Do not overlook the importance of National Delegates and State Delegates in the big picture.

We all know there are problems in Iowa…

And It’s looking more and more that Senator Sanders is going to take the state, but did you know the math surrounding State Delegates is very clever and somewhat nefarious math?

You make think… “But State Delegates? Don’t we just care about National Delegates?”

Well, yes and no.

National Delegates go to the National Convention and can be assigned a variety of roles by the campaigns in the various phases of the process…

But State Delegates do something similar… they vote on all kinds of things for the state, their own platform, and in some cases that includes the State Party Chair.

With Iowa being the first in the nation it determines a lot about how the media narrative can manipulate the public to sow trust or distrust in various candidates.

Now, who do you think set up all this mess in Iowa?

Everyone keeps screaming “The DNC, THE DNC!”

And while it is true the state party chair, vice-chair, and a few others represent their state at the DNC meetings, in the same way, National Delegates goto the Convention, the true power lays with the State Party Chair.

This all revolves around who controls the state because the Iowa state chair approves all of these elements you’ve all been screaming at and they tried to add online caucusing too. Had the DNC as a national body actually wanted to manipulate the vote then they would have let that go… what a mess.

So, what has happened? The DNC stepped in and suddenly the numbers in the total began to reflect the numbers that Berners were sharing from social media.

What they were doing was going around the notoriously corrupt state party and collecting the numbers directly from the precinct captains. So, the numbers we were getting were correct… but something was off…

Pete had too my State Delegates… actually everyone had too many but it was disproportionately giving Pete more than Senator Sanders while at the same time the true percentages and final allocations were being hidden by the larger media sites while available from the local press. Btw, their numbers did not and still do not match.

So, bring in Lulu, who I have seen work on a number of election integrity-related issues to successful conclusions… she pointed out something critical that is inflating everyone’s numbers.

When the final math was being done, they were not dividing against the number of still eligible voters. They were instead dividing against the original number in the room.

It’s like this… 100 people walk into caucus… 10 are found nonviable, they decide not to reorganize. So the new number of eligible voters should be 90? Right?

Well, not according to Iowa rules or the examples we are finding. They are still dividing against the original 100 but now with fewer people. This is going to artificially inflate everyone’s numbers.

Now, this alone is not really that big of a deal but it is when you use it with another rule that includes appointments based on rounding. Numbers above .5 are automatically rounded to a whole number.

But what if you have an extra delegate or two still?

Then you assign the delegates to whoever has the highest below .5.

This does not mean the higher number automatically get it, because we are trying to make a whole number.

So, if you had one candidate with 3.2 and one with 1.4, then 1.4 would get the extra delegate because they are the closest to a whole number.

When you add these together, you first get artificial inflation that is almost impossible to track because it’s based on a random variable (how many leave before the final round) that occurs infrequently and then you combine that with all numbers are basically being proportioned improperly, proportioning is a multistep process, and that means, in this case, the largest number gets the largest share.

This means that whoever is in the lead is going to have their lead inflated and is more likely to be closer to a whole number, either .5 or over or the highest under .5, and therefore pick up an extra delegate unfairly when it should go to a different candidate.

But because many of these variables are random it is almost impossible to track statistically but it favors Pete this time because he won lots of little caucuses, the volume is the important factor, and he picked up one extra delegate occasionally but more often than not while keeping his overall vote totals lower than Senator Sanders. This is probably why Berners had so much power in Iowa during the convention process because our results were closer to Pete’s geographically in 2016.

And that is why Pete has more State Delegates than he should and will give the establishment a huge advantage going into reorganization, giving them control of Iowa until the next primary and that process.

Let’s be clear, the entire State Delegate process is directly proportional to the popular vote. If eligible voters are the dividing variable then it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the candidate with the most popular vote to have fewer State delegates unless something is being rounded incorrectly.

This is what the media had been setting up when they were explaining that “popular vote does not mean the most delegates” for the last few weeks because this was undoubtedly an actual strategy.

These rules are super broken and must go against something in the DNC bylaws in some way… not using an eligible count for the final count? This is worthy of a Credentials challenge of the whole Iowa Delegation at the DNC.

Not only does this entire thing need an overhaul, if not total removal.. but we need complete transparency which would include a full audit and using the proper numbers.

These Inner-Party Elections hold control of our future elections. If you want this madness to stop then get involved at this level while there is time!

State Delegates matter just as much as National Delgates.

If enough of the movement shows up VBNMW will be a thing of the past because you will only get the candidates and policy that you want, because you will be in the driver’s seat.

Don’t be afraid to lead.

Edit: since this explanation has gone live the DNC has demanded an entire recanvass.

If the Eligible Vote was used in Senator Sanders’ totals but the Original Total was used for Pete that would shrink the Senator’s numbers and grow Pete’s artificially.

We have no idea without a full recanvass and full transparency which would include all of the Caucus ballots made available online.

These results are tabulated in violation of the Party Charter and Senator Sanders should have an entire extra NATIONAL delegate and the most State Delegates going into the Convention Process which would give Berners control of the party.

If a full recanvass is not done then there will be a Credentials Challenge at the DNC for the entire Iowa Delegation, where there is precedent that they will still be sat at the convention but not allowed to vote.

This will cause a power shift in the State Party and usually trigger a change in the Establishment there.

Sometimes that is the best we can do.

Read and follow Don Ford on Medium