (sic), let us partisans choose our party nominees, and go vote in the general election.<br />
<br />
That's another thing we're seeing in part because of the COVID driven vote by mail election: dramatic shifts in party affiliation in my county. In Johnson County it's been a triple whammy, with each stage leading to Democratic gains.<br />
<br />
Normal party registration trends between elections are a slow steady shift away from parties and toward No Party, driven mainly by registrations from the DOT. When parties gain, it's big and all at once, from primaries, caucuses, and list maintenance mailings (which inactivate voters who are on average younger, more mobile, and No Party - in short, students who moved away).<br />
<br />
In mid-September Democratic registration sat at 46.55% in Johnson County. At that point big pre-caucus registration drives started, culminating in caucus night itself with 21,436 attendance and a net plus of 4000 Democratic registrations (new or changed) in one night. When that was done, Democratic registration had shot past the old record of 49.24% (at the June 2016 primary) all the way up to 51.04%.<br />
<br />
After a brief backslide to 50.74% caused by cards coming back from caucus attendees with bad addresses (read: missing apartment numbers), the countywide list maintenance mailing kicked in, and long-departed students started moving to Inactive status (my best catch this time was a sorority girl who last voted in 1994). The Democratic share passed the caucus peak and climbed to 51.69%.<br />
<br />
The Republicans were dropping through all this, part of a trend that saw them dropping steadily ever since the 2016 caucuses. They were at 21.92% in April 2016, but bottomed out at 17.71% on March 23 - their lowest level in the county since 1976.<br />
<br />
The third whammy, the primary mailing, reversed this trend for Republicans, and even further accelerated Democratic registration. Through yesterday, Democrats were up to a whopping 53.69%, while Republicans have recovered to 18.46%. The registration trends from the mailing have coincidentally mirrored the changes from the countywide mailing, with a ratio of 2.9 registered Democrats for each Republican, up from the historic, anecdotal two to one ratio long seen in Johnson County. (Third parties are less than 1% and have been slipping through all three waves of registration activity.)<br />
<br />
In fact, Democrats are now for the first time nearly doubling the No Party voters. No Party last led the Democrats for about three years from the 2000 presidential election till the 2004 caucuses. As recently as mid-December they were at 33.85% - well behind the Democrats, but incrementally climbing each week with those apolitical registrations from the DOT.<br />
<br />
Then the caucus wave kicked in, with people starting to get affiliated before the mid-January list printing deadline. After the caucuses No Party had slipped to 30.32%. They briefly recovered to 30.58% by March, with the inactivations from bad caucus addresses coming 100% out of the Democrats and with the usual share of people immediately switching back (if you do that, I don't think you should vote in the June primary, but that's just my opinion...)<br />
<br />
The countywide mailing reversed that trend and pushed No Party down to 29.83%, and before they had a chance to recover the primary absentee mailing hit. A normal primary mailing would just go to known primary voters or to party members, but this went to everyone, in effect <i>actively encouraging</i> people to affiliate with a party.<br />
<br />
And many have. No Party slipped below their old record low (28.61% at the 2016 primary) ten days ago and now are at just 27.13% of county registration. Johnson County is now close to a point where Democrats have a three to one lead over Republicans and a two to one lead over No Party.<br />
<br />
Despite all this registration activity, actual new registrations have been very flat. Total active status registration bottomed out at the end of processing the countywide mailing on April 17 at 90,370. A month later, despite Democrats jumping two full points in registration share and Republicans gaining 0.6%, with corresponding No Party and third party losses, total registration is up just 55 people at 90,425. New registrations are almost immediately balanced by other counties taking voters away from us - many of those from the Dorm Diaspora. (Under-discussed issue: the census impact of COVID, and vacant campuses on April 1, on college towns.)<br />
<br />
That shows that just about EVERYTHING about this election is being driven by that statewide mailing. It's been an election like no other, but it feels like the future.<br />
<br />
Oh, as for my own ballot? Brad Kunkel, of course, for sheriff, the three incumbent supervisors, and Greenfield. <div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-5961770571968460672020-03-14T13:58:00.002-05:002020-03-14T13:58:40.505-05:00An Unconventional Situation and An Unconventional Brain<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bv705" data-offset-key="ripu-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ripu-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="ripu-0-0"><span data-text="true">My initial reaction to the Iowa Democratic Party's decision to postpone county conventions hasn't been good. In part that's because locally, our local decision was pushed by the venue cancelling our site reservation before we could consider what we wanted to do on our own.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ripu-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="ripu-0-0"><span data-text="true"> </span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ripu-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="ripu-0-0"><span data-text="true">I had some negative feelings about the convention site host because of some caucus issues. (The caucus chair in that precinct made it work in a not as good site, but I still think the Iowa code section that says tax-supported facilities "shall provide the space required" means "SHALL," not "unless there's a ball game." If we ever have a caucus again, which I doubt, we need to press that point or strengthen that law.)</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bv705" data-offset-key="3lsj7-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3lsj7-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3lsj7-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bv705" data-offset-key="ujvg-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="eusgk-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="eusgk-0-0"><span data-text="true">In part my bad reaction is because of some other pre-existing conflicts with some other people and, now that I'm out of the closet about it, because of my place on the autistic spectrum and the impractical obsessions I get as a result. </span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="eusgk-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="eusgk-0-0"><span data-text="true"> </span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="eusgk-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="eusgk-0-0"><span data-text="true">I reject advice, sometimes even good advice, if I have rejected the person. And then I can't apologize, even if I should, because I'm still mad about the initial conflict. I don't know if I can find a way to sincerely apologize to the person I privately told to </span></span><span class="_3gl1 _5zz4" data-offset-key="eusgk-1-0" start="90" style="background-image: url("https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/images/emoji.php/v9/t82/1/16/1f92c.png"); background-size: 16px 16px; height: 16px; width: 16px;"><span class="_ncl"><span data-offset-key="eusgk-1-0"><span data-text="true">🤬</span></span></span></span><span data-offset-key="eusgk-2-0"><span data-text="true"> off this week without some action on their part to make good the original thing I was angry with them about. I know that's wrong of me... but that's the kind of thing I struggle with.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ujvg-0-0">
<div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3jgt7" data-offset-key="6i4re-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6i4re-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="6i4re-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="3jgt7" data-offset-key="evs20-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="evs20-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="evs20-0-0"><span data-text="true">I feel like I was treated unfairly on something a very long time ago, and that everyone else who has done the same thing I did since then has been treated differently. The backstory: </span></span><div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="ft07n-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="ft07n-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="ft07n-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="2c2m3-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2c2m3-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="2c2m3-0-0"><span data-text="true">I'm the only person in our local organization who has ever been sanctioned for not supporting a nominee. I was removed as first vice chair in 2000 for refusing to support Al Gore, even though I did not violate any formal rules by publicly endorsing a non-Democratic candidate. All I did was loudly, but privately, express my opposition. </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="9ue30-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9ue30-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9ue30-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="45c40-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="45c40-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="45c40-0-0"><span data-text="true">Yet every person since then in our county party who has done what I did, or even more, has been given a pass. Yeah, that still makes me bitter. Why is it OK to refuse to support Hillary Clinton or Fred Hubbell or Terry Dahms, but not Al Gore? Why is it OK to not back the nominee unless you're Deeth? My brain needs to have a WHY and it needs to have fairness, and I react badly when I don't get that. I'm asking for the same that was asked of me, which I was unable to do, and then I resent when others who can't or won't do it don't suffer the consequences I did.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="7lo7k-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7lo7k-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7lo7k-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="fcmv6-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="fcmv6-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="fcmv6-0-0"><span data-text="true">Us Bill Bradley supporters were told, in almost these words, "you lost, </span></span><span class="_3gl1 _5zz4" data-offset-key="fcmv6-1-0" start="73" style="background-image: url("https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/images/emoji.php/v9/t82/1/16/1f92c.png"); background-size: 16px 16px; height: 16px; width: 16px;"><span class="_ncl"><span data-offset-key="fcmv6-1-0"><span data-text="true">🤬</span></span></span></span><span data-offset-key="fcmv6-2-0"><span data-text="true"> you, get on board." Which was exactly the wrong way to handle me, and so was belittling the issue I had with Gore. But nowdays, we are expected to kiss up to the supporters of the losers and listen to their "demands." That may be smarter politics, but I'm still mad that I didn't get the same respect in 2000 (or, for that matter, in 2004). Which makes me less inclined to extend that same courtesy. That's not smart politics for me, but that's the struggle in my head. Holding grudges sucks but my brain can't let some of them go.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="3182u-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3182u-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3182u-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="82vu6-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="82vu6-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="82vu6-0-0"><span data-text="true">Maybe this disclosure just makes me look foolish. </span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="82vu6-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="82vu6-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgq80uMjVh3rsvwiuM5xXrl6Rgps2HbKKL45XCj0ACK5xhS6ot6OYK4WOORnDjTc1obbHZ4jA8NQso9un3kCwjvooOA5n7h5WwNJ7RXPQM1B1dqxJH9oVsYd3rsqoh5_hyphenhyphenmS3Ml/s1600/kzigz24bpcyqyz8cuzft.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="800" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgq80uMjVh3rsvwiuM5xXrl6Rgps2HbKKL45XCj0ACK5xhS6ot6OYK4WOORnDjTc1obbHZ4jA8NQso9un3kCwjvooOA5n7h5WwNJ7RXPQM1B1dqxJH9oVsYd3rsqoh5_hyphenhyphenmS3Ml/s320/kzigz24bpcyqyz8cuzft.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="3hm4e-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3hm4e-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3hm4e-0-0"></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="49mej" data-offset-key="c1olp-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="c1olp-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="c1olp-0-0"><span data-text="true">The funny thing is, I now realize that my bitter opposition to Al Gore was a case of an autistic obsession of mine outweighing practical politics. That's not to say that, if I had it to do over again, I would do something different. The PMRC was wrong and those hearings, during my college radio days, were too formative a part of my political DNA. I never got over it, and I understand my brain well enough now to know that I never will, even though time has passed the underlying issue by. <a href="https://politics.theonion.com/recently-single-al-gore-finally-able-to-listen-to-w-a-s-1819571657">All I can do is try to laugh about it</a>.</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="bv705" data-offset-key="8hu4q-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8hu4q-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="8hu4q-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1qavb-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="1qavb-0-0"><span data-text="true">Anyway, I am trying hard to wrap my head around this whole virus thing in my own way, and it's hard work. I understand all the facts but something about this crisis is pushing all my oppositional defiant buttons and I don't understand why which makes it more frustrating. My weird on the spectrum brain lets me accomplish some amazing things, but sometimes it's a real barrier as well. </span></span><span class="_3gl1 _5zz4" data-offset-key="1qavb-1-0" start="380" style="background-image: url("https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/images/emoji.php/v9/t5/1/16/1f92f.png"); background-size: 16px 16px; height: 16px; width: 16px;"><span class="_ncl"><span data-offset-key="1qavb-1-0"><span data-text="true">🤯</span></span></span></span></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-65821466689853770622020-03-05T18:07:00.000-06:002020-03-05T18:07:04.114-06:00The End Of Persistence<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6ytwAdpjP_eDcjYhQIGCMI-r2_R790760K83rMC-kD54aPLMBuis-5q5elj5T-WRd1D85y1huxJVhdec0S-rtsywWcIX8wWCYLskvAAD6gBhvo6ruyF9MtAPj17Zaa0YeRpaB/s1600/warrendeeth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="464" data-original-width="960" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6ytwAdpjP_eDcjYhQIGCMI-r2_R790760K83rMC-kD54aPLMBuis-5q5elj5T-WRd1D85y1huxJVhdec0S-rtsywWcIX8wWCYLskvAAD6gBhvo6ruyF9MtAPj17Zaa0YeRpaB/s400/warrendeeth.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<span aria-live="polite" class="fbPhotosPhotoCaption" data-ft="{"tn":"K"}" id="fbPhotoSnowliftCaption" tabindex="0"><span class="hasCaption"></span></span><br />
<div class="text_exposed_root text_exposed" id="id_5e61931753dd93188350549">
Thank
you to Elizabeth Warren and all her organizers, volunteers, and
supporters. I was proud to caucus for her and I am proud to support Joe
Biden now. Since Warren is not going to be president, I hope to see her
not on the ticket or in the cabinet, but where she is: in the Senate,
nudging the Biden Administration in a more progressive direction.<br /> <br /> More important thoughts for Iowa Democrats:<br /> <br /> It i<span class="text_exposed_show">s
critically important for supporters of Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Pete
Buttigeig to attend county, district, and state conventions. Not just
for national delegates (which are locked in at the CD level, even for the dropped-out candidates), but for state
central committee and other important offices. (And platform, if you
care about that, which I don't.)<br /> <br /> With Biden's poor showing in
Iowa, if the supporters of the dropouts abandon the conventions, the
Sanders faction will take over all those critical offices. Don't get me
wrong, there is a place for the Sanders faction in the Democratic Party.
But it should not be a disproportionately large or loud place. I
welcome anyone who is willing to join the party and follow the rules (which
Sanders himself is not). </span></div>
<div class="text_exposed_root text_exposed" id="id_5e61931753dd93188350549">
<span class="text_exposed_show"> </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiZN0MXmzwKcb2ZVfMWWZg3IxgR1JXcUNHZEdZByhN6_oIFomtN5OdX954uWFZ071hdMHUG70Et4j8tnsxm2uHrFFGivAW_1XwK2FxPUFwLnz7HEzKO88VPc8RJEXv2hA_QaIl/s1600/vtballot.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="747" data-original-width="1079" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiZN0MXmzwKcb2ZVfMWWZg3IxgR1JXcUNHZEdZByhN6_oIFomtN5OdX954uWFZ071hdMHUG70Et4j8tnsxm2uHrFFGivAW_1XwK2FxPUFwLnz7HEzKO88VPc8RJEXv2hA_QaIl/s320/vtballot.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="text_exposed_root text_exposed" id="id_5e61931753dd93188350549">
<span class="text_exposed_show"></span></div>
<div class="text_exposed_root text_exposed" id="id_5e61931753dd93188350549">
<span class="text_exposed_show">Some of those rules are: support the nominee,
the national convention is not a deliberative body or place to protest,
and end your campaign when the writing is on the wall.<br /> <br /> If
everyone shows up, the Sanders faction is weaker (26% of the Iowa state
convention) than it was in 2016 (roughly 1/2 of state convention). But
if only Biden and Sanders state delegates show up, it's 62% Sanders. <br /> <br />
And since most of the mainstream team-player 2016 Sanders supporters
abandoned him for other candidates, the remaining core of Sanders
delegates is even more likely to act out in negative ways. There are
good Sanders people - but at each level of convention in 2016, the
supporters got more and more hard core and more and more difficult,
culminating in Jill Stein signs at the national convention. Some states
chose Bernie Or Busters as presidential electors who refused to support
Hillary in the Electoral in College. We can't afford that kind of
stupidity. A Biden win is going to be very, very narrow.<br /> <br /> It will
be a challenge, motivating the supporters of the former candidates to
spend all day at a dull convention. The new no-re-align rules make it
harder. But it is absolutely essential to a united party and a
successful year. We need an actual effort to make this happen.</span></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-83488605829811839642020-02-23T04:20:00.000-06:002020-03-14T15:50:19.680-05:00Vegas, Baby: A Series Of Tweets That Aged Badly<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I looked at the Nevada crosstabs. 2/3 with voters under 40 and 50% with Hispanics in a field with six people seriously contesting the state. Unless something radically changes in the next week, which I hope, Sanders gets a too big to fail lead on Super Tuesday. <br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-small;">(UPDATE: Something radically changed. Continuing on with my thoughts at that brief moment:)</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Trying to imagine how a CCI-Occupy style "coordinated campaign" with a non-Democrat leading the ticket is going to work for a agribusiness rural Democratic Iowa House challenger, when the alternative is not a Green New Deal Democrat but a home school Republican.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I'm not assuming there would BE a coordinated campaign. </span></span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I assume there would be a Sanders campaign and that any down-ballot candidates who were not affiliated with Our Revolution would be on their own. Result would be a whole lot of ballots with only president marked. </span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I can totally see Sanders hitting 75% in Johnson County and not winning a single other county in Iowa</span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0gLj7UlOMiX08cYBnNHvt9kIMbNpwF53qn644lYXEC3PibcEL64MxjEbbZBdrDyB6J8c9PuATk8vgPNN1gpf5rhsTMw5_a2sSjaC3MRJQhSPBSCt8l7zyCqLTyt17xuu1gjjU/s1600/vtballot.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="747" data-original-width="1079" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0gLj7UlOMiX08cYBnNHvt9kIMbNpwF53qn644lYXEC3PibcEL64MxjEbbZBdrDyB6J8c9PuATk8vgPNN1gpf5rhsTMw5_a2sSjaC3MRJQhSPBSCt8l7zyCqLTyt17xuu1gjjU/s320/vtballot.png" width="320" /></a><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I'm not even assuming that were he to win the nomination Sanders would even condescend to appearing on the ballot with "Democratic Party" under his name. <span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">He can pledge to appear on the ballot in the general as a Democrat and he can get rid of the (I-VT) today, if he wants. He won't. Hostility to the party is too big a part of the brand.</span> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">If Sanders wins nomination (more likely than not) and if he cares about reaching out (less likely than not), respect for the Democratic Party as an institution matters to a lot of us who have been in the trenches fighting to make it better for a long time (30 years for me). </span></span></span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">There's a lot of wise and experienced people within the Democratic Party who should not be thrown away simply because we prefer a different approach and don't salivate at the words "revolution" and "oligarchy."</span><br />
<br />
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I've long said losers don't get to make demands - but candidates who reach out to supporters of defeated rivals (Obama, Bill Clinton) tend to do better than those who say "F*** </span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-4qtqp9 r-ip8ujx r-sjv1od r-zw8f10 r-bnwqim r-h9hxbl" dir="auto"></span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">you, we won, get on board" (Gore, Kerry). </span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">But as noted, hostility to the Democratic Party as an institution is a core part of the Sanders brand, so I don't expect it. I think that's a net negative for him, but I hope I'm wrong.</span></span><br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n">
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Other thoughts on Nevada: </span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">I thought I was silly for giving all the caucus chairs a flipping coin, until Nevada gave everyone a deck of cards.</span></span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span></div>
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Cannot stop laughing at these big empty Nevada caucus rooms. </span>Heard MSNBC saying early vote was 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 over caucus attendance. Not sure if that was that precinct or overall. But explains empty rooms. My bet is NSDP underestimated how popular early vote would be. Also, </span></span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">NSDP is a terrible acronym because, well, NSDAP.</span></span></span></span><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span></div>
</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-13568598639429415552020-02-03T14:00:00.000-06:002020-03-14T15:54:04.660-05:00Last Minute Point Of Personal Privilege<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBBl3KWsxHU8-2HVa0QIufIznV0QExf-Yryn7FUXebidxt_4ItKyHy-ENjb3kdV4ZS8JJPAQ3ZbeVBTQQtKId6KDlDO7ZM_xF6wmvJrc25-8gGECvyhPhyygtysSpnn4GbO213/s1600/warrendeeth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="464" data-original-width="960" height="154" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBBl3KWsxHU8-2HVa0QIufIznV0QExf-Yryn7FUXebidxt_4ItKyHy-ENjb3kdV4ZS8JJPAQ3ZbeVBTQQtKId6KDlDO7ZM_xF6wmvJrc25-8gGECvyhPhyygtysSpnn4GbO213/s320/warrendeeth.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">While I have publicly ruled some candidates out, I have not endorsed because of my caucus leadership role. I want to thank all of the campaigns, including those no longer with us, for their help and support through the last 8 months.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Four years ago I made a point of walking over to the Uncommitted corner first. I don’t think I fooled anyone, most people had figured out I was with Hillary, but I wanted to make that point.</span> </span><br />
<br />
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">But with the raw vote being reported this year, I want my first alignment choice to be reported for a candidate rather than Uncommitted, and I might as well be open about it. And I’ve worked hard enough that I deserve my say.</span><br />
<br />
<div class="css-1dbjc4n">
<div class="css-901oao r-hkyrab r-1qd0xha r-a023e6 r-16dba41 r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-bnwqim r-qvutc0" dir="auto" id="tweet-text" lang="en">
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">Koni and I will caucus for Elizabeth Warren</span> <span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0">tonight.</span></div>
</div>
<span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"> </span><br /><span class="css-901oao css-16my406 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0"></span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-56967237108379809112020-01-24T16:20:00.000-06:002020-03-14T16:21:02.953-05:00Prepare for crowds, changes and commitment: Caucus tips from John Deeth<em>John Deeth, a caucus organizer for the Johnson County Democrats and <a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">political blogger</a>, shared some advice for aspiring caucusers.</em>
<br />
<h4>
Be in it for the long haul</h4>
Caucus night is like game day. It’s exciting and we all want the
Hawks to win. But you don’t expect to walk in, watch a game highlights
clip and go home. You’re there for a long time, two or three hours for
the caucuses. And not every play is an exciting thing like a long
touchdown pass. Sometimes you’re stopped at the line of scrimmage, the
ref throws a flag and you have to sit around and wait while the three
refs talk among themselves and figure out the call and everyone else is
confused. And you can’t expect to show up 15 minutes before kickoff and
get a parking space across the street from Kinnick Stadium.<br />
<h4>
Prepare for crowds</h4>
The caucuses in Johnson County are going to be very, very crowded.
It’s important to remember that everyone, including me, is a volunteer
and is legitimately trying to do their best in a tough situation. The
caucus process was never meant to be a mass participation event that was
the equivalent of an election. It was meant to be the handful of core
party activists in the precinct — 20 or 40 people who were familiar with
the process and rules and were meeting at their friend’s house. In some
parts of Iowa, it’s still like that: In 2016, the mean average
attendance statewide was 102 people, and the median was just 65, so that
kind of process still works in most of the state. But in Johnson
County, the average was 342. We had seven of the 10 biggest precincts in
the state and 19 of the top 40. Our biggest was 945 and we expect to
top 1,000 some places this time. And a process that was designed for 20
to 40 people does not scale up well to a crowd of 1,000.<br />
<div>
<h5>
<em>Find your caucus location:</em> <strong><a href="https://iwillvote.com/locate/?lang=en&state=IA" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Registered Democrats</a> / <a href="https://www.iowagop.org/2020-caucus-locations" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Registered Republicans</a></strong></h5>
</div>
We’ve done better with rooms than we did in 2016 but there are some
places where the biggest room in or near the precinct is not big enough
to hold everyone we expect to attend — and there’s nothing that can be
done about that. There is not going to be enough parking anywhere, so
walk or carpool if you can.<br />
<h4>
Things may look different than past caucuses</h4>
There are a couple changes to the alignment process this year. The
biggest is that the raw vote count at the end of the first alignment
will be reported. In the past, the Democrats never reported vote counts
at all, just delegate numbers. So a caucus-goer who is supporting a
non-viable candidate on the first alignment will need to decide: do I
realign now, or do I stay with my first choice candidate to get my vote
counted, and then move at re-alignment time?<br />
The other change is that, once you’re in a viable group, you can’t
move. It used to be that campaigns would send people over to another
group to make them viable and hurt a different candidate. Example: We
had a place last time where Hillary was at two delegates, Bernie at one
and O’Malley was just short of viable. Hillary’s crew sent some spare
people over to O’Malley to make him viable so that Bernie would not get
another delegate. You can’t do that anymore.<br />
<h4>
Do some research, and choose a strategy</h4>
It will help to have a realistic and honest assessment about your
candidate’s chances. I’ve never been in a situation where my candidate
was not viable in my precinct, but there have been years when I knew my
candidate’s chances in the big picture were poor, and that’s emotionally
hard. <br />
A friend of mine who supported a candidate who has dropped out had
this advice: “I used to have a candidate, now I have a choice.” You can
move to a second choice, or you can move in a way that hurts the
candidate you like the least. That’s a tiebreaker you can decide for
yourself. Is it more important to me that my first choice be recorded
for the history books, even though they’re doing poorly and may drop out
later tonight? Or is the overall direction of the party and campaign
more important?<br />
<h4>
Undecided? Get ready to commit.</h4>
One thing I worry about here: In the past, a lot of undecided people
would just go to the Uncommitted group, and then make their decision at
realignment time. This year, there’s a risk of getting stuck in an
Uncommitted group that’s accidentally viable. So if you’re Uncommitted,
you need to keep track of that, and you may need to move sooner than you
want to.<br />
<h4>
Feel free to dress to impress</h4>
This isn’t an election, where campaigning in the polling place is
illegal. This is a party meeting and you’re allowed to try to persuade
people. Nothing is secret. (That’s actually one complaint about caucuses
versus primaries — some people very strongly want to make their choice
in secret. In other states, there were complaints in 2016 about bullying
in caucus settings.) Shirts, stickers and buttons are OK. So are signs —
though we are telling campaigns in Johnson County not to put signs on
the walls. Candidate signs should be held. Our site hosts are concerned
about messes and damage, and they’re being very gracious about letting
us use their buildings (even though in some cases they’re required to by
law, it’s still appreciated).<br />
<br />
<em>This article was originally published in Little Village issue 277. </em><div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-70427797933344747482020-01-23T16:20:00.001-06:002020-11-12T14:52:09.610-06:00Goodbye To My Buddy<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKKpkHg6AzIByLvbieXmqaNsrdkjNFY-_OdN-FuGtNfHz9LqQRXowxohK17sb_QQmuiJqW6j8NPDyQr0N0eQzcdOwSHOdjsfvnDooBgLZmozniYRj8YMWSMv47dHg94EoYnHAy/s1600/83817441_10157644111676233_1889271382395584512_o.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="960" data-original-width="960" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKKpkHg6AzIByLvbieXmqaNsrdkjNFY-_OdN-FuGtNfHz9LqQRXowxohK17sb_QQmuiJqW6j8NPDyQr0N0eQzcdOwSHOdjsfvnDooBgLZmozniYRj8YMWSMv47dHg94EoYnHAy/s400/83817441_10157644111676233_1889271382395584512_o.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
For the first time in 22 years, I do not have a cat. My buddy Dylan had 19 years of adventures, the last 15 of those with
me. <br />
<br />
Dylan was active and frisky until pretty recently - he gave us all a scare back on October 12 when I left the door open and he was outside for 12 hours (he was an indoor cat). After that I started spending extra time with him, grateful he had come home.<br />
<br />
But he went downhill not long after that, and it had
become clear that he wasn't going to be here much
longer. Saturday night I stopped what I was doing and just sat with Dylan on my lap, watching the fireplace, with a sense that it was the last time.<br />
<br />
I had a vet appointment scheduled for tomorrow but I knew it was just a matter of them telling me what fatal diagnosis it was and how much time was left. But just last night he was being silly - I was afraid his face was bleeding until I smelled ketchup.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4sFGwE_e_Mlut2fACMQFqm1MVtEnc2MpBuN11XTEQ0hyGrUiLXshug6dBOcxBOaeW_poJ3K8kp5PRBIlJG1tfUMx58TYYAPPL5WIEIGnGgMalNYoBRNpnKOvcg6S-oSpXAPXy/s1600/84041019_10157644283686233_6017864199537950720_o.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1200" data-original-width="1600" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4sFGwE_e_Mlut2fACMQFqm1MVtEnc2MpBuN11XTEQ0hyGrUiLXshug6dBOcxBOaeW_poJ3K8kp5PRBIlJG1tfUMx58TYYAPPL5WIEIGnGgMalNYoBRNpnKOvcg6S-oSpXAPXy/s320/84041019_10157644283686233_6017864199537950720_o.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Dylan was a long time Democat, supporting the ticket in 2004.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Last night he curled up and slept by my head. like he so often did - he had the head and his son Xavier used to keep my feet warm.<br />
<br />
He had an accident and couldn't get to the box, which woke me up at 5 AM. It wasn't the first time he didn't make it, and I patiently did laundry and worried.<br />
<br />
I couldn't get back to sleep, so right before I went to work I gave him his second, or was it third, breakfast of the morning.<br />
<br />
That's where Koni found him, curled up by the food dish. We don't know what happened and don't need to.<br />
<br />
So now he's with the great cat herd in the sky with his son Xavier, with Butter and Spot, and with Shadow. <div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-9337526689420219152020-01-19T04:20:00.000-06:002020-01-30T21:16:34.379-06:00In 2016, Rural Counties Had Less Caucus Goers Per Delegate Since I'm not really writing anymore - I am way too busy DOING right now trying to get our caucuses off the ground - I resemble a classic rock dinosaur band that trots out on the circuit during state fair seasons and plays the greatest hits. This is a rewrite of a post I write every cycle, in<a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2007/12/rural-counties-less-caucus-goers-per.html"> 2007</a> (covering 2004) and again in <a href="https://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2016/01/in-2008-rural-counties-had-less-caucus.html">2016</a> (looking at 2008).<br />
<br />
Since the Iowa Democratic caucuses are a representative democracy,
not a straight one person one vote, not every caucus goer carries equal
weight. Several of the candidates have spent a lot of time in small
courthouse towns. Amy Klobuchar and the hapless John Delaney have completed the "Full Grassley" 99 county tour. That's because the way the results are counted, the small
counties weigh in disproportionately.<br />
<br />
The delegate allocation formula is based on past general election voting for the top of the ticket. The caucuses
take place in a mythical, projected version of a general election voting
population. This cycle, it's based on votes for Hillary Clinton and Fred Hubbell; four years ago it was based on Jack Hatch and on Barack Obama's 2012 total.<br />
<br />
This means candidates can't run up the score with big wins in big
counties, and it mutes the impact of isolated turnout waves. No matter how many people show up, the same number of delegates are
at stake. <br />
<br />
The problem is, some counties are full of go-to-meeting activists who are more likely to attend a caucus. Others have more people who may vote, sometimes even for Democrats, but are otherwise less active.<br />
<br />
You may not call that a problem - indeed, some caucus old timers will tell you that the formula, which is locked into the Iowa Democratic Party's constitution, was specifically designed to under-count the student vote in Iowa City, Ames, and other college towns.<br />
<br />
Obviously, from my perspective, that's a problem. In fact, the obscure allocation formula likely skewed the national interpretation of the outcome of 2016.<br />
<br />
Hillary Clinton won a razor-close margin of the state delegate equivalents (SDEs), the only total that the Iowa Democratic Party has historically released. However, Bernie Sanders won big margins in the college towns - which, as you'll see, had a higher share of the turnout than they did of the delegates. In fact, I'll go so far as to say Sanders probably had more bodies in the room than Clinton, and you know I'm not saying that out of any love for Bernie Sanders.<br />
<br />
The impact of this under-allocation of delegates to high turnout areas is mitigated somewhat by new DNC rules this year that will require, in a first for Iowa Democrats, the reporting of a one person one vote raw vote count. But the delegate count still matters toward the nomination and to perceptions. <a href="https://apnews.com/851fd35564a23d8ca6c644e2ff62065c">The Associated Press announced this week</a>, wrongly in my opinion, that they will "declare the winner of the Iowa caucuses based on the number of state delegate equivalents each candidate receives."<br />
<br />
That means my vote in high turnout Johnson County will matter less than the vote of an Iowan in a low turnout rural county. But exactly how much less will it matter?<br />
<br />
An analysis of
2016 caucus attendance shows that, on average statewide, it took just
over 122 people to elect a state delegate equivalent. But that varied dramatically by county, and (while I won't dive into details) by precinct within counties.<br />
<br />
The easiest
place to elect a delegate was Fremont County, where it took 45.33
attendees to elect a state delegate equivalent. Five other counties were at or below 61 people per SDE, less than half the statewide average. The bottom ten is filled with
small, rural, population losing, Republican counties.<br />
<br />
And as always, the same places stood out as the most difficult places to elect a delegate: campus communities most of all, urban areas, and high growth suburbs.<br />
<br />
Four counties are bunched at the top, in a near dead heat. In these places, you needed 211 to 213 people to earn a SDE - nearly twice the state average and 4.7 times Fremont County. Put another way, a vote in Fremont County was worth nearly five times as much as a vote in these four counties.<br />
<br />
Jefferson County, with its very active meditator community and Maharishi International University, was at the very top at 213.22. Story and Johnson, home to the two biggest Regents universities, were number 2 and number 4. Poweshiek County was third - and that statistic was almost entirely driven by the 925 people who attended the caucus for the Grinnell College precinct. <br />
<br />
In Winneshiek, home to Decorah's
Luther College, it took 154.64 people to elect a state delegate equivalent, putting them in fifth place (they were the hardest place to earn an SDE in 2008).<br />
<br />
Another half dozen counties were above the state average of 122 voters per SDE. Two were the two biggest in the state, Polk and Linn. Two were in rural outlier counties, Decatur and Sioux, where the novelty of having a large number of Democrats in one place may have spurred attendance (though the county grand totals are still far below an east side Iowa City precinct).<br />
<br />
And two were in high growth suburban Dallas and Warren counties. High growth makes it harder to elect a delegate from your county. A voter who moved to Dallas County
three years ago won't count in the county's presidential
vote totals used to calculate delegates, because they voted somewhere
else. A voter who moved in after the gubernatorial election wouldn't
count at all toward the delegate count.<br />
<br />
The flip side
is, people in shrinking rural counties who moved away or passed away
still contribute to the county's delegate allocation, meaning it takes
fewer LIVE bodies to win delegates.<br />
<br />
Ultimately, the apportionment rules mean candidates have
to carefully allocate their resources and fight on all fronts at once,
and part of that allocation is making the effort where the most bang for
the buck is available -- the small towns.<br />
<br />
Is that fair? Depends on where you live. I'd like to see someone take on the formula at the state convention this June. If we're going to keep having a caucus, which I don't think we should, we could at least get closer to one person one vote. If the rural counties don't like it, they can do what my county does and show up.<br />
<br />
<b>State Delegates and Caucus Attendance, 2016 Democratic Caucuses</b><br />
<br />
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 568px;"><colgroup><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 3700; mso-width-source: userset; width: 80pt;" width="106"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4072; mso-width-source: userset; width: 88pt;" width="117"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 4352; mso-width-source: userset; width: 94pt;" width="125"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 5445; mso-width-source: userset; width: 117pt;" width="156"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl76" height="19" style="height: 14.5pt; width: 48pt;" width="64">Rank</td>
<td class="xl76" style="border-left: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">County</td>
<td class="xl76" style="border-left: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">Delegates </td>
<td class="xl77" style="border-left: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">Attendance </td>
<td class="xl78" style="border-left: none; width: 117pt;" width="156">Attendees per
delegate</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl91" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">1</td>
<td class="xl83" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Jefferson</td>
<td class="xl84" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">9</td>
<td class="xl85" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,919</td>
<td align="right" class="xl86" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">213.22</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl91" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">2</td>
<td class="xl83" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Story</td>
<td class="xl84" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">46</td>
<td class="xl85" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">9,757</td>
<td align="right" class="xl86" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">212.11</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl91" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">3</td>
<td class="xl83" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Poweshiek</td>
<td class="xl84" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">9</td>
<td class="xl85" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,904</td>
<td align="right" class="xl86" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">211.56</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl91" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">4</td>
<td class="xl83" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Johnson</td>
<td class="xl84" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">92</td>
<td class="xl85" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">19,407</td>
<td align="right" class="xl86" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">210.95</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl92" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">5</td>
<td class="xl79" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Winneshiek</td>
<td class="xl80" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">11</td>
<td class="xl81" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,701</td>
<td align="right" class="xl82" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">154.64</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl92" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">6</td>
<td class="xl79" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Polk</td>
<td class="xl80" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">228</td>
<td class="xl81" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">35,181</td>
<td align="right" class="xl82" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">154.30</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl92" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">7</td>
<td class="xl79" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Dallas</td>
<td class="xl80" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">29</td>
<td class="xl81" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">4,209</td>
<td align="right" class="xl82" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">145.14</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl92" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">8</td>
<td class="xl79" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Decatur</td>
<td class="xl80" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl81" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">428</td>
<td align="right" class="xl82" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">142.67</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl92" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">9</td>
<td class="xl79" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Sioux</td>
<td class="xl80" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl81" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">541</td>
<td align="right" class="xl82" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">135.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl92" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">10</td>
<td class="xl79" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Linn</td>
<td class="xl80" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">121</td>
<td class="xl81" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">15,026</td>
<td align="right" class="xl82" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">124.18</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl92" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">11</td>
<td class="xl79" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Warren</td>
<td class="xl80" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">22</td>
<td class="xl81" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">2,731</td>
<td align="right" class="xl82" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">124.14</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">12</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Van
Buren</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">2</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">237</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">118.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">13</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Madison</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">696</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">116.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">14</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Scott</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">82</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">9,503</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">115.89</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">15</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Muscatine</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">18</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">2,073</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">115.17</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">16</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Washington</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">9</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,019</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">113.22</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">17</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Cedar</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">8</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">882</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">110.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">18</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Marion</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">13</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,431</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">110.08</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">19</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Boone</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">13</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,428</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">109.85</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">20</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Black
Hawk</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">69</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">7,459</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">108.10</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">21</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Henry</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">7</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">742</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">106.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">22</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Dubuque</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">48</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">5,056</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">105.33</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">23</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Hamilton</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">629</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">104.83</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">24</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Iowa</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">7</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">719</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">102.71</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">25</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Jasper</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">18</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,843</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">102.39</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">26</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Guthrie</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">409</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">102.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">27</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Marshall</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">18</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,835</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">101.94</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">28</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Pottawattamie</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">31</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">3,082</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">99.42</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">29</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Union</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">5</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">497</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">99.40</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">30</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Des
Moines</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">20</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,967</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">98.35</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">31</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Davis</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">293</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">97.67</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">32</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Jackson</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">9</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">877</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">97.44</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">33</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Bremer</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">12</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,165</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">97.08</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">34</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Mahaska</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">7</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">678</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">96.86</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">35</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Clayton</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">8</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">762</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">95.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">36</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Greene</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">376</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">94.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">37</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Wapello</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">15</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,404</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">93.60</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">38</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Carroll</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">8</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">748</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">93.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">39</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Winnebago</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">364</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">91.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">40</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Woodbury</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">36</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">3,263</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">90.64</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">41</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Harrison</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">5</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">453</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">90.60</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">42</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Ringgold</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">2</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">181</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">90.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">43</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Buena
Vista</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">542</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">90.33</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">44</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Louisa</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">361</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">90.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">45</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Sac</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">270</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">90.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">46</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Clay</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">540</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">90.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">47</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Appanoose</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">5</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">449</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">89.80</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">48</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Montgomery</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">266</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">88.67</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">49</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Lucas</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">266</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">88.67</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">50</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Emmet</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">266</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">88.67</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">51</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Page</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">354</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">88.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">52</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Clinton</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">24</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">2,121</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">88.38</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">53</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Cerro
Gordo</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">22</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,938</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">88.09</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">54</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Audubon</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">264</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">88.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">55</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Adair</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">263</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">87.67</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">56</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Lee</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">17</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,489</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">87.59</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">57</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Floyd</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">8</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">698</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">87.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">58</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Hardin</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">7</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">608</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">86.86</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">59</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Webster</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">16</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">1,369</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">85.56</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">60</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Mills</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">5</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">417</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">83.40</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">61</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Monona</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">249</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">83.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">62</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Benton</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">12</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">991</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">82.58</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">63</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Tama</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">9</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">738</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">82.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">64</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Grundy</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">328</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">82.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">65</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Dickinson</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">7</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">574</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">82.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">66</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Buchanan</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">10</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">809</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">80.90</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">67</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Lyon</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">2</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">161</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">80.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">68</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Cherokee</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">321</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">80.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">69</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Humboldt</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">239</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">79.67</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">70</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Clarke</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">316</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">79.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">71</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Allamakee</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">474</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">79.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">72</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Fayette</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">10</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">788</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">78.80</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">73</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Jones</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">9</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">703</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">78.11</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">74</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">O'Brien</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">234</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">78.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">75</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Calhoun</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">309</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">77.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">76</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Keokuk</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">308</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">77.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">77</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Plymouth</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">7</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">535</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">76.43</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">78</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Wright</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">5</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">376</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">75.20</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">79</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Butler</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">449</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">74.83</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">80</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Howard</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">297</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">74.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">81</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Kossuth</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">445</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">74.17</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">82</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Chickasaw</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">6</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">433</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">72.17</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">83</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Wayne</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">2</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">143</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">71.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">84</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Monroe</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">214</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">71.33</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">85</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Hancock</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">285</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">71.25</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">86</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Shelby</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">284</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">71.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">87</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Franklin</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">284</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">71.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">88</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Cass</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">5</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">351</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">70.20</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">89</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Ida</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">2</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">137</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">68.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">90</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Worth</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">272</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">68.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">91</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Mitchell</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">272</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">68.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">92</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Osceola</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">1</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">67</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">67.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl93" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">93</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Adams</td>
<td class="xl72" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">2</td>
<td class="xl73" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">130</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">65.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl94" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">94</td>
<td class="xl87" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Pocahontas</td>
<td class="xl88" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl89" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">183</td>
<td align="right" class="xl90" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">61.00</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl94" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">95</td>
<td class="xl87" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Taylor</td>
<td class="xl88" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">2</td>
<td class="xl89" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">121</td>
<td align="right" class="xl90" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">60.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl94" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">96</td>
<td class="xl87" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Crawford</td>
<td class="xl88" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">5</td>
<td class="xl89" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">302</td>
<td align="right" class="xl90" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">60.40</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl94" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">97</td>
<td class="xl87" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Delaware</td>
<td class="xl88" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">8</td>
<td class="xl89" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">454</td>
<td align="right" class="xl90" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">56.75</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl94" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">98</td>
<td class="xl87" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Palo
Alto</td>
<td class="xl88" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">4</td>
<td class="xl89" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">222</td>
<td align="right" class="xl90" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">55.50</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl94" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">99</td>
<td class="xl87" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">Fremont</td>
<td class="xl88" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 88pt;" width="117">3</td>
<td class="xl89" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 94pt;" width="125">136</td>
<td align="right" class="xl90" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">45.33</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.5pt;">
<td class="xl70" height="19" style="border-top: none; height: 14.5pt;">Total/<br />
avg</td>
<td class="xl71" style="border-left: none; border-top: none; width: 80pt;" width="106">State</td>
<td align="right" class="xl75" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">1401</td>
<td align="right" class="xl75" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">171290</td>
<td align="right" class="xl74" style="border-left: none; border-top: none;">122.26</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-2039006888540020102020-01-03T16:27:00.000-06:002020-01-07T18:36:16.547-06:00Cassandra At The Caucus: One Month OutI have been quite busy since my semi-retirement from blogging, <b>do</b>ing rather than reporting. I last attended a candidate event in September. In addition to getting through the city-school election at my day job, I have been doing the leg work for my county's caucuses.<br />
<br />
And here we are: the 12 year anniversary of Barack Obama's win, the 8 year anniversary of the Republican dead heat, and one calendar month away from 2020. <br />
<br />
One old caucus hand told me I should complain about the caucuses less and do more to help, though I don't know what more I can do besides recruiting almost all the chairs, booking the rooms, helping train the volunteers, answering the questions, and doing more media interviews than I can count.<br />
<br />
After doing one of those interviews yesterday via email, I realized that I had more or less written a blog post. It may be repetitive to my long time readers, but I have been shouting the same warnings into the wilderness for four years to no avail, so I may as earn one more right to say I Told You So after the fact.<br />
<br />
Essentially nothing has been done to address the issue of overcrowding in the largest urban precincts. But to be fair about this, the Iowa Democratic Party was making a good effort with its plan for a
phone-in "virtual caucus." That was mainly meant as an accessibility program, to include people who could otherwise not attend. The campaigns were not buying in because it counted less than in person attendance, but nearly a third of likely caucus goers were telling pollsters that they would consider it anyway. The Johnson County Democrats were planning to make a big push to encourage Virtual Caucus in order to take pressure off our most crowded sites.<br />
<br />
IDP spent nearly a year working on Virtual Caucus, and they
were assured by the DNC every step of the way that it was a good plan -
until all of a sudden in September it wasn't anymore. Had they told us from the start "we think a phone in system is a security risk," we would have had time to come up with another plan (like actual absentee ballots).<br />
<br />
But in September, it
was too late to come up with any major new changes and build a new system from scratch. Thanks, DNC. Satellite Caucus was dusted off, basically because it was the only plan that was on the shelf and it had been tried in 2016 with limited success. (Four sites statewide - three flopped but Oaknoll, the biggest retirement community in Iowa City, was a smash hit.)<br />
<br />
There are 99 satellite caucus sites this year, but some are very obscure, like a guy's house in Tblisi, Georgia at 4 AM local time (which is caucus hour here). Basically, you had to be in the loop during a very narrow window in October and early November to know you needed to ask for a satellite caucus. It will help a few in-the-know snowbirds, the people at Oaknoll, and the nurses at UIHC and the firefighters at the West Side station who have to work that shift. But it won't get a single body out of our most crowded rooms. Basically everyone at a satellite caucus will be someone who would just not have attended otherwise.<br />
<br />
(Aside: That term "satellite caucus" is unfortunate. In our county people hear about it and think that means the kind of satellite voting we do, zip into a public library and zip out. They don't realize that it means a mini-caucus at a different location.) <br />
<br />
I also appreciate that the severe overcrowding is, to some extent, a "Johnson County problem." I was madder about that type of dismissal till I looked at the numbers and realized that's, well, kind of true.<br />
<br />
Of the 11 precincts in the state (out of 1681 total) with over 600 in attendance in 2016, there was the campus
precinct in Grinnell, the campus precinct at Iowa State, two in Des
Moines... and <i>seven</i> of ours. That's a big burden to place on one county.<br />
<br />
In 2016 the mean average attendance statewide was 102 people. The median
was just 65.
In Johnson County, the average was <b>342</b>. We had seven of the 10 biggest
precincts in the state and 19 of the top 40. The last time I saw anyone with 7 of the top 10 and 19 in the top 40 was <a href="https://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100/2018-07-14">when Drake dropped an album</a>. <br />
<br />
The caucus process was never designed to be a mass participation event that
was the equivalent of an election. It was meant to be the handful of
core party activists in the precinct - 20 or 40 people who were familiar
with process and rules and were meeting at their friend's house.<br />
<br />
In
some parts of Iowa it's still like that. In off years it's still like that in Johnson County. And at that size it still works.<br />
<br />
As we argued last spring over the way the late unlamented virtual caucus vote was being allocated, it became clear to me that the caucuses are yet another rural-urban split in Iowa. The rural counties are convinced that without mandatory in person attendance to vote, they will not be able to organize their counties - and I understand that, and I understand that we are supposed to be all about Winning Back The Rurals this year.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipV17aWEEoQqzvbZtC3B8dN4DhJYDWiLMg8gLt1o5eWx_CS_gZDWfqbupx8L3C01nn03DR-6vKWvaNy7mmKKr77TDaZs9EdR7Hfu1bitAH8drQmtgxm6qcGqeKt4SBw6cXp4zX/s1600/2164868727_4df365d1d8_b.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="676" data-original-width="1024" height="420" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipV17aWEEoQqzvbZtC3B8dN4DhJYDWiLMg8gLt1o5eWx_CS_gZDWfqbupx8L3C01nn03DR-6vKWvaNy7mmKKr77TDaZs9EdR7Hfu1bitAH8drQmtgxm6qcGqeKt4SBw6cXp4zX/s640/2164868727_4df365d1d8_b.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A 2008 caucus on the east side of Iowa City, with 719 people attending.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
But what about the BEST county? What about the county that for the last
three cycles, in <i>every state and federal race</i>, has voted 13 to 15% more
Democratic than any other county in the state? We are ALREADY organized,
and this process hurts more than it helps. Knowing that's it's mostly a
Johnson County Problem does not <i>solve </i>the
problem. And - and this is what I'm still upset about - it does not mean
the problem should just be dismissed.<br />
<br />
<i>We simply need a different system for the urban counties</i>, a system that recognizes our lifestyles and needs and political folkways - and that rewards our outstanding performance each general election. Win back the rurals, yes, but give Johnson County and Polk County some credit and some respect. And in Johnson County, what we like and what we want and what we need is convenient multi-option early voting. <br />
<br />
The biggest precinct in the state in 2016 was Iowa City 17 with 945 people. (We beat the Grinnell campus precinct by ten voters.) Our biggest in 2008 was 720 in precinct 18 - but remember that 2008 was on January 3 during UI's winter break, which suppressed turnout. We
expect to top 1000 in both these precincts this time. We expect to be over 500 in dozens of our 57 precincts. And a caucus process that was
designed for 20 to 40 people does not scale up well to a crowd of 500 to 1000. Once you get past the grade school gym capacity of 200 to 250, you can't do any "organizing." It's just crowd control and anger management.<br />
<br />
You can do a lot to prepare for 500 people. You can train better, you can get more volunteers. But you can't solve the problem of the biggest room in (or near) the precinct being too small to hold the crowd you KNOW will be there. What is my county party supposed to do, build an 8000 seat arena with a 6000 car parking lot on the east side of Iowa City?<br />
<br />
We've done better with rooms than we did in 2016. Sometimes that was due to better cooperation from the University and the schools but sometimes it was rented space at considerable expense to the county party. For example, we outgrew the free location at the Iowa City Public Library, so we rented out the Englert Theater. We had a hotel ballroom on the far north side of Iowa City that we turned down for the cost in 2016. We regretted that and we took it, at a slightly higher cost, this time. It's money well spent - but it's another extra burden on a local party, in a community that is already expected to export money to other races across the state.<br />
<br />
In some places, residential precincts full of single family homes, there's not an option like the Englert and we have to take a too-small school. There is not going to be enough parking anywhere, so
walk or carpool if you can. <br />
<br />
So my advice to Johnson County Democratic caucus goers is to set your expectations appropriately and be prepared. It's important to remember that everyone, including me, is a volunteer
and is legitimately trying to do their best in a tough situation. <br />
<br />
I know sports analogies are overdone, but my dad was a coach and my Packers are in the playoffs so I'm using one. Caucus night is like game day. It's exciting and we all want the Hawks to win. But you don't expect to walk in, watch a game highlights clip, and go home. You're there for a long time, two or three hours for the caucuses. And not every play is an exciting thing like a long touchdown pass. Sometimes you're stopped at the line of scrimmage, the ref throws a flag, and you have to sit around and wait while the three refs talk among themselves and figure out the call and everyone else is confused.<br />
<br />
And you can't expect to show up 15 minutes before kickoff and get a parking space across the street from Kinnick Stadium. Expect to walk. If you can't, make plans for a ride, and remember that your candidate has more resources for that than the county party.<br />
<br />
And frankly, think about whether you should even do this.<br />
<br />
My parents are in Wisconsin, not Iowa, and never miss an election. They are 85 and 84 and having more trouble moving around than they used to. I've told them: "If you lived in Iowa City 17 and had to walk four blocks from your parking place to attend a three hour meeting with 1000 people, I would tell you, <i>don't go</i>. Don't do that to yourself. And then I would tell you to call your legislators and tell them what you think of that process."<br />
<br />
I'll have more to say soon about some small process changes and maybe some candidate related thoughts.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-84124616529406117932019-12-05T16:20:00.000-06:002020-03-14T18:41:02.057-05:00Debating The DebatesYeah, I get that the all white debate optics are bad. But here's the thing: What are Perez and the DNC able or supposed to do about it NOW? <br />
<ul>
<li>Order Kamala Harris back into the race? The debate rules aren't the problem there - Harris had already qualified. <br /></li>
<li>What else... Magically make voters support Castro and Booker? <br /></li>
<li>Override the First Amendment and force the media to cover the candidates differently? <br /></li>
<li>Unilaterally pass campaign finance reform that keeps self funding billionaires from running? You think if we could do that, we wouldn't have already? </li>
</ul>
There are a LOT of problems with a system that leads to Steyer and Bloomberg, but the debate rules aren't even in the top 10.<br />
<br />
The only option in the DNC's power is changing the qualification criteria - and the candidates who have qualified, and who built their efforts around the pre-set rules, would rightfully scream.<br />
<br />
So would the candidates who were previously excluded and dropped out as a result. If you let Castro in now, do you go back in time and re-invite Gillibrand and Inslee?<br />
<br />
The bigger debate rules problem was the excessive size of the field and the two night 20 candidate
💩
shows. With fewer no-chance mediocre white men on stage, Harris or Booker or Castro could have gotten more time and focus and maybe have earned more support.<br />
<br />
Bottom line is, elections are an open process, and if people aren't going to support Booker, Castro, or Harris, they aren't going to. We can argue about WHY, and race should certainly be part of that discussion, but at this point the debates are an effect, not a cause.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4061483.post-13738055486644734442019-09-22T11:49:00.001-05:002020-07-10T18:11:14.117-05:00The Caucuses' Greatest Hits: 4th Edition Revised 2019<span style="font-size: large;">And a revised mission statement as well. </span><br />
<br />
My dual role as press-activist, which was what led to the invention of the beret as the "blogging hat," back in 2007 when I unexpectedly found myself back in a professional journalism job for a year and a half, has been getting in the way of the activist role. (It's actually a TRIPLE role, but we'll leave my job out of the mix for the moment.)<br />
<br />
Lately I found myself not able to have conversations that were critical to my activist role. I was getting left out of other things I wanted to do. And I felt less and less like I really "belonged" on press row - including a few nasty looks the last time I sat there at the Hall Of Fame event in Cedar Rapids in June.<br />
<br />
It's a lot harder to justify the travel and time at events when it's a hobby, not a second job. I haven't really written enough in a long time to justify a press pass - including no long form blog posts at <i>all </i>the entire month of July and nothing in August but a <a href="http://jdeeth.blogspot.com/2019/08/why-taylor-swift-matters.html">music post</a>. Twitter has really been my main medium for a long time.<br />
<br />
Another problem for me as "press" is that I really, really, really hate doing interviews. As I get more open about being on the autism spectrum I can confess that I always felt extremely uncomfortable and awkward asking the questions. But if YOU interview ME about MY favorite subjects I'll talk all day (again: the spectrum).<br />
<br />
So the beret is going into semi-retirement. I'm not going to attend events as "press" anymore. This isn't "quitting" as much as it is an acknowledgement of what my reality has been for some time.<br />
<br />
Irony: At the first event where I deliberately decided not to go as press, Elizabeth Warren's Thursday rally on campus. I walked out of the closed door, no-press pre-event and out to the main rally - and Team Warren was playing my song as pre-rally music.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/l7vRSu_wsNc" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Literally the only good thing about Prince's death is that now you can find his videos on the internet. He was extremely aggressive about blocking his content online. </span><br />
<br />
I'm always happy to be a source for real working journalists. The actual beret may appear on special occasions. And I'll still write occasional long form posts when I feel like it, when that medium works best, and when it's my specialty: number crunchers, caucus process, election law, and history.<br />
<br />
Like this. <br />
<br />
In a post I first wrote back in 2006 and have updated periodically. I've
looked at and ranked all the caucus cycles back to 1976. As for
history and the caucuses themselves, a mixed bag. Irrelevant nearly
half the time, critical a little less often. <br />
<br />
<b><big>Not Worth The Airfare To Waterloo</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>20. 1984 and 2004 Republican.</b> The Republican tradition was to hold no presidential vote at all in incumbent re-elect years.That tradition looks likely to end in 2020, not because of Trump's minor opponents but because state party leadership seems to think not having a vote in 2020 hurts the case for First in 2024. Ironically, this is happening as other state Republican parties are canceling their contests.<br />
<br />
<b>19. 1996 Democratic.</b>
The word went down from Des Moines to the Democratic county chairs:
“The President would like a unanimous re-nomination and this WILL
happen.” <a href="https://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/returns/caucus/9602cauc.htm">Self-starters in a couple lefty college precincts elected a very small handful of Nader and Uncommitted protest delegates</a>, but those
results got swept under the rug. Clinton came out and campaigned the
final weekend, largely to step on the GOP story (Actually Being
President trumps winning the caucus), but it was in basketball arenas,
not chat n’ chews.<br />
<br />
<b>17 (tie). 2012 Democratic</b>. As
close to an unopposed caucus as possible short of “The President would
like a unanimous re-nomination and this WILL happen.” The state party
went to bat for actually <i>having</i> an alignment, which Chicago didn't want. But without a live
person as an Obama opponent (<a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/bernie-sanders-talks-primary-challenge-obama-good-idea-our-democracy-and-democratic-part/">despite Bernie Sanders' suggestion</a>), the dissenters were split between Uncommitted and
crossing over for Ron Paul. In the end the Uncommitteds, mostly made up of folks allied with the simultaneous Occupy movement, made a lot of
noise out of proportion to their 1.5% of the delegates. Rated up one notch because that 1.5% actually got honestly reported, not suppressed as in 1996.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="background-color: yellow;">17 (tie). 2020 Republican.</span></b> Iowa Republicans broke with tradition in 2020, in part because they were concerned that with no actual vote they would put First at risk (this was before the 2020 Democrats removed all doubt). But even though they counted the votes against Trump, Bill Weld and Joe Walsh proved to be woefully ineffective even as protest vote placeholders. <br />
<br />
<b>16. 1992 Republican.</b> The Pat Buchanan
Brigade was looking like a serious threat to win New Hampshire - he ended up at 37.5% there - but the
inside the Des Moines Beltway crowd stuck with the tradition of not
having a vote in an incumbent year. That decision was a small win for George HW, and that no-vote decision was more important than the 2020 decision to vote. So this gets the highest rank of the de facto uncontested caucuses.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Ultimately Irrelevant</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>15. 1992 Democratic.</b>
Hometown boy Tom Harkin runs and wins big, though not as big as it
looked because of some skilled realignment work at viability time. That
76% Harkin delegate count included a lot of stealth supporters of other
candidates.<br />
<br />
Paul Tsongas was already on the ground in
Iowa when Harkin announced, but he quickly bailed. There were a couple
feints from Bob Kerrey and Jerry Brown but nothing serious. Everyone showed up for the cycle's lone cattle call, the then-Jefferson Jackson dinner, but between low interest and a blizzard the hall was half empty.<br />
<br />
In the end,
Iowa kept first place after `92 only because Tom Harkin was the only Bill Clinton rival who enthusiastically jumped on the bandwagon. The other also-rans could barely hide their obvious
contempt for Clinton. (Kerrey and Brown probably wrote themselves in that
November.)<br />
<br />
The long term importance of the 1992 caucuses may be that Bill, and by extension Hillary, Clinton did not have to retail campaign in Iowa, and that had a ripple effect into 2008 and 2016.<br />
<br />
<b>14. 2000 Both.</b> On the Democratic side Al Gore easily beat Bill Bradley in what was merely the first moment in the overall national dynamic; <a href="http://www.hoophall.com/halloffamers/Bradley.htm"> Dollar Bill</a> made his stand on friendlier turf in New Hampshire and fell just short there, and that pretty much ended it.<br />
<br />
On
the Republican side it was like one of those boycott-era Olympics: W
won but the toughest competitor, McCain, was a no-show playing a Screw Iowa strategy. The truly
significant GOP event was the straw poll that winnowed out more
candidates (E. Dole, Quayle, and Buchanan bolting to Reform) than the
actual caucus (Orrin Hatch, as if that wasn’t obvious). Comic relief:
People who took Gary Bauer seriously, <a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2000-01-28"> Alan Keyes in Michael Moore’s mosh pit</a>.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Secondary event in nomination contest</big></b><br />
<br />
<b><span style="background-color: yellow;">13. 2016 Republican</span>. </b>Whichever contest was first would have narrowed a field that peaked at 17 candidates. The biggest event of the cycle was actually a non-event - the Ames Straw Poll that had been the dominant pre-caucus event from 1987 to 2011 was first moved out of Ames, then canceled entirely when the leading candidates refused to show up.<br />
<br />
The field was down to a mere 12 by caucus night. Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, and Marco Rubio, in that order, each took about a quarter of the vote, with the other nine splitting the remaining 25%. The immediate two past Iowa winners, Huckabee and Santorum, fizzled, and that effectively ended their campaigns.<br />
<br />
Rand Paul failed to keep his father's coalition, because all of the "he's alternative, dude!" vote was caucusing for Bernie Sanders. The dudebro overlap between Ron/Rand Paul and Sanders supporters, which makes little ideological sense but is clearly a Thing, is a Ph.D. dissertation for someone.<br />
<br />
Cruz's win turned out to be an anomaly and a relatively minor event. Cruz wasn't even Trump's final opposition - that turned out to be John Kasich, merely because he refused to quit.<br />
<br />
<b>12. 1980 Democratic.</b>
The incumbent won the first test of Kennedy-Carter, but that battle of
giants was played out on a national, even global, stage and Iowa was a
bit player.<br />
<br />
<b>11. 2008 Republican.</b> Important to the dynamic of the contest, but not central to the result. <br />
<br />
Mitt
Romney was looking like the guy to beat in December 2007. Which Mike
Huckabee did in January 2008, after first beating Sam Brownback at the
straw poll to win the mantle of THE religious conservative candidate.
Had Iowa Republicans gotten behind the Mitt, they may have headed off
the chaos that was the GOP field in January. Instead, we proved that
there was no there there for Fred Thompson, and that the Ron Paul Яэvo<sub>┘</sub>utionaries
were noisy in disproportion to their actual numbers (but see 2012
below). But really, we just stirred the pot, and the decisive event was
in Florida between two men with Screw Iowa Lite strategies, Rudy
Giuliani and John McCain.<br />
<br />
Our next contest was very similar, but the tiebreaker is that the Iowa winner actually won the nomination:<br />
<br />
<b>10. 1996 Republican.</b>
What might have been: Pat Buchanan was within 3% of Bob Dole, but the
social conservatives in Cedar Rapids backed Alan Keyes instead; Keyes
thus won the second biggest county. One minister at one mega-church
makes a different choice, and we’d have had a major upset.<br />
<br />
Some all too obvious field winnowing (Dick Lugar???) happens. Phil Gramm
gets out too, but his real stumble was in Louisiana’s
jump-the-starting-gun contest a week earlier. <br />
<br />
Comic relief: Easily the funniest caucus! Dole, <a href="http://www.bobdole.org/books/prezwits.html"> genuinely witty</a>
in his non-Satan mode, Steve Forbes the android, Alan Keyes… but they
all pale next to Morrie Taylor, the tire magnate who literally tried to
buy a win one vote at a time. Failed miserably but looked like he had
more fun than the rest put together.<br />
<br />
<b>9. 1988 Democratic.</b>
Other than Tom Harkin's favorite son run, this is the only time in the post-Carter modern era of the caucuses that Iowa Democrats did not vote for the eventual nominee. The nomination contest came down to Dukakis vs.
Jackson, neither of whose fortunes were affected by Iowa.<br />
<br />
In `88 Al Gore, <a href="https://politics.theonion.com/recently-single-al-gore-finally-able-to-listen-to-w-a-s-1819571657">dirty Prince lyrics still ringing in his ears</a>, was the
first candidate to use the Screw Iowa strategy. It's never worked (save
for the Harkin year), but nevertheless Gore wound up outlasting the
two Iowa leaders.<br />
<br />
There's a story, long told by Paul Simon loyalists, that a county chair
sat on his Simon-friendly results until the Register had printed its
GEPHARDT WINS headline, which mattered in the pre-internet era. Rules got changed after that so that results are reported direct from the precinct to the state without going through a county chair, but this one proved the
winner-take-all-news theory that was prevalent at the time (and which was supposed to be the anchor of my aborted masters' thesis).<br />
<br />
Comic relief:
Gary Hart’s last minute return to the race, campaigning with his wife.<br />
<br />
<b>8. 2012 Republican</b>. The real importance of the 2012 Republican caucuses was not its
relatively small role in designating the nominee. That was always going
to come down to Mitt vs. Not Mitt. Rick Santorum never really got the bump from the
win, because of the dead heat, the botched result announcement, and the recount that delayed the final result. And also because Sheldon Adelson kept Newt Gingrich on life
support far too long,<br />
<br />
No, the real importance was what happened to the Republican Party of Iowa <i>after</i>
the presidential vote. The Romney and Santorum people both said "yay,
we won," went home, and both in turn were right. The Ron Paul people
stuck around, elected themselves as all the delegates and committee people, and
took over the state party structure.<br />
<br />
The consequences
had a huge ripple effect through state, and even national, internal
Republican politics for the next two years, until Terry Branstad, Jeff
Kaufmann and the rest of the grownups took party control back in 2014
(the most important OFF-year caucus). This one may move up the charts depending on the
long-term fate of the caucuses, and so may the next:<br />
<br />
<b><span style="background-color: yellow;"><b>7. </b>2016 Democratic.</span> </b>Iowa was a big deal - in the same way that the first post in an epic flame war that eventually breaks Godwin's Law is a big deal.<br />
<br />
Had Hillary Clinton solidly beaten Bernie
Sanders in Iowa, 2016 would have been over as fast as you can say "Bill Bradley"
and the whole Sanders phenomenon would never have happened. Oh, he
might have stayed on some ballots and accumulated a few votes. But
without the dead heat in Iowa, and the money and attention that followed, he would have been an asterisk, like Dennis Kucinich playing out the string in the late states in 2004 after John Kerry had clinched and everyone else had quit.<br />
<br />
I have long said that half the Sanders vote was simply Not Hillary, and that
alone would have gotten Martin O'Malley to 30 points in Iowa had Sanders not
run. Indeed, that was probably O'Malley's whole strategy, to be the only person willing to run against Clinton.<br />
<br />
The fact that Sanders was even allowed to run in 2016 without joining the Democratic Party was a decision by the DNC - ironically, headed at the time by the same Debbie Wasserman Schultz who supposedly "rigged" the nomination against Sanders. DWS's inability to take Sanders seriously as a threat to Clinton, and her under-estimation of Clinton's negatives, are just more signs of her ineptitude.<br />
<br />
Sanders himself may have faded (from 49.9999% in Iowa on Caucus Night to <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/">11% in last night's Register poll</a>) but his campaign mainstreamed a progressive stance that other candidates without Sanders' negatives, most notably Warren, are now seeing success with. The long range ranking of 2016 may move up if this turns out to be a permanent change.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Significant event in nomination contest</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>6. 1988 Republican.</b>
Pat Robertson pushes George HW into third place. Robertson was
insignificant thereafter, but the blow made Bush go on a fight of his
life attack against Bob Dole in New Hampshire. Dole took the bait and
was goaded into “stop lying about my record.” This convinces HW that
hard negative was the way to go. That road went through the flag factory
and Willie Horton, and ended at the White House. Comic relief: Al Haig.<br />
<br />
<b>5. 1984 Democratic.</b>
Gary Hart barely squeaked past his old boss, George McGovern. But
second, no matter how distant, was enough to make him the Not Mondale
and propel him up about 40 points in eight days for a New Hampshire win,
a brief but genuine shot at the nomination, and (pre-Donna Rice) 1988
front-runner status. The Right Stuff sank like Gus Grissom’s capsule,
and you're an old timer if you catch that reference.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Decisive event in nomination contest</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>4. 2004 Democratic.</b><br />
<br />
Iowa was the whole ball game in 2004. Nothing that happened <i>after</i> Iowa mattered nearly as much as what happened <i>in</i> Iowa. The guy who won got the nomination, and the guy in second got VP. And the guy in third? <br />
<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9j6xm7e5bJo" width="560"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
The Dean Scream goes down as the single most memorable caucus moment, but everyone forgets The Scream was <i>after</i> The Much More Important Disappointing Third Place. After Dean had been the front-runner for months, Iowans got scared at the last minute - mostly thanks to Dick Gephardt, who went on a suicide attack that took them both out and set Gephardt up for reward in the Kerry Administration.<br />
<br />
<b><big>Made History</big></b><br />
<br />
<b>3. 1976 Democratic</b>.
This one made both Jimmy Carter and the caucuses themselves. Carter
didn’t actually win this, you know. He was second to Uncommitted. But I
know folks who <i>still</i> brag “Jimmy Carter slept on my couch.”<br />
<br />
I’m torn about ranking a caucus that directly produced a president below one that didn't. But read on.<br />
<br />
<b>2. 1980 Republican.</b>
In the first true Iowa Republican caucus, an obscure former ambassador,
spy boss, and failed Senate candidate George Herbert Walker Bush
shocked the ten foot tall colossus of the GOP, Ronald Reagan. This one
win puts Poppy on the map and ultimately on the ticket (after the
botched Ford “co-presidency” deal at the `80 convention).<br />
<br />
So
why rank this ahead of Jimmy Carter, especially since Bush Sr. lost
that 1980 nomination? The ripple effect. No Iowa win = no Bush 41. And
with no HW, do you REALLY think Bush 43 or 45 (please clap) would have made it
on their own? 1976 made a president, but 1980 made a dynasty.<br />
<br />
<b>Number 1: 2008 Democratic</b>.
There's no question the 2008 Iowa Democratic caucuses created a
president. Iowa was the honing ground for Barack Obama's message and
appeal and ground game. We eliminated the entire second tier, and proved
that voters in one of the whitest places in America would support a
black candidate. Remember, a lot of African-American voters were
sticking with Hillary Clinton before Iowa, because Obama "couldn't win."
Iowa shattered that myth and the perception of Clinton's inevitability.<br />
<br />
It's too soon to tell, and Trump's win blurred things, but the 2008 caucuses may have ushered in not just one president, but a whole <span style="font-style: italic;">era</span>,
a new alignment of states that ends the 1968 Nixon-Wallace
southern-western coalition for good, at least at the presidential level.<br />
<br />
2008
was a whole new map. As late as the first John Edwards campaign, people
were sill seriously saying it was impossible to break the Republican
"electoral college lock" without southern rural white male voters. Trump has since proven those voters are gone forever - maybe in the urban and exurban North as well.<br />
<br />
But that old
South has been replaced by the new South, driven by suburban voters who migrated from the North, women, and minorities. Virginia three times, Florida twice,
North Carolina once, Georgia becoming an in-play mega-state, and even Texas on the horizon. Barack Obama fueled this alignment, which would not have been possible without that Iowa win.<br />
<br />
The
1976 caucuses made one president, but his victory is a mere footnote to
a Republican era, brought about by the intensity of Watergate and the
Nixon pardon. The 1980 Republican caucuses made two presidents, but they
followed the electoral footsteps of others. <br />
<br />
How many
presidents in an era? Obama wasn't able to transfer
this alignment to a successor, because some anchors of the old coalition fell in 2016 (Trump essentially drew three cards to an inside straight with his narrow Wisconsin-Michigan-Pennsylvania wins). If the 2008 caucuses ushered in an Obama
Realignment, like the FDR Relignment or the Nixon-Wallace Realignment,
they could lead to four or five presidents.It's a weaker case than it was four years ago, but 2008 still deserves the number one spot.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">
var sc_project=288431;
var sc_partition=1;
var sc_security="";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script></div>Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09749260349116845928noreply@blogger.com0