Do you know who won in Iowa? I don’t, not yet anyway. We really need to know, so that we can write off some of the candidates and narrow the field down, and we don’t care if it’s a little arbitrary. But, according to U. S. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Michigan, District 12), we shouldn’t even be in this situation in the first place.
The congresswoman from Dearborn has tried to reform the Democratic nomination process before, but met with resistance from the party. The technical delay in tallying the Iowa caucus results has renewed her resolve to change the nomination system so that Iowa and New Hampshire don’t have as much influence deciding the nominee.
In a radio interview this morning, Dingell called the present situation in Iowa “a total screwup.” I didn’t listen to the interview, but I read a Detroit News report about it.
“[Iowa and New Hampshire] are two small states that do not reflect the diversity of this country."
Her comments came as results from Iowa's first-in-the-nation caucus were delayed due to technical issues.
...
An attempt to modernize the arcane Iowa caucus system and make it more transparent melted down with the introduction of new technology and more complex rules. The Iowa Democratic Party was unable to release results from Monday’s caucuses after discovering “inconsistencies” in reporting from some precincts.
...
The Iowa Democratic party indicated results may be released sometime Tuesday but gave no firm timeline.
The disruption in the reporting is likely to push others to join Dingell and accelerate calls for an end to caucuses. Only three other states – Nevada, Wyoming and Kansas – still use the caucus system in the nomination race as the national party has tried to shift states toward using primaries.
I think I would make the same extrapolation.
The Iowa contest is the first in a long cycle of caucuses and primaries that stretches until June – awarding just 1% of the delegates needed to clinch the Democratic presidential nomination. But Iowa offers outsized momentum to its strong finishers as they head to New Hampshire a week away.
Ending the Electoral College is more important, in my opinion. However, changing the nomination process to give a few more states a say early on might be a step in the right direction.