Velgerne stiller seg under kandidaten de foretrekker på brannstasjonen i Kellogg, Iowa, 3. februar. Foto: Brenna Norman/Reuters/Scanpix

New York Times har ettergått resultatene fra det Demokratiske primærvalget i Iowa og har funnet mange feil og mangler. Avisen sier ikke det er bevisst, men finner det alarmerende at så mye ikke stemmer.

Bernie Sanders’ tilhengere har lenge mistenkt at establishment i partiet forøker å holde ham utenfor, akkurat som i 2016.

The results released by the Iowa Democratic Party on Wednesday were riddled with inconsistencies and other flaws. According to a New York Times analysis, more than 100 precincts reported results that were internally inconsistent, that were missing data or that were not possible under the complex rules of the Iowa caucuses.

In some cases, vote tallies do not add up. In others, precincts are shown allotting the wrong number of delegates to certain candidates. And in at least a few cases, the Iowa Democratic Party’s reported results do not match those reported by the precincts.

Iowa har et innviklet system hvor en kandidat som ikke når opp kan overføre stemmene til en annen. Men det er likevel et system som det er mulig å etterprøve. NYTimes finner ikke at det er gjort etter reglene.

Forskjellen mellom Sanders og Pete Buttigieg er noen tideler,

De nye reglene sier at prosessen skjer i tre trinn:

First, caucusgoers express their preference for a candidate upon arrival, and these votes are recorded in a “first alignment.” Then, candidates with limited support at a precinct, usually less than 15 percent, are deemed not viable; their supporters get a chance to realign to support a viable candidate. The preference at this point is recorded as well, and it’s called the final alignment.

Viable candidates can’t lose support on realignment, but there were more than 10 cases where a viable candidate lost vote share in the final alignment, even though that is precluded by the caucus rules.

Dette skulle ikke kunne skje.

Når første runde er over skal det ikke være mulig å melde på nye velgere. Men det har skjedd i 4 prosent av tilfellene.

No new voters are permitted to join the caucus after the first alignment. But in at least 70 precincts, more than 4 percent of the total, there are more tabulated total votes on final alignment than on first alignment.

NYTimes varslet det Demokratiske partiet om feilene de oppdaget.

But the tabulated result could be close enough for the remaining ambiguity to preclude a projection of a winner.

Even if the appropriate candidate is deemed the winner, the irregularities in the results are likely to do little to restore public confidence in the Iowa caucuses.

Sanders’-leirens mistanke er vakt og den blir ikke mindre av disse opplysningene.

Many Errors Are Evident in Iowa Caucus Results Released Wednesday
Vote counts are riddled with inconsistencies, though there is no evidence that the mistakes were intentional.