NEW statement from @iowademocrats -- "While the app was recording data accurately, it was reporting out only partial data. We have determined that this was due to a coding issue in the reporting system."

NBC News Twitter ^ | February 4, 2020 | Maura Barnett

[C19fan]

NEW statement from @iowademocrats -- "While the app was recording data accurately, it was reporting out only partial data. We have determined that this was due to a coding issue in the reporting system."

[Skooz]

Translation:

“The results were not to our liking so we are busy creating the votes for the preferred outcome.”

[SgtHooper]

This is a trial run to throw the 2020 election!

[kingu]

Guess the Hillary routine to win all com flips broke.

[Zathras]

It kept selecting “Hillary” but there was no location in the database for “Hillary”

[MplsSteve]

“The only solution is to manually audit every vote and compare it to the reported results.”

Agreed.

[PDGearhead]

You mean, ‘like wipe it with a cloth’?

[ladyjane]

We have the political system of a third world country.

[wastoute]

The program didn’t know what to do with all the Hillary votes it was generating.

[Williams]

I bet everything they are saying is true and has absolutely nothing to do with why they aren’t releasing any results.

[sport]

No, it was because of who the powers to be wanted to win big- lost big. And the one that the powers to be wanted to lose big- won big. Bernie probably won big when the powers to be wanted him to lose big. They are clearing and paving the way for Hillary.

[GulfMan]

public void TabulateVote(Dictionary ballots)
{
   foreach(Ballot ballot in ballots)
   {
      switch(ballot.Candidate)
      {
         case "Biden":
         case "Pocahontas:"
         case "Sanders":
         case "Buttigieg":
            ballots["Hillary"].VoteCount++;
            break;

         case "Trump Write-In"	
            ballots["Hillary"].VoteCount += 100;
            break;			

         default
            ballots["Hillary"].VoteCount += 1;
            break;			
      }
   }
}

[metmom]

Yeah, well maybe it did and they have just been exposed in what they planned on doing for vote fraud in Nov.

If this is a mess, why should we trust the electronic voting in the general elections.

This is a PERFECT example of why to not use them.

[euram]

maybe they should “learn to code”.

[Nuke From Orbit]

Let me see if I have this correct. The application took in the votes but can’t or was unable to report them. Number one rule of app design is to be able to see your results. So I call BS on the application side of this and I am now wondering how or if the results are now able to be manipulated.

If I remember correctly with the spin up to 2016 there were little to no issues with the process. This smells of political skullduggery and if there was a hint of data manipulation this will explode on the Dem side... This should be a huge wake up call on digital voting. Its not ready.

[mmichaels1970]

So they probably had the “trial version” of the app which only reports out the first 5 precincts. Had they paid the $9.99 for the FULL version of the app, they would have been able to report them all.

It’s possible if they watch a 30 second ad in the app, they might be able to report an extra precinct or two.

[1Old Pro]

No concerns here, I’m sure they will get the results straight soon, wink wink.

[jimjohn]

ROFL!!!

[Liz]

@iowademocrats now say: "....the app was recording accurately, but reporting out only partial data.
We have determined that this was due to a coding issue in the reporting system."

The Iowa Dem Party confirms this: says delay in caucus results is due to "quality checks."

Just by coincidence Pelosi used the same reason for waiting a month to deliver House impeachment articles to the Senate.

Dems united for "quality"........kinda gives confidence to the electorate (sob).

[OrangeHoof]

Dear Dummicrats:

Learn to code.

[wiseprince]

Should have got coal miners to code it.