csmonitor--2020-01-29--GOP lacks witness-barring votes needed for fast acquittal

President Donald Trump 's impeachment trial is shifting to questions from senators , a pivotal juncture as Republicans lack the votes to block witnesses and face a potential setback in their hope of ending the trial with a quick acquittal .
After Mr. Trump 's defense team rested Tuesday with a plea to `` end now , '' Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell privately told senators he does n't yet have the votes to brush back Democratic demands for witnesses now that revelations from John Bolton , the former national security adviser , have roiled the trial .
Mr. Bolton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump told him he wanted to withhold military aid from Ukraine until it helped with investigations into Democratic rival Joe Biden .
That assertion , if true , would undercut a key defense argument and go to the heart of one of the two articles of impeachment against the president .
`` I think Bolton probably has something to offer us , '' said Sen. Lisa Murkowski , R-Alaska .
Mr. Trump disagreed in a tweet Wednesday in which he complained that Mr. Bolton , after he was fired , `` goes out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book .
All Classified National Security . ''
The president had tweeted shortly after midnight about his former adviser , asking why Mr. Bolton did n't complain `` about this ‘ nonsense ’ a long time ago , when he was very publicly terminated . ''
Mr. Bolton left the White House last September and says he offered his resignation .
The uncertainty about witnesses arises days before crucial votes on the issue .
In a Senate split 53-47 in favor of Republicans , at least four GOP senators must join all Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call witnesses , decide whom to call , or do nearly anything else in the trial .
Several Republicans apparently are ready to join Democrats in calling witnesses .
The two days set aside for questions , Wednesday and Thursday , also allow each side more time to win over any undecided senators pondering the witness issue .
In the meantime , all will have the opportunity to grill both the House Democrats prosecuting the case and the Republican president 's defense team .
Held to submitting written questions to be read by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expected to dig into the big themes of the trial – among them whether what Mr. Trump did or may have done rises to the level of `` high crimes and misdemeanors '' – as well as pointed and partisan attacks on each side 's case .
Mr. Trump faces charges from Democrats that he abused his power like no other president , jeopardizing U.S.-Ukraine relations by using the military aid as leverage while the vulnerable ally battled Russia .
Democrats say Mr. Trump then obstructed their probe in a way that threatens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and balances .
The president 's legal team tried to lock up its case Tuesday and convince GOP senators that the president was right to ask Ukraine for investigations of Mr. Biden and his son Hunter and was well within his power to block the aid .
They said he was not bound to abide by the congressional investigation .
Mr. Trump complained anew at a Tuesday night rally in Wildwood , New Jersey , charging that `` congressional Democrats are obsessed with demented hoaxes , crazy witch hunts , and deranged partisan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ addressed the Bolton controversy head-on in closing arguments by dismissing the former national security adviser 's manuscript as `` inadmissible . ''
Attorney Alan Dershowitz , the Harvard scholar , said earlier that even if Mr. Bolton 's story is true the actions do n't rise to an impeachable offense .
Senate Republicans spent considerable time in private discussing how to deal with Mr. Bolton 's manuscript without extending the proceedings or jeopardizing the president ’ s expected acquittal .
That effort lost steam as Democrats showed no interest , Minority Leader Chuck @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bargaining with them . ''
GOP senators were warned that if they agree to call Mr. Bolton or try to access his manuscript , the White House will block him , likely sparking a weekslong court battle over executive privilege and national security .
Nonetheless , Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine appeared to be backed by others in the move to seek more testimony .
Some Republicans including Sen. Pat Toomey want reciprocity – bringing in Mr. Bolton or another Democratic witness in exchange for one from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hear from Mr. Biden and his son , who was on the board of a Ukrainian gas company when his father was vice president .
Those swaps , though , seem likely to fail as most Republican senators do n't want to call Mr. Bolton and most Democrats would rather avoid dragging the Bidens further into the impeachment proceedings .
The Bidens were a focus of defense arguments though no evidence of wrongdoing has emerged .
`` I do n't know that the manuscript would make any difference in the outcome of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Missouri , a member of GOP leadership .
And some Republicans said they simply don ’ t trust Mr. Bolton ’ s word .
Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky called Mr. Bolton `` disgruntled '' and seeking to make money off his time at the White house .
But John Kelly , Mr. Trump 's former White House chief of staff , told an audience in Sarasota , Florida , that he believes Mr. Bolton .
White House officials privately acknowledge that they are essentially powerless to block the book 's publication but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe it violated the confidentiality agreement Mr. Bolton signed .
Mr. Trump and his lawyers have argued repeatedly that Democrats are using impeachment to try to undo the results of the last presidential election and drive Mr. Trump from office .
`` What they are asking you [ to ] do is to throw out a successful president on the eve of an election , '' said White House counsel Pat Cipollone .
Democrats , meanwhile , say Mr. Trump 's refusal to allow administration officials to testify only reinforces that the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House has had Mr. Bolton 's manuscript for about a month , according to a letter from Mr. Bolton 's attorney .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
AP writers Alan Fram , Mary Clare Jalonick , Andrew Taylor , Matthew Daly , Laurie Kellman , and Padmananda Rama contributed to this report .

Eric Tucker, Zeke Miller, and Lisa Mascaro

President Donald Trump's impeachment trial is shifting to questions from senators, a pivotal juncture as Republicans lack the votes to block witnesses and face a potential setback in their hope of ending the trial with a quick acquittal.
After Mr. Trump's defense team rested Tuesday with a plea to "end now," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell privately told senators he doesn't yet have the votes to brush back Democratic demands for witnesses now that revelations from John Bolton, the former national security adviser, have roiled the trial.
Mr. Bolton writes in a forthcoming book that Mr. Trump told him he wanted to withhold military aid from Ukraine until it helped with investigations into Democratic rival Joe Biden. That assertion, if true, would undercut a key defense argument and go to the heart of one of the two articles of impeachment against the president.
"I think Bolton probably has something to offer us," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska.
Mr. Trump disagreed in a tweet Wednesday in which he complained that Mr. Bolton, after he was fired, "goes out and IMMEDIATELY writes a nasty & untrue book. All Classified National Security."
The president had tweeted shortly after midnight about his former adviser, asking why Mr. Bolton didn't complain "about this ‘nonsense’ a long time ago, when he was very publicly terminated." Mr. Bolton left the White House last September and says he offered his resignation.
The uncertainty about witnesses arises days before crucial votes on the issue. In a Senate split 53-47 in favor of Republicans, at least four GOP senators must join all Democrats to reach the 51 votes required to call witnesses, decide whom to call, or do nearly anything else in the trial. Several Republicans apparently are ready to join Democrats in calling witnesses.
The two days set aside for questions, Wednesday and Thursday, also allow each side more time to win over any undecided senators pondering the witness issue. In the meantime, all will have the opportunity to grill both the House Democrats prosecuting the case and the Republican president's defense team.
Held to submitting written questions to be read by Chief Justice John Roberts, senators are expected to dig into the big themes of the trial – among them whether what Mr. Trump did or may have done rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors" – as well as pointed and partisan attacks on each side's case.
Mr. Trump faces charges from Democrats that he abused his power like no other president, jeopardizing U.S.-Ukraine relations by using the military aid as leverage while the vulnerable ally battled Russia. Democrats say Mr. Trump then obstructed their probe in a way that threatens the nation's three-branch system of checks and balances.
The president's legal team tried to lock up its case Tuesday and convince GOP senators that the president was right to ask Ukraine for investigations of Mr. Biden and his son Hunter and was well within his power to block the aid. They said he was not bound to abide by the congressional investigation.
Mr. Trump complained anew at a Tuesday night rally in Wildwood, New Jersey, charging that "congressional Democrats are obsessed with demented hoaxes, crazy witch hunts, and deranged partisan crusades."
Trump attorney Jay Sekulow addressed the Bolton controversy head-on in closing arguments by dismissing the former national security adviser's manuscript as "inadmissible." Attorney Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard scholar, said earlier that even if Mr. Bolton's story is true the actions don't rise to an impeachable offense.
Senate Republicans spent considerable time in private discussing how to deal with Mr. Bolton's manuscript without extending the proceedings or jeopardizing the president’s expected acquittal. That effort lost steam as Democrats showed no interest, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer saying, "We're not bargaining with them."
GOP senators were warned that if they agree to call Mr. Bolton or try to access his manuscript, the White House will block him, likely sparking a weekslong court battle over executive privilege and national security.
Nonetheless, Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine appeared to be backed by others in the move to seek more testimony.
Some Republicans including Sen. Pat Toomey want reciprocity – bringing in Mr. Bolton or another Democratic witness in exchange for one from the GOP side. Some Republicans want to hear from Mr. Biden and his son, who was on the board of a Ukrainian gas company when his father was vice president.
Those swaps, though, seem likely to fail as most Republican senators don't want to call Mr. Bolton and most Democrats would rather avoid dragging the Bidens further into the impeachment proceedings. The Bidens were a focus of defense arguments though no evidence of wrongdoing has emerged.
"I don't know that the manuscript would make any difference in the outcome of the trial," said Roy Blunt of Missouri, a member of GOP leadership. And some Republicans said they simply don’t trust Mr. Bolton’s word. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky called Mr. Bolton "disgruntled" and seeking to make money off his time at the White house.
But John Kelly, Mr. Trump's former White House chief of staff, told an audience in Sarasota, Florida, that he believes Mr. Bolton.
White House officials privately acknowledge that they are essentially powerless to block the book's publication but could sue after the fact if they believe it violated the confidentiality agreement Mr. Bolton signed.
Mr. Trump and his lawyers have argued repeatedly that Democrats are using impeachment to try to undo the results of the last presidential election and drive Mr. Trump from office.
"What they are asking you [to] do is to throw out a successful president on the eve of an election," said White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Democrats, meanwhile, say Mr. Trump's refusal to allow administration officials to testify only reinforces that the White House is hiding evidence. The White House has had Mr. Bolton's manuscript for about a month, according to a letter from Mr. Bolton's attorney.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writers Alan Fram, Mary Clare Jalonick, Andrew Taylor, Matthew Daly, Laurie Kellman, and Padmananda Rama contributed to this report.


csmonitor--2020-02-04--Iowa caucus debacle a wake-up call for American democracy

However , Iowa ’ s botched caucuses could also galvanize all stakeholders to urgently address election vulnerabilities before November .
“ What happened yesterday was a wake-up call , ” says Richard Hasen , author of “ Election Meltdown : Dirty Tricks , Distrust , and the Threat to American Democracy , ” which is due out today .
“ We have nine months to make things better.
” Mary McAdams , a local Democratic Party chair outside Des Moines , wants the Iowa election results as much as anyone , and she is hopping mad that they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ankeny , she says , ran 23 flawless precincts .
“ The only fly in the soup is this app , ” she says , referring to the state Democratic Party ’ s new tool for tallying caucus results .
“ We did our job on the ground !
” In the first presidential nominating contest since Russian interference sowed doubt and distrust about the 2016 election , the Iowa caucus debacle has triggered a frenzy of national speculation about the integrity of results that will set the tone for this campaign season @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious question whether Iowa will be trusted to carry out the first-in-the-nation caucuses ever again , but has amplified concerns that have been building ever since the 2000 election , when Bush v. Gore raised questions about the accuracy and fairness of American election results .
Deborah West , dressed head to toe in yellow and blue , was giggling with excitement .
Pete Buttigieg , her preferred candidate , had just won the caucus in the 13th precinct of Ankeny , Iowa – at least , according to the projector at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I ’ m just tickled that he did so well , ” Ms. West said last night .
But that giddiness turned to confusion and then frustration , as it became clear overnight that state party leaders weren ’ t nearly so sure about the results , due in part to technical difficulties with a new app for tallying results .
“ I woke up this morning thinking , ‘ Oh dear , Iowa .
What have you done ?
’ ” sighs Ms. West , who has been caucusing here for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contest since Russian interference sowed doubt and distrust about the 2016 election , the Iowa caucus debacle has triggered a frenzy of national speculation about the integrity of results that will set the tone for this campaign season .
It has not only called into serious question whether Iowa will be trusted to carry out the first-in-the-nation caucuses ever again , but has amplified concerns that have been building ever since the 2000 election , when Bush v. Gore raised questions about the accuracy and fairness of American election results .
At issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but how the nation will react to yet another high-profile challenge to the civic trust that is a pillar of any democratic society .
But Iowa ’ s botched caucuses can also be seen as an opportunity , galvanizing everyone from local officials to the federal government to urgently address election vulnerabilities .
“ This is a preview of the kind of things that could go wrong in November when the stakes will be higher and emotions will be hotter , ” says Richard Hasen , author of “ Election Meltdown : Dirty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to American Democracy , ” which is out today .
“ What happened yesterday was a wake-up call .
We have nine months to make things better.
” At 5 p.m. Tuesday , the Iowa Democratic party chair apologized and said officials “ were going to take the time we need to verify the results.
” With 62 % of the precinct results , Mr. Buttigieg had a narrow lead with 27 % of state delegate equivalents , with Sen. Bernie Sanders just behind with 25 % .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren placed third @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Joe Biden got 16 % , and Sen. Amy Klobuchar came in fifth .
To be sure , many aspects of the Iowa caucus were run flawlessly , and officials are cautioning against impatience and overreaction .
But a decentralized electoral system is only as strong as its weakest link .
Experts say there are reforms states can make to ensure greater accuracy and security .
At the same time , the media could do a better job combating misinformation when things go wrong , and educating voters about being patient rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
While it ’ s important to recognize signs of foreign meddling and other forms of fraud , it ’ s also crucial not to see boogeymen behind unintentional human error .
“ Not every snafu is a rigging of election results , and we need to call out people who make such comments , ” says Professor Hasen , who teaches law and political science at the University of California , Irvine .
That said , he adds , “ There are domestic and foreign forces who will try to make things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to make sure we remember we have a fragile system .
It needs attention and it ’ s under attack.
” “ We did our job on the ground !
” To Democratic leaders on the ground in Ankeny , a fast-growing suburb of Des Moines , last night ’ s caucus went better than ever in terms of organization .
Mary McAdams , chair of the Ankeny Area Democrats , says they ran 23 flawless precincts .
“ The only fly in the soup is this app , ” she says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s new tool for tallying caucus results .
“ We did our job on the ground !
” Despite having nearly 50 % more people turn out than in 2016 , the check-in process was so seamless that many of the Ankeny caucuses were able to start right at 7 p.m. , instead of taking up to an hour to register participants as usual .
That was thanks in part to having more volunteers and better training .
So the caucus chairs of Ankeny ’ s 13th precinct , Kelsie Goodman and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local high school , woke up surprised by this morning ’ s news trumpeting Iowa ’ s failure .
Ms. Albaugh said the app worked well and helped her do the math easily .
Yes , she had a difficult time loading a photo of the spreadsheet they work on , but it was faster than doing it all by hand – especially given the two-inch-high stack of new registrants .
“ We want to make sure all of our T ’ s are crossed and I ’ s are dotted , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want accurate results or fast results ?
” The Iowa Democratic Party revised its caucus rules and procedures this year as a result of complaints from people from the Bernie Sanders camp , who were angered by the lack of transparency in 2016 .
The app was supposed to help with the new way of tallying three different categories of results , but many people on the ground are frustrated that it was rolled out without adequate training and testing .
Many local chairs reported having trouble using the app , and when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they were put on hold – sometimes for hours .
“ I don ’ t understand why an untested app was introduced when we should have been more focused on building credibility and building faith in our process , ” says Angie Hagerty , a Sanders ambassador for Ankeny ’ s 13th precinct .
She is especially concerned about how this has marred the caucuses in the eyes of young people and other first-time participants .
Her college-aged daughter who caucused for Senator Sanders in Iowa City texted her asking , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world is laughing at us.
” “ I said , ‘ Honey , you stood up for what you believed in , and you went and caucused .
That ’ s what ’ s important.
’ ” Even before the delay and malfunction , many Democrats were up in arms about Iowa ’ s outsize influence on the election .
Though it has a growing minority population , Iowa ’ s 91 % white population is not reflective enough of the party ’ s diversity to warrant the weighty role it plays in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Supporters counter that the state provides small , intimate spaces for the candidates to connect with voters and hone their message through retail politics .
Iowans provide a perspective that moderates the extremes of the coasts , they say , and take seriously their civic responsibility .
“ I ’ ve been taking my kids to the caucuses since they were babies in their car seats , ” says Ms. Hagerty .
“ We ’ ve passed this tradition down to our kids.
” Now there are added questions of competence , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely to grow even louder before the next election cycle .
Iowa Republicans are all too conscious of what this could mean for their own caucus in 2024 .
“ Iowa ’ s unique role encourages a grassroots nominating process that empowers everyday Americans , not Washington insiders or powerful billionaires , ” wrote Sens .
Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst , together with Iowa Gov .
Kim Reynolds , all Republicans .
“ The face-to-face retail politics nature of Iowa ’ s caucus system also encourages dialogue between candidates and voters that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positions they take and the records they hold.
” “ The process is not suffering because of a short delay in knowing the final results , ” they added .
Ms. West worries that the caucus mess will add to negative stereotypes of Iowans as a bunch of farmers and unsophisticated people .
“ If it ’ s taken away , I will miss it , ” she says .
“ It ’ s gotten people like me a lot more involved and interested .
...
But maybe we can make it more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this another crack in pillars of U.S. democracy ?
After pouring millions of dollars into crisscrossing Iowa over the past year , in hopes of winning the first contest , which gives the front-runner crucial momentum and helps to winnow the field , candidates are facing the prospect that none of them may get that boost they were vying for .
They still came out last night before catching planes to New Hampshire , but without definitive data , their speeches ranged from vague to presumptive .
Mr. Buttigieg was criticized in particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ validation .
“ We don ’ t know all the results , ” he said .
“ But we know , by the time it ’ s all said and done , Iowa , you have shocked the nation , because by all indications , we are going on to New Hampshire victorious.
” Professor Hasen says the Iowa Democratic Party was not ready for prime time , and should have had much more extensive testing on their app and better training for those who were tabulating .
Elections are hard to run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incompetence combined with places that are rolling out new rules or machines raise concerns .
There are also internet rumors , thus far unfounded , asking if Russia was behind these technological glitches .
Sen. Mark Warner , a Virginia Democrat who is co-chair of the Senate Cybersecurity Caucus , said in a statement that there ’ s no indication of malicious cyberactivity .
“ But the continuing chaos in Iowa is illustrative of our overall failure to take sufficient steps to protect the integrity of our election systems , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paper trail as a backup to electronic election systems .
Though all of Iowa ’ s nearly 1,700 precincts reportedly have a paper trail of caucus night , elsewhere in the country many local election administrators have no such backup in case the electronic voting machines malfunction .
Democrats in Congress have been pushing for additional funding for paper ballots ahead of the November presidential election .
The vacuum of official results in Iowa has resulted in a swirl of misinformation , which is damaging to citizens ’ trust in democratic processes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jr. and Eric Trump are among those who have tweeted that the delay is due to the Iowa Democratic Party “ rigging ” the election .
“ As we get further into the 2020 primaries , what happened in Iowa is an early warning sign that Congress , local officials , and the social media platform companies have much more work to do to ensure the integrity of our elections , ” said Senator Warner .
“ It ’ s pitiful , ” agrees Ms. West .
“ I ’ m not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t point fingers , but my goodness .
Somebody really dropped the ball.
” The lack of timely results has also dampened her enthusiasm for the apparent success of her favorite , Mr. Buttigieg .
“ It takes all the bloom off the rose , ” says Ms. West .

The delay in caucus results – and doubts about their accuracy – sowed distrust in Iowa’s vaunted civic exercise. But the debacle may spur needed reforms in election security in the run-up to the presidential election this fall.
However, Iowa’s botched caucuses could also galvanize all stakeholders to urgently address election vulnerabilities before November. “What happened yesterday was a wake-up call,” says Richard Hasen, author of “Election Meltdown: Dirty Tricks, Distrust, and the Threat to American Democracy,” which is due out today. “We have nine months to make things better.”
Mary McAdams, a local Democratic Party chair outside Des Moines, wants the Iowa election results as much as anyone, and she is hopping mad that they’re not out yet. Her suburb of Ankeny, she says, ran 23 flawless precincts. “The only fly in the soup is this app,” she says, referring to the state Democratic Party’s new tool for tallying caucus results. “We did our job on the ground!” In the first presidential nominating contest since Russian interference sowed doubt and distrust about the 2016 election, the Iowa caucus debacle has triggered a frenzy of national speculation about the integrity of results that will set the tone for this campaign season. It has not only called into serious question whether Iowa will be trusted to carry out the first-in-the-nation caucuses ever again, but has amplified concerns that have been building ever since the 2000 election, when Bush v. Gore raised questions about the accuracy and fairness of American election results.
Deborah West, dressed head to toe in yellow and blue, was giggling with excitement.
Pete Buttigieg, her preferred candidate, had just won the caucus in the 13th precinct of Ankeny, Iowa – at least, according to the projector at the front of the Marriott conference room.
“I’m just tickled that he did so well,” Ms. West said last night.
Why We Wrote This The delay in caucus results – and doubts about their accuracy – sowed distrust in Iowa’s vaunted civic exercise. But the debacle may spur needed reforms in election security in the run-up to the presidential election this fall.
But that giddiness turned to confusion and then frustration, as it became clear overnight that state party leaders weren’t nearly so sure about the results, due in part to technical difficulties with a new app for tallying results.
“I woke up this morning thinking, ‘Oh dear, Iowa. What have you done?’” sighs Ms. West, who has been caucusing here for decades.
In the first presidential nominating contest since Russian interference sowed doubt and distrust about the 2016 election, the Iowa caucus debacle has triggered a frenzy of national speculation about the integrity of results that will set the tone for this campaign season. It has not only called into serious question whether Iowa will be trusted to carry out the first-in-the-nation caucuses ever again, but has amplified concerns that have been building ever since the 2000 election, when Bush v. Gore raised questions about the accuracy and fairness of American election results.
Story Hinckley/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption Deborah West and her husband, Doug, were elated last night when their candidate, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg, won their local precinct's caucus. But overnight, it became clear that state party leaders weren’t nearly so sure about the results. “I woke up this morning thinking, ‘Oh dear, Iowa. What have you done?’” sighs Ms. West, who has been caucusing here for decades.
At issue is not only which candidate won, but how the nation will react to yet another high-profile challenge to the civic trust that is a pillar of any democratic society. But Iowa’s botched caucuses can also be seen as an opportunity, galvanizing everyone from local officials to the federal government to urgently address election vulnerabilities.
“This is a preview of the kind of things that could go wrong in November when the stakes will be higher and emotions will be hotter,” says Richard Hasen, author of “Election Meltdown: Dirty Tricks, Distrust, and the Threat to American Democracy,” which is out today. “What happened yesterday was a wake-up call. We have nine months to make things better.”
At 5 p.m. Tuesday, the Iowa Democratic party chair apologized and said officials “were going to take the time we need to verify the results.” With 62% of the precinct results, Mr. Buttigieg had a narrow lead with 27% of state delegate equivalents, with Sen. Bernie Sanders just behind with 25%. Sen. Elizabeth Warren placed third place at 18%, former Vice President Joe Biden got 16%, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar came in fifth.
To be sure, many aspects of the Iowa caucus were run flawlessly, and officials are cautioning against impatience and overreaction. But a decentralized electoral system is only as strong as its weakest link.
Experts say there are reforms states can make to ensure greater accuracy and security. At the same time, the media could do a better job combating misinformation when things go wrong, and educating voters about being patient rather than conditioning them to expect instant results. While it’s important to recognize signs of foreign meddling and other forms of fraud, it’s also crucial not to see boogeymen behind unintentional human error.
“Not every snafu is a rigging of election results, and we need to call out people who make such comments,” says Professor Hasen, who teaches law and political science at the University of California, Irvine. That said, he adds, “There are domestic and foreign forces who will try to make things worse for American democracy, and we need to make sure we remember we have a fragile system. It needs attention and it’s under attack.”
“We did our job on the ground!”
To Democratic leaders on the ground in Ankeny, a fast-growing suburb of Des Moines, last night’s caucus went better than ever in terms of organization.
Mary McAdams, chair of the Ankeny Area Democrats, says they ran 23 flawless precincts. “The only fly in the soup is this app,” she says, referring to the state Democratic Party’s new tool for tallying caucus results. “We did our job on the ground!”
Despite having nearly 50% more people turn out than in 2016, the check-in process was so seamless that many of the Ankeny caucuses were able to start right at 7 p.m., instead of taking up to an hour to register participants as usual. That was thanks in part to having more volunteers and better training.
So the caucus chairs of Ankeny’s 13th precinct, Kelsie Goodman and Megan Albaugh, both employees at the local high school, woke up surprised by this morning’s news trumpeting Iowa’s failure.
Story Hinckley/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption In her first caucus since moving back to Iowa, Holly Fettinger (left) entered Ankeny's 13th precinct on Feb. 3, 2020, undecided about which candidate to back. After spending some time talking to different candidates' supporters, she settled on Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, whom she says she had a “good feeling" about all along.
Ms. Albaugh said the app worked well and helped her do the math easily. Yes, she had a difficult time loading a photo of the spreadsheet they work on, but it was faster than doing it all by hand – especially given the two-inch-high stack of new registrants.
“We want to make sure all of our T’s are crossed and I’s are dotted,” says Ms. Albaugh. “Do you want accurate results or fast results?”
The Iowa Democratic Party revised its caucus rules and procedures this year as a result of complaints from people from the Bernie Sanders camp, who were angered by the lack of transparency in 2016. The app was supposed to help with the new way of tallying three different categories of results, but many people on the ground are frustrated that it was rolled out without adequate training and testing. Many local chairs reported having trouble using the app, and when they tried to call their results in, they were put on hold – sometimes for hours.
“I don’t understand why an untested app was introduced when we should have been more focused on building credibility and building faith in our process,” says Angie Hagerty, a Sanders ambassador for Ankeny’s 13th precinct.
She is especially concerned about how this has marred the caucuses in the eyes of young people and other first-time participants. Her college-aged daughter who caucused for Senator Sanders in Iowa City texted her asking, “Does my vote even count? The world is laughing at us.”
“I said, ‘Honey, you stood up for what you believed in, and you went and caucused. That’s what’s important.’”
Even before the delay and malfunction, many Democrats were up in arms about Iowa’s outsize influence on the election. Though it has a growing minority population, Iowa’s 91% white population is not reflective enough of the party’s diversity to warrant the weighty role it plays in winnowing the presidential field, critics contend.
Supporters counter that the state provides small, intimate spaces for the candidates to connect with voters and hone their message through retail politics. Iowans provide a perspective that moderates the extremes of the coasts, they say, and take seriously their civic responsibility.
“I’ve been taking my kids to the caucuses since they were babies in their car seats,” says Ms. Hagerty. “We’ve passed this tradition down to our kids.”
Now there are added questions of competence, however, which means the debate is likely to grow even louder before the next election cycle. Iowa Republicans are all too conscious of what this could mean for their own caucus in 2024.
“Iowa’s unique role encourages a grassroots nominating process that empowers everyday Americans, not Washington insiders or powerful billionaires,” wrote Sens. Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst, together with Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, all Republicans. “The face-to-face retail politics nature of Iowa’s caucus system also encourages dialogue between candidates and voters that makes our presidential candidates accountable for the positions they take and the records they hold.”
Liz Martin/The Gazette/AP View caption Hide caption Frankline Tshombe, left, and Eliza Dushimemana discuss their options during a multilingual caucus at Hoover Elementary School in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on Feb. 3, 2020. The satellite site was the second of its kind in the state. After an introduction in English, instructions were translated into French, Kinyarwanda, Lingala, Kirundi, Nepali, Swahili, and Spanish.
“The process is not suffering because of a short delay in knowing the final results,” they added.
Ms. West worries that the caucus mess will add to negative stereotypes of Iowans as a bunch of farmers and unsophisticated people.
“If it’s taken away, I will miss it,” she says. “It’s gotten people like me a lot more involved and interested. ... But maybe we can make it more fair for the whole country.”
Is this another crack in pillars of U.S. democracy?
After pouring millions of dollars into crisscrossing Iowa over the past year, in hopes of winning the first contest, which gives the front-runner crucial momentum and helps to winnow the field, candidates are facing the prospect that none of them may get that boost they were vying for.
They still came out last night before catching planes to New Hampshire, but without definitive data, their speeches ranged from vague to presumptive. Mr. Buttigieg was criticized in particular for essentially claiming victory without any official validation.
“We don’t know all the results,” he said. “But we know, by the time it’s all said and done, Iowa, you have shocked the nation, because by all indications, we are going on to New Hampshire victorious.”
Professor Hasen says the Iowa Democratic Party was not ready for prime time, and should have had much more extensive testing on their app and better training for those who were tabulating. Elections are hard to run well, and pockets of election administrator incompetence combined with places that are rolling out new rules or machines raise concerns.
There are also internet rumors, thus far unfounded, asking if Russia was behind these technological glitches.
Sen. Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat who is co-chair of the Senate Cybersecurity Caucus, said in a statement that there’s no indication of malicious cyberactivity.
“But the continuing chaos in Iowa is illustrative of our overall failure to take sufficient steps to protect the integrity of our election systems,” he said, reiterating the need for a voter-verified paper trail as a backup to electronic election systems. Though all of Iowa’s nearly 1,700 precincts reportedly have a paper trail of caucus night, elsewhere in the country many local election administrators have no such backup in case the electronic voting machines malfunction. Democrats in Congress have been pushing for additional funding for paper ballots ahead of the November presidential election.
The vacuum of official results in Iowa has resulted in a swirl of misinformation, which is damaging to citizens’ trust in democratic processes. The president’s sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are among those who have tweeted that the delay is due to the Iowa Democratic Party “rigging” the election.
“As we get further into the 2020 primaries, what happened in Iowa is an early warning sign that Congress, local officials, and the social media platform companies have much more work to do to ensure the integrity of our elections,” said Senator Warner.
“It’s pitiful,” agrees Ms. West. “I’m not a tech-y person, so I can’t point fingers, but my goodness. Somebody really dropped the ball.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
The lack of timely results has also dampened her enthusiasm for the apparent success of her favorite, Mr. Buttigieg.
“It takes all the bloom off the rose,” says Ms. West.


csmonitor--2020-02-04--Looking past Roe: Can ‘pro-life Democrats’ still find home in party?

“ We would never say , ‘ We value the environment and clean air , but we welcome pro-coal people as a strength , ’ ” says Pamela Merritt , a longtime liberal activist .
“ So why would we ever say it about abortion ?
” Democrats against abortion say that a party that prides itself on diversity and inclusion should be able to reconcile support for women ’ s bodily autonomy with sincerely held religious beliefs about – or at least moral uncertainty over – the procedure .
Abortion rights advocates argue that such a party can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the full range of choices regarding their own bodies .
If the high court finds the law constitutional , Louisiana will be left with only one abortion provider .
The hearing , and the 2020 elections close behind , has brought new urgency to the tension over abortion within the Democratic Party .
Yet a case to be argued before the Supreme Court on March 4 shows their enduring power .
At the heart of June Medical Services LLC v. Gee is Act 620 , a measure written by a Democratic lawmaker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that state ’ s Democratic governor .
Act 620 requires doctors who provide abortions to gain legal permission to admit patients at a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic .
They appear to be among the most endangered political species in America .
Only four are left in Congress .
The very term – “ pro-life Democrat ” – sounds like an oxymoron , and their existence often triggers heated debate within their party .
At first glance , they appear to be among the most endangered political species in America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The very term – “ pro-life Democrat ” – sounds like an oxymoron .
And their existence often triggers heated debate within their party , their position shunted to the side in ways they say they did not experience even a decade ago .
Yet a case to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 4 shows their enduring power .
At the heart of June Medical Services LLC v. Gee is Act 620 , a measure written by a Democratic lawmaker from Louisiana and signed into law by that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 620 requires doctors who provide abortions to gain admitting privileges – or legal permission to admit patients – at a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic .
If the high court finds the law constitutional , Louisiana will be left with only one abortion provider .
It could also , critics say , set a standard that would all but remove the right to abortion access .
Which is what the law ’ s author , state Sen. Katrina Jackson , has advocated her whole career .
“ I plan on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in favor of this law , ” she said in a phone interview with the Monitor in 2019 .
“ I will be taking calls from people , responding to emails , talking to my colleagues , posting on Facebook , Twitter , Instagram , and trying to encourage everyone to take the pro-life stance .
It ’ s what I always do.
” Not long ago , Senator Jackson ’ s views would not have been too out of sync with her party ’ s .
When the nonprofit Democrats for Life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2000s , it listed more than 40 members of Congress in its coalition .
As recently as 2008 , Hillary Clinton was campaigning on making abortion “ safe , legal , and rare ” – which still acknowledged , and tried to appeal to , Democratic voters who had moral doubts about the procedure .
As the ideological distance between the two parties have grown , however , the space for internal dissent on hot-button issues like abortion has shrunk .
The GOP has unequivocally become the party against abortion .
The Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrestle with whether or not it can continue to make room for lawmakers like Ms. Jackson , who says she only splits with the platform on this one issue and has no desire to become a Republican .
Democrats against abortion say that a party that prides itself on diversity and inclusion should be able to reconcile support for women ’ s bodily autonomy with sincerely held religious beliefs about – or at least moral uncertainty over – the procedure .
Abortion rights advocates argue that such a party can not defend policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonwhite women – from access to the full range of choices regarding their own bodies , including the decision of when and whether or not to parent .
Now , with June Medical on the docket and the 2020 elections fast on its heels , this intraparty tension has taken on new urgency .
Progressive advocates say candidates must commit to fighting the wave of legal restrictions the procedure faces at the state and national levels , and recognize the socioeconomic and racial realities experienced by women seeking abortion .
They ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Democratic Party ’ s future , and that explaining them clearly to voters is a winning strategy .
Democrats for Life is pushing back hard .
They ’ re recruiting candidates who are willing to both stand against abortion and advocate comprehensive supports for women – including policies around contraception and paid family leave .
They argue that it ’ s about defending life “ from womb to tomb , ” a philosophy they say is consistent with Democratic positions on everything from the role of social safety net programs to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And they worry that by excluding abortion opponents from the party , national Democrats are alienating crucial swing voters in a pivotal election year .
“ We ’ re supposed to be the big-tent party , so it ’ s mystifying to me that we ’ re really not , ” says Kristen Day , executive director of Democrats for Life .
“ We ’ ve got to take the party back.
” Perhaps nowhere has the Democratic conflict over abortion played out more clearly than in Missouri , a state once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ middle.
” In 2018 , former state legislator Joan Barry led an effort to insert language into the state Democratic Party platform asserting that its members “ have sometimes different positions ” on the issue .
This diversity of views , the statement added , is “ a strength.
” The attempt triggered a furious debate over the party ’ s commitment to reproductive rights .
It ended with members overwhelmingly voting down Ms. Barry ’ s proposal at a public meeting that summer .
The dispute left a bitter aftertaste .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months later , Missouri ’ s two-term Democratic senator Claire McCaskill lost her seat to conservative Republican Josh Hawley .
State Democrats bickered over the reason : Some said it was partly because Senator McCaskill had publicly supported abortion rights .
Others shot back that it was because she hadn ’ t defended them enough .
The thought of Democrats fighting among themselves over reproductive rights makes Pamela Merritt sigh over her cinnamon roll .
The longtime liberal activist – who was a member of the platform reform committee during the 2018 dispute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allies at Democrats for Life hijacked a year ’ s worth of difficult deliberations in order to foist a conservative agenda onto the party .
Isn ’ t it enough , she asks , that Missouri is one of the most abortion-restrictive states in the nation ?
As of January , state law requires women to wait 72 hours between mandatory in-person counseling and the actual procedure , parental consent for minors seeking an abortion , and an array of logistical standards that providers must meet before they are licensed to perform abortions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ active in Missouri since 2018 .
“ We would never say , ‘ We value the environment and clean air , but we welcome pro-coal people as a strength , ’ ” Ms. Merritt says over breakfast at a cafe in St. Louis ’ Shaw neighborhood .
“ We would never say , ‘ We value our LGBTQ party members but we welcome people who support conversion therapy as a strength.
’ So why would we ever say it about abortion ?
” In her view , Democrats need to give voters the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choose when to parent is crucial for women , for families , and for society .
Do that , she says , and they will reward your trust .
Ms. Merritt points to recent Democratic victories in Virginia , where in November the party took control of all three branches of the state government for the first time in a quarter-century .
As part of the campaign , Planned Parenthood ’ s political arm in Virginia spent more than $ 1 million on candidates who supported abortion access .
Abortion rights activists called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ms. Merritt chafes at Missouri Democrats ’ reluctance to take a similar course .
“ Rather than learn how to talk about this and educate potential constituents … we ’ re just going to pretend like it ’ s not workable , ” she says .
At her home in the suburbs just outside St. Louis , Ms. Barry , dressed in a lavender sweater and dark slacks , shakes her head .
Like many moderate Democrats , she holds the view that focusing on abortion could antagonize voters in relatively conservative places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ahead of the 2018 midterms , during the controversial Senate confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court .
But it was kitchen-table issues like health care that energized voters in swing districts and won Democrats control of the U.S. House of Representatives that year – not abortion .
Why not try to sway voters with those issues , instead of pushing Democrats like her away ?
“ They think that everybody feels like them , and that ’ s not true , ” Ms. Barry says of abortion rights advocates .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ We belong in there.
” Where Missouri is a battleground for Democrats for Life , Louisiana is about as close as its members have to a stronghold .
The state ’ s brand of socially conscious religious conservatism is fertile ground for abortion opponents of all political stripes .
More than half of Louisiana residents , including nearly 40 % of Democrats , say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases , according to a 2016 survey .
( Nationally , nearly two-thirds of Americans say abortion should be legal in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % of Democrats in agreement . )
The governor , John Bel Edwards , is one of the organization ’ s most prominent members .
In this environment , Ms. Jackson , the Democratic state senator , has bloomed into a star .
Born and raised in Monroe , Louisiana – a city of about 48,000 – she grew up in a household that placed great store by duty to God and to community .
Prayer and fasting mark her life milestones , including the decision to run for the state legislature in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Democrats , and feels strongly about her party ’ s commitment to defending the marginalized .
“ They still fight for those who can ’ t fight for themselves , ” she says .
She draws a hard line at abortion .
To her , it ’ s unequivocal : Abortion is murder , and murder goes against God ’ s will .
Over two terms as a state representative – she joined the Senate in 2019 – Ms. Jackson put her name to a slew of laws that have made headlines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activists in Louisiana and nationwide .
Act 620 , which passed in 2014 , is among her crowning achievements .
“ One of my best moments in the legislature was when this bill came up for final passage … and almost 80-some members , both Democrat and Republican , stood at the mic with me to pass this bill , ” she says .
“ It showed a unity in the state of Louisiana that is not often seen.
” The experience also came with angry phone calls , nasty social media posts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hire police to ensure the safety of her staff .
But Ms. Jackson refuses to budge on the issue .
“ To the extent that the party is on the wrong side of an issue – and what I mean by the wrong side is that they veer away from the Christian faith – then I have to stand with God , ” she says .
“ That doesn ’ t mean that I don ’ t support the party , ” she adds .
“ [ But ] I will not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ms. Day at Democrats for Life , Ms. Jackson is a model of leadership .
“ That ’ s exactly what we need at this point – someone who ’ s solidly pro-life , ” she says .
The group is actively recruiting state and local candidates to run in 2020 , and raising funds to support their campaigns .
Existing members have also grown bolder .
Illinois Rep. Dan Lipinski , one of the few members of Congress endorsed by the organization , co-signed an amicus brief at the start of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ revisit ” Roe v. Wade , the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion , “ and , if appropriate , overrule it.
” The move prompted Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot to announce her bid to challenge Representative Lipinski in the 2020 primary , making her the third Democrat to do so .
Democrats for Life members have also gathered at the 2020 Democratic presidential primary debates in Atlanta , Los Angeles , Houston , and elsewhere , calling on candidates to publicly recognize their views .
Some have argued that if Democrats were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focus on coalition building and finding common spaces on difficult issues – like abortion .
Jane Kleeb , a board member of the progressive nonprofit Our Revolution , compares the challenge to early efforts to stop the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline .
Climate change activists had led the charge against the project , crying out against potential risks to the environment .
But the strength of the movement came from other stakeholders , who “ came to work with us on that because of eminent domain , sovereign rights , water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says Ms. Kleeb , who is also chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party .
“ If I ’ d said to farmers and ranchers and tribal nations : ‘ You can only come to the table and work with us if you ’ re against Keystone XL because of climate , ’ ” she says , the coalition wouldn ’ t have been possible .
The Trump administration has since approved a right-of-way permit that would allow the pipeline to be built on U.S. lands , taking the project a step closer to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Ms. Kleeb says , the Democratic Party needs to think of abortion the same way .
“ It ’ s [ about ] going to voters and saying , We may disagree on abortion and gun reform .
Here are the 20 other areas we agree on , ” she says .
“ You now have a choice .
Do you stick with the party that agrees with you on those two issues , but completely abandoned you on these other 20 ?
” Democratic party officials and progressive activists play down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ within the party .
In an email , a spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee affirmed the organization ’ s commitment to supporting women ’ s right to choose .
The Missouri Democratic Party said in a separate statement that while it recognizes that Democrats hold a range of beliefs , “ we can come together and support reproductive rights.
” Ms. Merritt in St. Louis dismisses Democrats for Life as a “ messaging machine ” that ’ s trying to drive a wedge between the Democratic Party and the abortion rights movement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reproductive oppression must be met , every single time they do it , with resistance , ” she says .
And despite all the steps they ’ re taking ahead of 2020 , Democrats who want the party to reverse itself on abortion have a steep climb ahead .
Louisiana is an anomaly ; nationwide , 82 % of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters say abortion should be legal in all or most cases , according to the Pew Research Center .
Among party moderates , the figure dips a bit to 75 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 91 % .
Ms. Barry knows this .
At a November meeting of the Oakville Democratic Organization in St. Louis County , where Ms. Barry serves as committeewoman , she gently asks the Monitor to avoid bringing up abortion .
Later , she admits that her work on the platform hurt some of her relationships with other party members .
“ It ’ s still very sad to think that my party feels that everyone should be included , except someone who is pro-life , ” she says .
“ I believe in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she adds .
“ But I also believe that I need to be known as a member of that party.
” Staff writer Sarah Matusek contributed to this report from Oakville , Missouri .

“We would never say, ‘We value the environment and clean air, but we welcome pro-coal people as a strength,’” says Pamela Merritt, a longtime liberal activist. “So why would we ever say it about abortion?”
Democrats against abortion say that a party that prides itself on diversity and inclusion should be able to reconcile support for women’s bodily autonomy with sincerely held religious beliefs about – or at least moral uncertainty over – the procedure. Abortion rights advocates argue that such a party cannot defend policies that prevent women from access to the full range of choices regarding their own bodies.
If the high court finds the law constitutional, Louisiana will be left with only one abortion provider. The hearing, and the 2020 elections close behind, has brought new urgency to the tension over abortion within the Democratic Party.
Are abortion rights now a litmus test for the Democratic Party? Democrats who oppose abortion say they feel like they must choose between their religious beliefs and their chosen political identity.
Yet a case to be argued before the Supreme Court on March 4 shows their enduring power. At the heart of June Medical Services LLC v. Gee is Act 620, a measure written by a Democratic lawmaker from Louisiana and signed into law by that state’s Democratic governor. Act 620 requires doctors who provide abortions to gain legal permission to admit patients at a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic.
They appear to be among the most endangered political species in America. Only four are left in Congress. The very term – “pro-life Democrat” – sounds like an oxymoron, and their existence often triggers heated debate within their party.
At first glance, they appear to be among the most endangered political species in America. Only four are left in Congress. The very term – “pro-life Democrat” – sounds like an oxymoron. And their existence often triggers heated debate within their party, their position shunted to the side in ways they say they did not experience even a decade ago.
Yet a case to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 4 shows their enduring power. At the heart of June Medical Services LLC v. Gee is Act 620, a measure written by a Democratic lawmaker from Louisiana and signed into law by that state’s Democratic governor. Act 620 requires doctors who provide abortions to gain admitting privileges – or legal permission to admit patients – at a hospital within 30 miles of their abortion clinic.
If the high court finds the law constitutional, Louisiana will be left with only one abortion provider. It could also, critics say, set a standard that would all but remove the right to abortion access.
Why We Wrote This Are abortion rights now a litmus test for the Democratic Party? Democrats who oppose abortion say they feel like they must choose between their religious beliefs and their chosen political identity.
Which is what the law’s author, state Sen. Katrina Jackson, has advocated her whole career.
“I plan on standing with our attorney general to argue in favor of this law,” she said in a phone interview with the Monitor in 2019. “I will be taking calls from people, responding to emails, talking to my colleagues, posting on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and trying to encourage everyone to take the pro-life stance. It’s what I always do.”
Not long ago, Senator Jackson’s views would not have been too out of sync with her party’s. When the nonprofit Democrats for Life of America was founded in the early 2000s, it listed more than 40 members of Congress in its coalition. As recently as 2008, Hillary Clinton was campaigning on making abortion “safe, legal, and rare” – which still acknowledged, and tried to appeal to, Democratic voters who had moral doubts about the procedure.
As the ideological distance between the two parties have grown, however, the space for internal dissent on hot-button issues like abortion has shrunk. The GOP has unequivocally become the party against abortion. The Democratic Party, meanwhile, has had to wrestle with whether or not it can continue to make room for lawmakers like Ms. Jackson, who says she only splits with the platform on this one issue and has no desire to become a Republican.
Democrats against abortion say that a party that prides itself on diversity and inclusion should be able to reconcile support for women’s bodily autonomy with sincerely held religious beliefs about – or at least moral uncertainty over – the procedure. Abortion rights advocates argue that such a party cannot defend policies that prevent women – often poor, nonwhite women – from access to the full range of choices regarding their own bodies, including the decision of when and whether or not to parent.
Now, with June Medical on the docket and the 2020 elections fast on its heels, this intraparty tension has taken on new urgency. Progressive advocates say candidates must commit to fighting the wave of legal restrictions the procedure faces at the state and national levels, and recognize the socioeconomic and racial realities experienced by women seeking abortion. They’re convinced that those ideas are a cornerstone of the Democratic Party’s future, and that explaining them clearly to voters is a winning strategy.
Democrats for Life is pushing back hard. They’re recruiting candidates who are willing to both stand against abortion and advocate comprehensive supports for women – including policies around contraception and paid family leave. They argue that it’s about defending life “from womb to tomb,” a philosophy they say is consistent with Democratic positions on everything from the role of social safety net programs to minimum wage increases to the death penalty.
And they worry that by excluding abortion opponents from the party, national Democrats are alienating crucial swing voters in a pivotal election year.
“We’re supposed to be the big-tent party, so it’s mystifying to me that we’re really not,” says Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life. “We’ve got to take the party back.”
Ann Hermes/Staff View caption Hide caption Joan Barry, a former Missouri state legislator shown here in her St. Louis home on December 10, 2019, led an effort to insert language into the state Democratic Party platform asserting that its members “have sometimes different positions” on abortion.
The Missouri dispute
Perhaps nowhere has the Democratic conflict over abortion played out more clearly than in Missouri, a state once called a “barometer of the American middle.”
In 2018, former state legislator Joan Barry led an effort to insert language into the state Democratic Party platform asserting that its members “have sometimes different positions” on the issue. This diversity of views, the statement added, is “a strength.” The attempt triggered a furious debate over the party’s commitment to reproductive rights. It ended with members overwhelmingly voting down Ms. Barry’s proposal at a public meeting that summer.
The dispute left a bitter aftertaste. When the midterm elections took place a few months later, Missouri’s two-term Democratic senator Claire McCaskill lost her seat to conservative Republican Josh Hawley. State Democrats bickered over the reason: Some said it was partly because Senator McCaskill had publicly supported abortion rights. Others shot back that it was because she hadn’t defended them enough.
The thought of Democrats fighting among themselves over reproductive rights makes Pamela Merritt sigh over her cinnamon roll. The longtime liberal activist – who was a member of the platform reform committee during the 2018 dispute – maintains that Ms. Barry and her allies at Democrats for Life hijacked a year’s worth of difficult deliberations in order to foist a conservative agenda onto the party.
Isn’t it enough, she asks, that Missouri is one of the most abortion-restrictive states in the nation? As of January, state law requires women to wait 72 hours between mandatory in-person counseling and the actual procedure, parental consent for minors seeking an abortion, and an array of logistical standards that providers must meet before they are licensed to perform abortions. Only one abortion clinic has been active in Missouri since 2018.
“We would never say, ‘We value the environment and clean air, but we welcome pro-coal people as a strength,’” Ms. Merritt says over breakfast at a cafe in St. Louis’ Shaw neighborhood. “We would never say, ‘We value our LGBTQ party members but we welcome people who support conversion therapy as a strength.’ So why would we ever say it about abortion?”
In her view, Democrats need to give voters the opportunity to understand why the right to choose when to parent is crucial for women, for families, and for society. Do that, she says, and they will reward your trust. Ms. Merritt points to recent Democratic victories in Virginia, where in November the party took control of all three branches of the state government for the first time in a quarter-century. As part of the campaign, Planned Parenthood’s political arm in Virginia spent more than $1 million on candidates who supported abortion access. Abortion rights activists called it a victory for the cause.
Ms. Merritt chafes at Missouri Democrats’ reluctance to take a similar course. “Rather than learn how to talk about this and educate potential constituents … we’re just going to pretend like it’s not workable,” she says.
At her home in the suburbs just outside St. Louis, Ms. Barry, dressed in a lavender sweater and dark slacks, shakes her head.
Like many moderate Democrats, she holds the view that focusing on abortion could antagonize voters in relatively conservative places like Missouri. Abortion did flare briefly ahead of the 2018 midterms, during the controversial Senate confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. But it was kitchen-table issues like health care that energized voters in swing districts and won Democrats control of the U.S. House of Representatives that year – not abortion.
Why not try to sway voters with those issues, instead of pushing Democrats like her away?
“They think that everybody feels like them, and that’s not true,” Ms. Barry says of abortion rights advocates. “We should not be ostracized. We belong in there.”
A home for the movement?
Where Missouri is a battleground for Democrats for Life, Louisiana is about as close as its members have to a stronghold. The state’s brand of socially conscious religious conservatism is fertile ground for abortion opponents of all political stripes. More than half of Louisiana residents, including nearly 40% of Democrats, say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, according to a 2016 survey. (Nationally, nearly two-thirds of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, with 76% of Democrats in agreement.)
The governor, John Bel Edwards, is one of the organization’s most prominent members.
In this environment, Ms. Jackson, the Democratic state senator, has bloomed into a star. Born and raised in Monroe, Louisiana – a city of about 48,000 – she grew up in a household that placed great store by duty to God and to community. Prayer and fasting mark her life milestones, including the decision to run for the state legislature in 2011. She hails from a family of Democrats, and feels strongly about her party’s commitment to defending the marginalized.
“They still fight for those who can’t fight for themselves,” she says.
She draws a hard line at abortion. To her, it’s unequivocal: Abortion is murder, and murder goes against God’s will. Over two terms as a state representative – she joined the Senate in 2019 – Ms. Jackson put her name to a slew of laws that have made headlines and drawn furious protests from abortion rights activists in Louisiana and nationwide.
Act 620, which passed in 2014, is among her crowning achievements.
“One of my best moments in the legislature was when this bill came up for final passage … and almost 80-some members, both Democrat and Republican, stood at the mic with me to pass this bill,” she says. “It showed a unity in the state of Louisiana that is not often seen.”
The experience also came with angry phone calls, nasty social media posts, even death threats that forced her to hire police to ensure the safety of her staff. But Ms. Jackson refuses to budge on the issue. “To the extent that the party is on the wrong side of an issue – and what I mean by the wrong side is that they veer away from the Christian faith – then I have to stand with God,” she says.
“That doesn’t mean that I don’t support the party,” she adds. “[But] I will not choose the party over God.”
Fighting for a place
To Ms. Day at Democrats for Life, Ms. Jackson is a model of leadership. “That’s exactly what we need at this point – someone who’s solidly pro-life,” she says. The group is actively recruiting state and local candidates to run in 2020, and raising funds to support their campaigns.
Existing members have also grown bolder. Illinois Rep. Dan Lipinski, one of the few members of Congress endorsed by the organization, co-signed an amicus brief at the start of the year that urged the Supreme Court to “revisit” Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion, “and, if appropriate, overrule it.” The move prompted Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot to announce her bid to challenge Representative Lipinski in the 2020 primary, making her the third Democrat to do so.
Democrats for Life members have also gathered at the 2020 Democratic presidential primary debates in Atlanta, Los Angeles, Houston, and elsewhere, calling on candidates to publicly recognize their views.
Some have argued that if Democrats were committed to progressive principles, they would focus on coalition building and finding common spaces on difficult issues – like abortion. Jane Kleeb, a board member of the progressive nonprofit Our Revolution, compares the challenge to early efforts to stop the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.
Climate change activists had led the charge against the project, crying out against potential risks to the environment. But the strength of the movement came from other stakeholders, who “came to work with us on that because of eminent domain, sovereign rights, water – all sorts of reasons,” says Ms. Kleeb, who is also chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party. “If I’d said to farmers and ranchers and tribal nations: ‘You can only come to the table and work with us if you’re against Keystone XL because of climate,’” she says, the coalition wouldn’t have been possible.
The Trump administration has since approved a right-of-way permit that would allow the pipeline to be built on U.S. lands, taking the project a step closer to reality despite activists’ efforts. Still, Ms. Kleeb says, the Democratic Party needs to think of abortion the same way.
“It’s [about] going to voters and saying, We may disagree on abortion and gun reform. Here are the 20 other areas we agree on,” she says. “You now have a choice. Do you stick with the party that agrees with you on those two issues, but completely abandoned you on these other 20?”
Jeff Roberson/AP View caption Hide caption Pamela Merritt, a reproductive rights advocate, speaks to supporters on May 30, 2019, in St. Louis. Since 2018 Missouri has had only one active abortion clinic. Ms. Merritt calls Democrats for Life a “messaging machine” that’s trying to drive a wedge between the Democratic Party and the abortion rights movement.
Democratic party officials and progressive activists play down the notion of a rift over abortion within the party. In an email, a spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee affirmed the organization’s commitment to supporting women’s right to choose. The Missouri Democratic Party said in a separate statement that while it recognizes that Democrats hold a range of beliefs, “we can come together and support reproductive rights.”
Ms. Merritt in St. Louis dismisses Democrats for Life as a “messaging machine” that’s trying to drive a wedge between the Democratic Party and the abortion rights movement.
“People who try to advance reproductive oppression must be met, every single time they do it, with resistance,” she says.
And despite all the steps they’re taking ahead of 2020, Democrats who want the party to reverse itself on abortion have a steep climb ahead. Louisiana is an anomaly; nationwide, 82% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, according to the Pew Research Center. Among party moderates, the figure dips a bit to 75%; among liberals, it surges to 91%.
Ms. Barry knows this. At a November meeting of the Oakville Democratic Organization in St. Louis County, where Ms. Barry serves as committeewoman, she gently asks the Monitor to avoid bringing up abortion. Later, she admits that her work on the platform hurt some of her relationships with other party members. “It’s still very sad to think that my party feels that everyone should be included, except someone who is pro-life,” she says.
“I believe in what the Democratic Party stands for,” she adds. “But I also believe that I need to be known as a member of that party.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Staff writer Sarah Matusek contributed to this report from Oakville, Missouri.
Explore the entire Looking Past Roe series.


csmonitor--2020-02-04--In party response to Trump, Democrats hope to elevate a rising star

The opposition party ’ s response to the president ’ s State of the Union address can be a kind of audition for the messenger .
Many past performances have inspired more mockery than praise , such as then-Louisiana Gov .
Bobby Jindal ’ s Mr. Rogers-like demeanor in 2009 or Florida Sen. Marco Rubio ’ s mid-speech water break in 2013 .
Tonight it ’ s Michigan Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer ’ s turn , as she gives the Democratic Party ’ s response to President Donald Trump ’ s State of the Union address .
Congressional Democrats point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expand health care , support working class families , and ensure safe drinking water as reasons for giving her the prime time slot .
The selection also has political overtones , since she ’ s a popular female governor from a critical swing state .
“ Gretchen Whitmer [ appeals to ] exactly the kind of voter the Democrats are hoping to retain and attract in November , ” says Bill Ballenger , a longtime Michigan political observer and commentator .
“ They were a huge factor in her victory : suburban female @ @ @ @ @ @ @ higher income , and from the suburbs around Detroit .
The Democrats scored big gains in the elections of 2018 and Whitmer exemplifies that .
She ’ s attractive , she ’ s articulate , and she ’ s pretty young at 48 .
She ’ s kind of a natural choice.
” After serving in both branches of the Michigan Legislature and as a county prosecutor , Ms. Whitmer won the Democratic nomination for governor in 2016 by easily defeating two more progressive challengers .
Then she cruised to victory in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been decidedly purple in gubernatorial races .
The last time one governor succeeded another from the same party was 1969 .
One of Ms. Whitmer ’ s major campaign promises was to , in her words , “ fix the damn roads.
” After taking office , she proposed increasing the state ’ s gasoline tax by 45 cents per gallon , a plan that fizzled in the Republican-controlled legislature .
The latest proposal , announced in this year ’ s State of the State address , was to bypass the legislature and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fund road repair .
Mr. Ballenger surmises that tonight she will take a pragmatic approach rather than directly attacking President Trump .
“ I think she ’ ll talk about what a Democratic governor in the hinterlands is doing today to address people ’ s bread-and-butter , food on the table problems , ” says Mr. Ballenger .
“ Good education , good health care , and good roads : this is what Democrats can accomplish.
” For Ms. Whitmer , tonight ’ s speech is a chance to step into the national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A strong performance could even propel her into the conversation about the vice presidential slot on the Democratic ticket .
She has denied any interest in going to Washington , but Mr. Ballenger believes she would have a difficult time resisting such a summons .
“ If she got the siren call from national leaders that you are needed , it would be hard for her to turn it down , ” Mr. Ballenger says .
“ She will either put herself in a great position with her speech or people will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can find somebody better than that .
’ ”

The opposition party’s response to the president’s State of the Union address can be a kind of audition for the messenger. Many past performances have inspired more mockery than praise, such as then-Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s Mr. Rogers-like demeanor in 2009 or Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s mid-speech water break in 2013.
Tonight it’s Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s turn, as she gives the Democratic Party’s response to President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address.
Congressional Democrats point to Governor Whitmer’s efforts to expand health care, support working class families, and ensure safe drinking water as reasons for giving her the prime time slot. The selection also has political overtones, since she’s a popular female governor from a critical swing state.
Why We Wrote This Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer won election handily with her now-famous slogan: "Fix the Damn Roads." In choosing her to give the response to the State of the Union, Democrats are highlighting a pragmatic female governor from a critical swing state.
“Gretchen Whitmer [appeals to] exactly the kind of voter the Democrats are hoping to retain and attract in November,” says Bill Ballenger, a longtime Michigan political observer and commentator. “They were a huge factor in her victory: suburban female voters, those with higher education, higher income, and from the suburbs around Detroit. The Democrats scored big gains in the elections of 2018 and Whitmer exemplifies that. She’s attractive, she’s articulate, and she’s pretty young at 48. She’s kind of a natural choice.”
After serving in both branches of the Michigan Legislature and as a county prosecutor, Ms. Whitmer won the Democratic nomination for governor in 2016 by easily defeating two more progressive challengers. Then she cruised to victory in the general election in a state that has been decidedly purple in gubernatorial races. The last time one governor succeeded another from the same party was 1969.
One of Ms. Whitmer’s major campaign promises was to, in her words, “fix the damn roads.” After taking office, she proposed increasing the state’s gasoline tax by 45 cents per gallon, a plan that fizzled in the Republican-controlled legislature. The latest proposal, announced in this year’s State of the State address, was to bypass the legislature and float $3.5 billion in bonds to fund road repair.
Mr. Ballenger surmises that tonight she will take a pragmatic approach rather than directly attacking President Trump.
“I think she’ll talk about what a Democratic governor in the hinterlands is doing today to address people’s bread-and-butter, food on the table problems,” says Mr. Ballenger. “Good education, good health care, and good roads: this is what Democrats can accomplish.”
For Ms. Whitmer, tonight’s speech is a chance to step into the national spotlight and make a good first impression. A strong performance could even propel her into the conversation about the vice presidential slot on the Democratic ticket. She has denied any interest in going to Washington, but Mr. Ballenger believes she would have a difficult time resisting such a summons.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“If she got the siren call from national leaders that you are needed, it would be hard for her to turn it down,” Mr. Ballenger says.
“She will either put herself in a great position with her speech or people will write her off and say ‘we can find somebody better than that.’”


csmonitor--2020-02-04--Why tech woes could leave lasting stain on Iowa caucuses

A new mobile app was supposed to help Democratic officials quickly gather information from some 1,700 caucus sites throughout Iowa .
Instead , it is being blamed for delays that left the results unknown the morning after the first-in-the nation nominating contest .
Glitches with a new mobile app Monday caused confusion , and some caucus organizers were forced to call in results for the state party to record manually , introducing delays and the possibility of human error .
Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price said the delays were not the result of a hack or intrusion .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results later Tuesday after manually verifying its data against paper backups .
Des Moines County Democratic Chair , Tom Courtney , said he heard that in precincts across his county , including his own , the mobile app was `` a mess . ''
When precinct leaders called Democratic Party headquarters , `` they were n't answering the phones , '' Mr. Courtney said .
The problems were an embarrassment for a state that has long sought to protect its prized status as the first contest in presidential primaries and the nation 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was certain to become fodder for critics who argued that the caucuses – party meetings that can be chaotic , crowded , and messy – are antiquated and exclusionary .
The Iowa Democratic Party pressed forward with the new reporting system amid warnings about the possibility of hacking and glitches .
Party officials said they took numerous security precautions and maintained that any errors would be easily correctable because of backups and a paper trail .
But organizers running precincts in Iowa did n't get to test the app beforehand .
Iowa party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sending the new mobile app to precinct chairs for downloading until just before the caucuses to narrow the window for any interference .
Some precinct chairs said they had trouble downloading or logging into the app and did n't use it .
The apps were barely working Monday night , according to a person involved in processing the data who requested anonymity to discuss the party 's internal system .
That forced party aides to record results from the precincts via phone and enter them manually into a database .
Officials were left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ensure accuracy .
Jonathan Green , who chaired a precinct in Lone Tree , said that when he tried to put the results into the reporting app , he kept getting a confusing error message : `` Unknown protocol .
The address specifies a protocol ( e.g.
, `` wxyz : ?
? ''
. )
the browser does not recognize , so the browser can not properly connect to the site . ''
He said he ultimately gave up and tried to call in the results to the party .
Like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an extended period of time .
In the end , it took hours to report results from his small site , he said .
The slowdown was exacerbated by the fact that the party was for the first time attempting to report three different sets of data – an initial headcount of each candidates ' support , a count after supporters had realigned , and the state delegate winners .
`` We found inconsistencies in the reporting of three sets of results , '' the party said in a statement .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the app did not go down and this is not a hack or an intrusion .
The underlying data and paper trail is sound and will simply take time to further report the results . ''
President Donald Trump 's campaign quickly seized on the issue to sow doubt about the validity of the results .
`` Quality control = rigged ? ''
Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale tweeted Monday evening , adding a emoji with furrowed brows .
Richard L. Hasen , an election expert and professor at University of California , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jumping to conclusions about the integrity of the election .
`` Most of the time when there is a problem with an election it turns out to be the result of administrative incompetence rather than someone cheating or some outside interference , '' Mr. Hasen said .
Deploying new technology this close to an election is always a risky proposition , said Lawrence Norden , an elections expert with The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law .
Mr. Norden said it is akin to a major retailer using new cash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friday .
`` To roll out a new technology without really testing it and making it available as early as possible and giving folks the opportunity to challenge it and work out all the bugs is a high-stakes decision which I think is proving to be problematic today , '' Mr. Norden said .
Mr. Norden said party officials were wise to slow down the reporting to ensure accurate results , given concerns of another round of election interference by Russia or other hostile governments seeking to undermine U.S. democracy .
`` People @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks that these results were late , but you can bet if the results changed dramatically they would , '' Mr. Norden said .
`` Those of us who work in the election space support accuracy over speed . ''
Ruth Thompson , who chaired a precinct at Lincoln High School in Des Moines , said she did not use the app to report results because organizers had problems trying to download and test it .
`` We just came to a consensus that nobody was happy with the app , '' she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to report her site 's results over the phone after hearing reports of long delays in answering the line at state headquarters , she said .
Instead , veteran caucusgoers at her site used calculators to compute the delegate allocation and then texted a photo of the results to Polk County Democratic Party officials , who drove it to state party headquarters .
Ms. Thompson said the delays in results were unfortunate because the process went `` remarkably smoothly '' in other ways .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .

Alexandra Jaffe and Christina A. Cassidy

A new mobile app was supposed to help Democratic officials quickly gather information from some 1,700 caucus sites throughout Iowa. Instead, it is being blamed for delays that left the results unknown the morning after the first-in-the nation nominating contest.
Glitches with a new mobile app Monday caused confusion, and some caucus organizers were forced to call in results for the state party to record manually, introducing delays and the possibility of human error. Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Troy Price said the delays were not the result of a hack or intrusion.
The party said it expects to release unofficial results later Tuesday after manually verifying its data against paper backups.
Des Moines County Democratic Chair, Tom Courtney, said he heard that in precincts across his county, including his own, the mobile app was "a mess." When precinct leaders called Democratic Party headquarters, "they weren't answering the phones," Mr. Courtney said.
The problems were an embarrassment for a state that has long sought to protect its prized status as the first contest in presidential primaries and the nation's first vetter of candidates. The delay was certain to become fodder for critics who argued that the caucuses – party meetings that can be chaotic, crowded, and messy – are antiquated and exclusionary.
The Iowa Democratic Party pressed forward with the new reporting system amid warnings about the possibility of hacking and glitches. Party officials said they took numerous security precautions and maintained that any errors would be easily correctable because of backups and a paper trail.
But organizers running precincts in Iowa didn't get to test the app beforehand. Iowa party officials had said they would not be sending the new mobile app to precinct chairs for downloading until just before the caucuses to narrow the window for any interference.
Some precinct chairs said they had trouble downloading or logging into the app and didn't use it.
The apps were barely working Monday night, according to a person involved in processing the data who requested anonymity to discuss the party's internal system. That forced party aides to record results from the precincts via phone and enter them manually into a database. Officials were left using photos of results to validate results and ensure accuracy.
Jonathan Green, who chaired a precinct in Lone Tree, said that when he tried to put the results into the reporting app, he kept getting a confusing error message: "Unknown protocol. The address specifies a protocol (e.g., "wxyz:??".) the browser does not recognize, so the browser cannot properly connect to the site."
He said he ultimately gave up and tried to call in the results to the party. Like others, he was put on hold for an extended period of time. In the end, it took hours to report results from his small site, he said.
The slowdown was exacerbated by the fact that the party was for the first time attempting to report three different sets of data – an initial headcount of each candidates' support, a count after supporters had realigned, and the state delegate winners.
"We found inconsistencies in the reporting of three sets of results," the party said in a statement. "This is simply a reporting issue, the app did not go down and this is not a hack or an intrusion. The underlying data and paper trail is sound and will simply take time to further report the results."
President Donald Trump's campaign quickly seized on the issue to sow doubt about the validity of the results.
"Quality control = rigged?" Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale tweeted Monday evening, adding a emoji with furrowed brows.
Richard L. Hasen, an election expert and professor at University of California, Irvine School of Law, cautioned against jumping to conclusions about the integrity of the election.
"Most of the time when there is a problem with an election it turns out to be the result of administrative incompetence rather than someone cheating or some outside interference," Mr. Hasen said.
Deploying new technology this close to an election is always a risky proposition, said Lawrence Norden, an elections expert with The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. Mr. Norden said it is akin to a major retailer using new cash registers for the first time on Black Friday.
"To roll out a new technology without really testing it and making it available as early as possible and giving folks the opportunity to challenge it and work out all the bugs is a high-stakes decision which I think is proving to be problematic today," Mr. Norden said.
Mr. Norden said party officials were wise to slow down the reporting to ensure accurate results, given concerns of another round of election interference by Russia or other hostile governments seeking to undermine U.S. democracy.
"People aren't going to remember in two weeks that these results were late, but you can bet if the results changed dramatically they would," Mr. Norden said. "Those of us who work in the election space support accuracy over speed."
Ruth Thompson, who chaired a precinct at Lincoln High School in Des Moines, said she did not use the app to report results because organizers had problems trying to download and test it.
"We just came to a consensus that nobody was happy with the app," she said. She also did not try to report her site's results over the phone after hearing reports of long delays in answering the line at state headquarters, she said.
Instead, veteran caucusgoers at her site used calculators to compute the delegate allocation and then texted a photo of the results to Polk County Democratic Party officials, who drove it to state party headquarters.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Ms. Thompson said the delays in results were unfortunate because the process went "remarkably smoothly" in other ways.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.