People are still anxiously awaiting the Iowa Caucus result. The results were stalled due to a technical glitch. Iowa is important because it is the first state to choose who will be the Democratic presidential candidate.
According to the Democratic Party, due to a technical failure, the results could not be forwarded from the various caucus sites in the state. This year an app was used for the first time. Various districts therefore called the results, which led to overloading.
Now the results must first be checked once again, because not all figures turned out to be correct, the Democratic Party says. “We have found inconsistencies in three different results.” According to the Democrats, there is no hack.
There was a lot of criticism of the outage, not least the campaigns. The Biden campaign requires an explanation. In American media there was talk of “a fiasco” for the Democratic Party.
The Trump campaign throws oil on fire via Twitter. Trumps campaign leader responded with “control = pierced card?” There is no evidence that there has indeed been manipulation. President Trump suggested this weekend that the Democratic Party is trying to disadvantage Sanders because they do not want him as a candidate. The Sanders campaign says they don’t believe that the system has been manipulated.
In the meantime, all candidates were holding speeches for their supporters. Although no victory can be claimed, almost all candidates assumed that the result would be good for them.
The Iowa caucus is important because it is the first time that a state is allowed to designate who, on behalf of the Democrats, will face President Trump in the upcoming elections. A good result gives a campaign considerable support. The state does not choose with voting in a box, but with discussions with neighbors. That makes the result notoriously unpredictable.
American media report that the result tonight is no longer coming, but that it will be available Tuesday.
About the author: Jeff Roper
Jeff Roper has been teaching journalism for more than five years. A theorist who nevertheless took up some practice. He is fond of the history of journalism and journalism.