Buttigieg claims delegate lead in Iowa caucus, with Sanders leading vote, Warren close behind, and Biden in the dust

No one uses your book though.

In the United States, there are two categories of urban area. The term urbanized area denotes an urban area of 50,000 or more people. Urban areas under 50,000 people are called urban clusters . Urbanized areas were first delineated in the United States in the 1950 census, while urban clusters were added in the 2000 census. There are 1,371 urban areas and urban clusters with more than 10,000 people.

The U.S. Census Bureau defines an urban area as “core census block groups or blocks that have a population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile (386 per square kilometer) and surrounding census blocks that have an overall density of at least 500 people per square mile (193 per square kilometer)”.[76]

Des Moines easily achieves these standards.

10 Likes

I would think Biden has more in common with Clinton vis a vis the establishment than Warren does.

5 Likes

The funny thing about that is that Sanders’ campaign declared before Buttigieg’s.

1 Like

it doesn’t hurt that he is only second to biden in billionaire donors

people are giving him more money than he can even legally spend in the primary (!)

while he has a ground game, yes. it’s one that wouldn’t have existed without the support of the richest of the rich.

that doesn’t bode well for the reforms the country needs

9 Likes

I hope you’re right, though as far as I’ve seen, they largely preach to his choir.

4 Likes

Because all good propaganda is both of those things. Don’t you think that "Who does Buttgieg have a narrow lead over would be an important enough question to answer in the headline rather than relegate to the small print when your headline is “Buttgieg has a narrow lead”

3 Likes

In general I agree. The major issue has been there’s so god damn many of them and the DNC has been over cautious with how everything was structured. There’s just no pressure on the field to narrow.

Together with all the other news that’s going on it’s created this big ole mush where nothing important has happened. Nobody is really breaking out and polls have been remarkably stable.

Iowa was almost guaranteed to be a wash, and most of the quality coverage was glossing what kind of wash. So Iowa pulling and Iowa on it might be a blessing in disguise because it actually caused people to focus on the primary a bit. And the one important maybe take away is that turnout was relatively low compared to past years. Which is bad.

But Iowa being Iowa it’s not the sort of conclusion you can draw. New Hampshire is a pretty bad gauge on that too.

New York state is only barely a Democratic hold. And pretty much only because of NYC and a couple of smaller upstate cities. Until 2018 the Republicans controlled our state legislature despite a majority of actual Democrats in seats. Thanks to a handful of blue dogs who split off to caucus with the GOP.

Primary challenges played a minor role in finally undermining those assholes (and Cuomo played no role despite what he says, more than happy to grovel).

Challenging democratic politicians in the NY metro doesn’t get rid of Lee Zeldin out on Long Island, or flip that massive expanse of red in the center of the state. And those areas are why we have Cuomos and Chuck Schumers. There are politicians nationwide that need to be pushed out, especially as they become Joe Manchin. But it’s not a silver bullet.

Bloomberg was kinda a transitional figure in NY politics. We were coming off total Republican control of the state and city. He was basically less baldly corrupt, less agressive Guiliani. And his affiliations shifted along with the city. There are still bluedogs camped in congressional districts and down ballot seats in the deep blue areas in and around the city. But the city’s politics aren’t the state’s.

From what I understand they did not. Buttigieg’s camp was tweeting numbers and “proof” they were likely to win the minute delays hit. And while every other candidate made a point not to explicitly claim victory in their night of speech. Buttigieg gave an explicit victory speech.

Sander’s campaign might have made an official claim first. But Buttigieg was taking a victory lap before it was even known there wouldn’t be numbers that night. He was making talking head appearances on practically every news program desperate for something to report. And just about as soon as he finished that speech he seems to have been out of the state to do more of that.

The only reason that wasn’t a massive embarrassment is the vague technicality of a single delegate.

But as more votes have been counted it looks like Pete has taken a more legit lead. That may change as the remaining 25% comes in. That would seem to be a pretty small amount of votes still.

5 Likes

Apparently he didn’t fund anything. He purchased services and software from them.

In all likelihood he’s using one of their other products or booked them to handle something for his campaign.

They look like a fairly routine, if known to be bad at it, campaign contractor that was out there selling shit and funded before they were hired for Iowa. It’s not clear if the app in question is a pre-existing product or something the IDP commissioned.

Eta: PolitiFact | What we know about Shadow, Acronym and the Iowa caucuses

2 Likes

ab-fab-okay-leaving

4 Likes

One worries if that turnout, coupled with the poor showing for Biden and Klobuchar, signals that Iowa swing voters are leaning towards Trump rather than the Democrats. Iowa swing voters aren’t much different from swing voters everywhere else in the country, and contrary to some fantasies the Democrats need them to win in November.

2 Likes

Much like Groundhog Day. Or a skeevy landlord and game show host who pretends he’s a billionaire.

2 Likes

Iowa doesn’t seem to be much of a swing state anymore. The state government is GOP controlled by a significant margin. And it’s been shifting right for a while now.

Legitimate swing votes are shockingly small group for all the attention paid. And we’ve watched turnout eclipse them repeatedly since 2016. Frankly I doubt there are enough switch hitters in Iowa to get up over the obvious GOP lead there.

So yeah Democrats need swing voters in spots. But I’m not convinced they need Iowa. Or have much of a chance at it.

They both seem to be propped up by Nazis.

2 Likes

Getting off topic, but FWIW when I took a course in urban geography, the U.S. definition was a mere 5,000 people. That was about 30 years ago but I wouldn’t have thought things had changed that much. (By comparison, the same source said that in South Korea, an urban area was >=50,000 people.)

My point was not about swing states, or about Iowa, but about swing voters. If the low turnout was due to moderate Republicans or conservative Democrats, whatever you want to call them, not turning up to vote for the candidates on the right of the Democratic party, that’s a post-convention problem.

2 Likes

That’s a very good point. For anything to improve the senate also must flip to a D majority…

2 Likes

Regarding Mayor Butterandeggs:

16 Likes

George Soros is an actual billionaire and the actual bogeyman of the entire right wing of the country.

Mike Bloomberg is an actual billionaire and literal trashheap of a candidate. He’s also making some actually effective anti-Trump advertising.

The other side has an absolute shitton of money. The Democrats are not going to win this on $3 donations.

Blah blah, it’s not like I’ve never heard “What really matters is money you know” before.

9 Likes

“The Iowa Democratic Party, however, denied that the DNC had warned it against using the result-reporting app.“

““The DNC is running the show,” one Iowa Democratic adviser told CNN, noting that tensions are sharpening between both sides.”

3 Likes

And your counterargument is …?