During my 36 years of reporting and editing at The Star, we had some lengthy waits for election results.
Delays always prompted angst — deadlines approaching, you know — and several times when results were slow coming in, we’d have to prepare two stories, one reflecting one result, the other reflecting the opposite.
But I never experienced an election delay that lasted all night.
Last night, then, I was sure glad I wasn’t a reporter or editor covering the Iowa caucuses and that, instead, I could shuffle off to bed about 11:30.
It certainly was disappointing, though, and still is: At this writing…still no results.
After all that build-up, after all the hype about Iowa being the state that would give the first indication at who might go up against President Trump in November…blah…nothing…a big turd served up on a platter by The Hawkeye State.
Might as well be The Flyaway State.
I had already read a lot about the problems with Iowa getting disproportionate influence in the nominating system because it is first out of the gate. The chief problem is that, demographically, it’s not an accurate representation of the United States.
In a prescient Op-Ed piece last week, New York Times columnist David Leonhardt said the Democratic Party should strip Iowa and New Hampshire of their “special” status and they should be relegated to deeper spots on the primary calendar.
Leonhardt wrote:
The 2020 cycle should be the last time that Iowa and New Hampshire benefit at the country’s expense. The strongest part of the case for change, of course, is the racial aspect of the current calendar. Iowa and New Hampshire are among the country’s whitest states. About 6 percent of their combined population is black or Asian-American. Almost 87 percent is non-Hispanic white, compared with 60 percent for the country as a whole. Demographically, Iowa and New Hampshire look roughly like the America of 1870.
In the wake of last night’s debacle, Leonhardt quickly doubled down this morning. He began several paragraphs with the words, “Iowa should never go first again because…”
One of those paragraphs read…
“Iowa should never go first again because last night it botched its caucus when the entire nation was watching, giving the lie to the state’s longtime claim that it is better at conducting democracy than the rest of us…Iowa has enjoyed a half-century of an outsize role in presidential campaigns, with all of the extra influence and economic activity that has come with that role. It’s time for the special treatment to end.”
Amen. Today, Iowa is bathed in exactly the opposite kind of attention it expected during the months leading up to caucus night. Today, Iowa deserves every one of the rotten tomatoes being thrown at it.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Hi Jim, you hit the nail on the head. As a former politician I can tell the wait for results are excruciating .
I believe that Iowa has either a Statute or A Constitutional provision that says they always go first. It would be an economically bad event for Iowa.
This is really a mess and should be fixed.
Good to hear from you, Vernon…New Hampshire has a state law saying it must have the first primary, and Iowa has some sort of similar law, maybe regarding caucuses.
An NYT contributing opinion writer, Michael Tomasky, wrote on Feb. 2 that the Democratic National Committee should simply break the law and dictate how the primary/caucus calendar would unfold.
He wrote…
“Let Iowa and New Hampshire hold their caucus and primary, but don’t participate. Make all the candidates agree that they won’t seek a spot on the ballot.
“Impossible? That’s what everyone will say. But it’s not. Oh, I’m sure it’s all very complicated with respect to the committee’s bylaws. But bylaws can be changed, by people who want to change them.”
He went on to say the Democratic National Committee should choose two other, more representative states, such as Florida and Michigan, to go first. And if Iowa and New Hampshire still insist on going first, he said, “let (them) do what they want, but just ignore them.”
Here’s a link to that column…https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/02/opinion/iowa-new-hampshire-primary.html
Good at Ag, bad at Tech!
Like it…
There were reporters in MANY of the 170 precincts. Not hard to report the results there. 100 people, first corner results, final results. Three things to report.
There is a cover up. That Biden didn’t even make top 3. Bernie did. Here ya go again, Dems!
And now they are holding results until tonight, and just half then–so the bad news is buried behind the State of the Union speech.
Shame on DM Register and network and cable news.
Yes! I say let The Press both report on and count the ballots! Put the power where it needs to be.
so you agree–the reporters are part of a news embargo? The news media are now creating the news, rather than reporting it. And enabling Biden to suppress the Bernie Sanders campaign a second time.
Golly I love these commentaries. You are right on the mark as usual. The Iowa debacle is without measure. Why are we measuring with the Iowa ruler anyway.
Thanks, Jean…Welcome to the Comments Dept.
How about a single national primary with plenty of time for candidates and voters to prepare? (And abolish or work around the Electoral College!)
I like the state system, the gradual progression…And we’ll never get rid of the Electoral College.
Oh, Vern. one natl. primary will clearly lead to someone buying it. NY, CA and Tx. would be the only states where well-heeled candidates and their PAC’s would invest. Google and Microsoft and FB’s owners, plus Jeff Bezos. Bada bing, bada boom. Cheapest way to buy ads to get out the vote.
Vern, you surprise me. You should thank God for the Electoral College as well–the founding fathers figured that out quickly. Population centers–biggest cities–would dominate. Trump chose not to campaign in CA last time because CA , a blue state, was a winner take all state. Hillary ran the worst campaign ever. He played by the rules, and counted Electoral votes. Whereas Hillary stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders, with help from the DNC and her pal, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Today, Shadow, one of Hillary’s buddies, worked to protect Biden from a huge loss last night–so the late reporting in Iowas, shamefully rigged, falls during the State of the Union address.
As for counting the vote, Joco learned the hard way, under Ronnie Metsker, you must stress test any app or program counting votes. Iowa just cost themselves the privilege of being a micro market and the leader.
I have participated in the caucusses. Iowa and back in the day in Ks. It is also awkward. Very public. You go stand in the corner for your candidate! So your neighbors know! Then if you don’t have 15%, your neighbors run over and recruit you to their candidate’s corner!!! It’s a game best played by extroverts and the bold!!
In this era of anonymous posting and fake names, I think the caucus format has seen its day. The main reason Iowa chose the caucus format was marketing strategy–publicity and fame and money–because New Hampshire had already rigged it with the DNC to be the required first “primary ballot” election.
A Democratic state party that can’t function better than this will produce a Sen. Joni Ernst and a Congressman Steve King.
Here we go, the Dems will find a way to shoot themselves in the foot. As much as they are in the right on issues and policy, they will focus on explaining why and not getting a concise, easy to understand message out. Think of all the pithy catch phrases that tRump and his minions constantly use that have now become part of the venacular – that’s what people remember. With Iowa, they gifted the Republicans another talking point to distract.
When it looked like a lock for witnesses after Bolton’s revelations, I bet my son that they would find a way to not have them. That’s what they do – find a way, any way. I fear that will happen in November and Iowa is not doing the Dems any favors.
The DNC needs to exert some power and say if you want to win, Iowa and NH are out – tradition and state laws be damned.
The running around the room in the Iowa reminds me of a combination of political “ring around the roses” and “musical chairs!” Don’t you just love it!!!!
The remarkable thing, (and I’ve gone to a few caucuses) is how public it is. So for Mayor Pete to capture Iowa is amazing.
I’m from Iowa. “A State of Minds”!!!