Sign the PetitionWe need a Voters Bill of Rights, Let's Stop Voter Suppression.
CaM5WEKWAAA_Zf_

Coin Toss Backwards, Per Rule 28 – Hillary lost Delegates, Didn’t Gain Delegates – Bernie Wins

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

According to news outlets, and caucus reporters 6 delegates were given to Clinton because she won a coin toss, however the ruling states that the coin determines not the winner, but the loser of the delegate. Since Clinton won the toss, that means she lost the delegates, and they must go to Bernie instead, meaning he actually is the winner 698-690.

Please share, tweet, and get this message out, so that we can be certain who won the Caucus, and who lost.

UPDATE:  here’s a source I found, though does appear different from the image on twitter, but in rule 26 it does have the same language.. http://www.isea.org/assets/document/IA/2016-1-7%20ISEA%20Caucus%20Kit%201.6.2016.pdf


  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Help stop voter suppression, sign the petition: Create a National Voters Bill of Rights


Donate to Our Fund to Raise Awareness of Our Petition to get a Voter Bill of Rights enacted.

Recurring Donation

One Time Donation

  • Michael

    Link to the final version, which says otherwise. I supported Bernie also and am proud of the tie outcome considering he got so much less press attention and debate schedules, etc. However, the process isn’t violated here.

    http://iowademocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/06_New-Caucus-Guide.pdf

  • Carrie M
  • Jeffrey Richey

    It says “a coin shall be tossed to determine who loses the delegate.” That’s not the same as “the winner of the coin toss loses the delegate.” Common sense dictates that the candidate who loses the delegate would be determined by that candidate LOSING the coin toss. As much as I’d love to see Bernie get those delegates, the language of the rules does not actually support the claim that the winner of the coin toss loses a delegate.

    • Ryan Pessa

      And I can’t imagine there was any question at all about this at the time of the coin toss. I’m sure everyone knew at that time what each result would mean. People coming back now and say “nuh uh, Hillary won so that means she lost!” are doing a disservice to Bernie’s campaign.

      • Kathi Geukes

        Which is not surprising considering the lengths they will go to, to get votes……It’s almost like they take their orders from Faux Noise……lie, cheat and steal……anything to win!!!!

        • No, but we are sensitive to the potential of fraud by the establishment.

          • Kathi Geukes

            Which YOU are perpetuating by the sneaky tactics you’re using…..you don’t seem to understand that cheating doesn’t get you anything but CAUGHT!!! This has nothing to do with fraud…..if you can’t see that then you have no right to cast a vote!!!

          • Amy

            Wow, where to begin…firstly with the right to vote, it isn’t determined by a person sharing your views, speaking of views…where did the person express anything other than a distrust of the establishment? I hope you are giving yourself time to mature before feeling that you are ready to join the political decision making process otherwise known as voting, yelling and ranting at people is definitely not commending you to be the one to decide who should or should not do anything.

        • infohack

          Those are your fellow Democrats you’re talking about. The same Democrats who’s support Hillary will need in the general election if she does win the nomination. Maybe you could not characterize Sanders’ supporters legitimate concerns with the way the caucus was run as lying, cheating, or stealing.

          No one accused Hillary of lying in 2008 when she changed her position on whether the disqualified Michigan and Florida primary results should be counted, after she had already e pledged to not campaign or participate in those states:

          THEREFORE, I (Hillary Clinton), Democratic Candidate for President, pledge
          I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential
          election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa,
          Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by
          rules and regulations of the DNC.

          10/10/07: “Well, you know, it’s clear, this election they’re having is not going to count for anything.”

          1/25/08 “I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee. I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan.”

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Democratic_primary,_2008

    • Dan Parker

      Not really. Rule 24, which obviously is intended to be read prior to 26, says, “In a case where two or more preference groups are tied for the same additional delegate, a coin shall be tossed to award the delegate to one of the preference groups.” This implies that the winner of the toss will be awarded the delegate. Since this is already established, then common sense really dictates that “a coin shall be tossed to determine who loses the delegate” implies the winner will lose it.

      However, none of this matters because Rule 26 did not apply here. 24 did, which is why Clinton got the delegates.

    • Vanessa Rae

      I think if you were right it would say the “coin shall be tossed to determine who wins the delegate”

      The common interpretation of the quote you gave is that the winner of the toss looses the delegate. It’s been this way for a very long time in the vast majority of places. Very few places use the backwards wording you seem to think is being used (similar to saying “I don’t care to do that” meaning “I don’t mind doing that” or “I am fine with doing that”. Most people think saying “l don’t care to do that” means “I would rather not do that” and to use it in the manner formerly presented is very confusing for everyone. Same thing with your twisted interpretation of the coin toss quote.

    • Renee Clancy

      That’s how I read it too.

    • Keith Coffman

      At the very least, this highlights both how arbitrary the results of coin tosses are. If you instead distribute all 6 evenly between the candidates (3 each) then
      a) Bernie would have won by 2 SDEs and
      b) it’s essentially a tie, either way

      What it certainly means is that each should get 22 delegates towards the convention (which is true regardless of the 6 SDEs here), and Clinton has no place claiming a victory in Iowa.

  • MEMacInnis

    You have misread the rules. Please reread Rule 24, which was the one that was applied to award the delegate to HRC.

  • Noreen Washington

    White people enjoy Bernie, but understand you are walking alone.

    • ButcherChop

      I’m Mexican and enjoy Bernie. Nice try.

    • BallHardGaming

      I’m black and it’s Bernie or Bust for me.

    • brian

      only stupid people and the rich would vote for anyone else

    • smartestmanalive

      Haha you silly woman. Nice try thinking you can speak for every non-white person in the US.

    • Paul Roper Sr.

      Bernie supporters are never alone so get real!!

    • Bernard Jones

      I’ve been black for 65 years, I’m supporting Sanders and I’m not walking alone.

    • JudgeX X

      I’m white but I support Bernie Sanders specifically BECAUSE his message is supportive of equality and helping people of all races and genders, not because he is white.

      Low-information voters choose non-Sanders options, Democrat or Republican. People of intellect who have looked at the candidates’ records, instead of just choosing a representative like one might choose a favorite football team, will inevitably choose Sanders. Every. Other. Candidate… is a choice for unchecked plutocracy and financial stagnation.

      Money loses value when one sector of the economy controls a surplus of it (its power and potency grows when it is exchange for goods and services, not when it is loaned and burdened with interest and debt). Sanders is the only candidate who has plans to solve this, and many other problems.

      • Nathan Wagenet

        It astonishes me that someone can be so turned in on their own viewpoint that they can’t possibly conceive of how intelligent people might disagree with them. Some of us think that socialism as a whole is not the best option for this country, no matter what good stances Sanders might have on the financial side of things. Some of us also disagree with him on enough other issues that we can’t in good conscience vote to put him in power.

        • Betty

          It astonishes me that anyone would think Bernie is advocating socialism. He believes the means of production belong in the private sector. Read about him as Mayor of Burlington, small and medium businesses thrived.
          What he is advocating is Democratic Socialism. Try reading about it.

        • sanduchi

          mashugana, our best thinking got us here and please don’t go the socialist route, open your eyes a little more. anyone with a half an ounce of mental health will vote Bernie, oh you said intelligent not mentally sound.

        • JudgeX X

          It astonishes me that I can specifically talk about low information voters, and then one can reply to me with proof that they are a low-information voter by posting that they don’t really understand Bernie Sanders by saying “socialism as a whole is not the best option for this country” – a sweeping, repeated statement that has absolutely no meaning in the face of the hundreds of “socialist” programs and actions that our country has undertaken that you directly and indirectly benefit from.

          That you can’t see that other ACTUALLY SOCIALIST countries are doing well with better rates of health, education, happiness, and employment.

          You’re free to disagree with him, and that doesn’t necessarily make you a low information voter… the part that makes you a low information voter is WHY you disagree with him, and it’s clear that you are just parroting something negative about socialism as a whole as a straw-man for Sanders – a tried and true legislator and person who has put his own ass on the line for others for decades.

      • kissyface

        how do you expect to win if you keep alienating everyone? you are calling everyone who doesn’t choose Sanders stupid then you wonder why he is getting a bad name

        • JudgeX X

          Because it’s truthful. If you actually care enough to look at the information, the history, the behavioral patterns of candidates, and compare them with the strengths and weaknesses of the USA as measured against current events, the plans and strategies outlined by Sanders are the only ones that match the situation without giant, unanswered and avoided questions.

          For Democrats – Clinton is clearly dishonest and is the sponsored candidate of Wall Street, who won’t release the content of her paid private speeches… if this doesn’t worry you, you are what? INTENTIONALLY low-information. Even if you support Clinton, you should ask to see how much of your future she sold. Look into her history… pay attention this time. Get it out of your head that you’re going to vote for her just because she’s a woman, because I’m pretty sure she’s worse for women than Bernie by a longshot (her position on minimum wage alone unduly cripples women workers and single Moms everywhere as opposed to Sander’s proposals).

          For Republicans – Yeah, you’re probably low-information. You watch Fox news? Definitely. There are two types of Republicans as far as I’m concerned… the ones with money who are Republicans to logically hoard their money like big fat selfish pigs who don’t care about their communities or countrymen, and then the ones without money who are slack-jawed dupes and low-information voters who are regularly fooled into supporting a party that will actively starve their communities into pill-abuse overrun heroin desolation dens.

          If you feel “alienated” by anything I said there, you really need to check yourself. You don’t get to just arbitrarily choose a candidate with HUGE OUTSTANDING LEGAL ISSUES, QUESTIONABLE DEALINGS IN CLOSED SPEECHES, and a history of quasi-legal money-grabs from office, who is supported by the military industrial complex, and not have your choice rationally questioned or criticized. That’s not the democratic process, and when you reach back to question a candidate you don’t support, you better come with some reasoning that stacks up to any of that stuff I just said, or you’re gonna get called low-information. Period.

    • Michael Gmirkin

      We walk in good company… Of all ages, races, educations, incomes. Together.

      We reject your premise as false on its face.

    • melissa marion

      I’d rather walk alone then to vote stupid. Good luck Sarah Palin supporter but us Bernie Sanders supporters walk together.

    • Chuck Thiel

      Drop the race bullshit. Bernie walked with MLK back in the 60’s.

      • kissyface

        thats the equivalent of i have a black friend

        • Robert Clarke

          WRONG. In 1964, republican Hillary Clinton actively campaigned and voted for Republican Senator Barry Gold water, for president of the United States.

          If elected, Goldwater promised to overturn the Civil Rights Act and re-segregate the nation.

          HOW PATHETIC.

          • kissyface

            she was 16 and she states that election as the reason she started thinking for herself and questioning the Republican values which led to her registering as a Dem when she turned 18

      • Noreen Washington

        Got his picture taken, and actually misrepresented the location.

  • Paul Roper Sr.

    Look on page 10 at the TOP Note: In a case where two or more preference groups are tied for the loss of a delegate, a coin shall be tossed to determine who loses the delegate.

    http://www.isea.org/assets/document/IA/2016-1-7%20ISEA%20Caucus%20Kit%201.6.2016.pdf

  • Pingback: Haiku, Real Elections Are Won With Votes Not Coin Tosses | Commandrine's Weblog()

  • Sxxxx Wxxxx

    Rule 28, what? Did you read that link? Where did you find your pic and your quote in that?

  • James Fenton III

    ” A coin shall be tossed to determine who loses the delegate” means Hillary was the one to lose the delegate.
    It’s simple English, but then I assume people can understand the English language.
    Apparently people can’t understand their own language.
    Bernie wins the delegate.

  • Product09

    Even if this is not true, there is NO way Clinton won all 6 tosses, the odds of that happening are too slim.

    • Alex Yarema

      Totally possible though plus, coin tosses aren’t even true 50/50. One side is slightly heavier than the other, making it more likely to fall on that face.

      • Fred L Anthony

        plus the fact that each district had their own coin tosses so it was 3 sets of 2 coin tosses not 6 coins tosses by the same coin

      • Gary Sharkey

        The odds of winning six consecutive coin tosses is 1 in 64. The fix is in.

  • cubbance

    Please stop. I’m a Bernie supporter, but even if you got the delegates reversed, THEY HAD NO EFFECT on the outcome! Please gets your facts straight before making us all look like idiots.

  • pattio666

    We’re missing the point completely… A COIN TOSS?!!!

    • Robert Clarke

      Ridiculous, agreed. But it’s in the Iowa Caucus Rule Book.

  • Curiousservant

    I think Hillary should try out for a lead role in a production of Rosencrantz and Guildestern Are Dead.

  • Gary Hoare

    The coin tosses determined a handful of precinct delegates, not state delegates. Come on, This stuff is easy to look up.

  • Bubba Wolfe

    i never find anyone that actualy supports Clinton at this point. Did anyone here vote for her? Is this a total scam by the powers that be?

  • TurboKitty

    I wish someone would publish the official caucus rules via PDF, online, in their entirety.

  • Cryndalae

    No one needs to get the word out and in the grand scheme of things this just doesn’t matter. This was a caucus and not an election. A caucus determines delegates to the county and state conventions… not the winner of an election.

    Usually there is a clear front runner or ‘winner’ at the caucuses. This time it is a virtual tie. And, folks, that really is ok. Nobody won or lost here.

    I’m a Bernie support, btw, and this sort of nonsense does either candidate any good and further splits the party. We really need to stop eating our own folks or hand the election to the republicans come Nov.

    • Keith Coffman

      Yes, and seeing as Iowa only sends 44 (elected) delegates to the convention, we can confidently state (regardless of these 6 SDEs) that each should get 22, and Hillary has no place claiming that she won.

      • Cryndalae

        Delegates aren’t obligated to split like that tho. There will be a county level caucus soon with new results. Either candidate could end up with a larger majority.

        Then comes the State caucus. Usually by then a clear national front runner has emerged and that candidate could show an even larger majority.

        By the time the delegates attend the National Convention all may vote for a single candidate.

  • Chris Reich

    Why even toss the coin? The fix is in.

  • Nick Bulka

    some people will grasp at any straw to try to get what they want. This is just silly.

  • Robert Clarke

    WE NEED TO FIX THIS. SPREAD THE NEWS.

    Apparently a new rule book was created on Jan 6, 2016.

    What was rule 28 appears now as rule 25.

    #Rule25 #Rule28 #BernieWins #ShowTheVote

    From rule 25:
    “Note: In a case where two or more preference groups are tied for the loss of a delegate, a coin shall be tossed to determine who loses the delegate.”

    That is, you win the coin toss, you LOSE the delegate.

    http://www.isea.org/assets/document/IA/2016-1-7%20ISEA%20Caucus%20Kit%201.6.2016.pdf

    .
    Hillary won all 6 coin tosses

    Therefore she must LOSE 6 delegates. (Bernie now leads by 2)

    Those 6 delegates are then awarded to Bernie. (Bernie now leads by 8)

    With those extra 6 delegates, Bernie overcomes what was Hillary’s 4 delegate lead.

    Bernie hence leads by 8 delegates (not just 2).

    Bernie WINS IOWA.

    Video of the six coin tosses..
    http://secure.marketwatch.com/story/coin-toss-broke-6-clinton-sanders-deadlocks-in-iowa-and-hillary-won-each-time-2016-02-02?link=MW_home_latest_news

  • S.F. Bay Studios

    Um…….

    We don’t know if they’re on #24 or #25. In #24, the coin toss would be to WIN the delegate. In #25 the toss is to see who loses.

    Given that in all the cases (that I’ve seen) the toss was for an “extra delegate”, that would be #24, and the toss would determine who wins it. Not who loses. So…yeah. Maybe read all of it.

    EITHER WAY: Neither of them won. It was a damn tie.

  • pgwarrick

    I would like this verified by more sources first.

  • Also very important…

    The coin toss awarded a PRECINCT, not a delegate. There are many precincts that make up a single delegate, so the coin tosses would not have swung the final tally to Bernie.

  • sandralynnsparks
  • Rattus Norvegicus

    And the link you provided doesn’t exist.