The first main event of the 2016 election cycle is barely in the books, and already we’re getting whiffs of somethin’ fishy in the reporting of results.
It appears that Democrat results from some 90 precincts may be missing.
Via The Blaze:
The Bernie Sanders campaign said early Tuesday morning that it was informed by the Iowa Democratic Party that results from 90 precincts were missing.
A spokesperson for the Iowa Democratic Party did not immediately respond to TheBlaze’s request for comment.
With 98 percent of the precincts reporting, Clinton only led Sanders by 0.3 points, 49.8 percent to Sanders’ 49.6 percent.
With candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in a razor-thin race in Iowa, the results from these missing 90 precincts surely matter even more than if it there were a wide margin.
Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign has declared victory in no uncertain terms, as CNN reports:
“Hillary Clinton has won the Iowa Caucus,” the Clinton campaign said. “After thorough reporting — and analysis — of results, there is no uncertainty and Secretary Clinton has clearly won the most national and state delegates.”
Apparently, Hillary’s campaign seems to know more than the Iowa Democrat Party, who’s indicated separately it’s not ready to make the call:
“The results tonight are the closest in Iowa Democratic caucus history,” Iowa party chairman Andy McGuire said. “We will report that final precinct when we have confirmed those results with the chair.”
So, you have to ask, how does the Democrat Party “fail” to staff 90 precincts in a year when record turnout was expected? Without knowing which precincts in particular these were, you have to wonder if these were places Bernie was clearly favored.
With the Democrat National Committee, led by Debbie Wasserman Schulz, so clearly in the tank for Clinton, I can’t help but wonder how much of the party’s dis-“organization” was strategically directed to favor Clinton.
I suppose none of us should be surprised that, if she can’t win the hearts and minds of the electorate — as is becoming increasingly clear — Hillary Clinton is not above stealing the election. It’s HER TURN, after all.
It’s going to be a long election season, and we’ll all need to be watching for these types of irregularities like hawks if we want the will of the voter to mean anything in this nation.
[Note: This article was written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor]