The Sanders campaign fought hard for delegates from Iowa in 2016, and subsequently forced our state party to adopt the Presidential Preference Cards so we had to report a “popular vote” as well as a delegate count, making the best of the situation of campaigning in a caucus state. I just saw him say from New Hampshire that he had won the popular votes while Buttigieg is leading (so far) in the delegate count.
Such foresight on the part of a candidate is amazing to see played out. It makes the work that campaign did to get our state party to change how the caucus works an incredible feat of foresight unusual enough to warrant our attention and, in my case, praise. It may not play out once all results are in. It may not make a difference. But small victories should be noted and celebrated. Long games rarely work out so well.
Well played, sir. Well played.
The design of our Constitution allows for two competing impulses: the popular vote (the democratic impulse) and the Electoral College (the republic impulse). Caucuses have tended to favor the latter up to now in Iowa. It is interesting to see a candidate and their campaign find a way to bring the other impulse to play within the constraints of this system, and then be able to capitalize on it.
Note I am not concerned with the pie fights over caucus vs. primaries in this observation. I am also not concerned with what will be the reality in 2024. As a Precinct Co-Chair and Caucus Permanent Chair Monday night, I am only interested in the present moment in how the changes we had to make in our process play out in the campaign dynamics, such as that may be. I find it quite interesting as a reason for us to be forced to change how we do our work which a candidate was able to use down the road.
Again, well played. I have to admire the foresight and determination it took to make this gambit possible.