the Dem Party has still not corrected this error. it should add 0.2798 to Sanders's SDE total once it's corrected.
(might seem small, but that's 8% of Buttigieg's current SDE lead)
(might seem small, but that's 8% of Buttigieg's current SDE lead)
This is correct: the IDP has not corrected Muscatine 2, which should net Buttigieg "0.1667" in SDEs compared to what he has now (over Biden).
Yup: This is straightforwardly wrong in IDP results. Either the Biden/Buttigieg vote results have been inverted, or the SDE has been allocated to Buttigieg mistakenly. More than 10% of Buttigieg's current lead is at stake just here.
part 4 is a mistake in Ocheyedan Precinct 0500, flagged by @jhobfoll: a county delegate (= 0.1 SDE) was given to Buttigieg instead of Sanders. [I didn't think that was right at first, but then read this screengrab of the rules. Def complex stuff.]
@Jhobfoll It's 3:10am, and I don't have it in me to verify these one by one. But @jhobfoll has flagged mistakes before.
So I really hope the @iowademocrats review each of these 8 (& the 4 above that are clearly mistakes, & others I imagine) ASAP.
So I really hope the @iowademocrats review each of these 8 (& the 4 above that are clearly mistakes, & others I imagine) ASAP.
@Jhobfoll @iowademocrats Two updates:
1) 3 more precincts for #iademocrats to check (Woodbine 7, Cleghorn 2, Des Moines-28), plus 9 listed above. I haven't gone thru all 12, but at least some are indeed wrong.
2) Apology on 3rd tweet in this thread: Donahue may have been right.
1) 3 more precincts for #iademocrats to check (Woodbine 7, Cleghorn 2, Des Moines-28), plus 9 listed above. I haven't gone thru all 12, but at least some are indeed wrong.
2) Apology on 3rd tweet in this thread: Donahue may have been right.
@Jhobfoll @iowademocrats .@AdamCohen538 just flagged "Adam 2" as another precinct that @iowademocrats should check on; based on the total votes the IDP reports, Buttigieg is <15% in both first & final alignment & should not be viable for a county delegate. [Not sure whether SDE or vote total is off.]
@Jhobfoll @iowademocrats @AdamCohen538 Another error, captured by @groundflooriowa & @jhoboll: based on final vote reported in Des Moines-80, Sanders should have an extra 0.2798 SDE (and Pete that much less, so big net swing). Caveat: IDP reports *0* R1 votes; while something's off, it could also be in realignment.
