The Daily Journalist.
Monday, the caucus in the social center of the Simpson Barn in Johnston, a village on the outskirts of Des Moine which is the capital of Iowa, has a little organizational chaos. As always, the caucus was full of democrats.
The people gathered in three groups. Some fans of Hillary, who won and others for Sanders, who finished second. And a third, for O’Malley, that due to the rules of the caucus, had to disband and join the other two that mostly went with Sanders to not reach 15% of gathered, so that their support would not be counted.
Although two members of the O’Malley refused to leave with the others, and they were alone defending the former governor of Maryland, in a show of political allegiance. Now multiply that barn 1.681 in voting, including five salons- eaters- homes, in an election in which the winner, Hillary Clinton, won by three tenths and you have the recipe for controversy.
Especially when that formula is seasoned with a surreal political tradition of the Democratic Party of Iowa: not to make public the number of people who voted. For example, we all know that 182,000 shows the Republican turnout. But among Democrats, the figure is a mystery. And it will remain so.
The Iowa Democratic Party has refused to do something as basic as a democracy to spread the turnout for the caucuses, as many supported each candidate. Above, the Democrats themselves have admitted that they had enough volunteers to ensure compliance with the rules in all caucuses. So the shadow of fraud hangs over Iowa. And the Democratic Party has been forced to carry out a recount of several caucuses.
For now, we know that in at least one of them, a delegate that would be for Sanders was transferred to Clinton. At about the haste with which the Democrats gave Hillary winner, just three hours after the official close of polling adds, but when some were still voting. The announcement came as a surprise to many responsible for the caucus, which party had officially informed that there was still a winner.
Twelve hours later, on the morning of Wednesday, the Democratic Party had to give the winner, again, Clinton, because the count was so tight that the first statement was worthless. “Something stinks, in the Democratic Party,” said an editorial in the leading newspaper of the state, ‘Des Moines Register’, which had requested the vote for Clinton.
Sanders, who is hurt by confusion, has played in style, the trick to say that nothing happens here. “Let’s not jump this ratio. This is not the most important in the world,” he said in Thursday’s televised debate with Hillary. Of course, these are the only two delegates at stake, and it takes 2,500 to reach the nomination. So the argument is impeccable. But it is also flawless game for Sanders.
While the candidate calls for calming the electorate controversy, his campaign is fueling the fire of indignation among his followers, who believe that Iowa is just the first step in a dirty war against Senator Hillary Vermont. If something is not Hillary Clinton, it is reputed to be honest — after Iowa, might become even less.
