Volunteers resorted to passing around a spare iPad to log into the system. Melissa Watson, the state party’s chief financial officer, who was in charge of the boiler room, did not know how to operate a Google spreadsheet application used to input data, Democratic officials later acknowledged. Others, desperate to verify results, began telling some precinct leaders to email photographs of their worksheets — paper forms used to tally results — to a dedicated email address. But for hours, no one monitored the inbox. When it was finally opened Tuesday morning, there were unread emails waiting, with photos that had been sent sideways; volunteers had to crane their necks to decipher the handwritten forms. The volunteers apparently either did not know how to rotate images or were using an application without that functionality.
got the most votes , but Pete Buttigieg leads in delegates
. Amid reports of errors in tabulation, the Associated Press has not declared a winner
and the Sanders campaign is (seeking a “partial recanvass” of the results. That app The problematic IowaReporter
mobile app was created by a company called Shadow Inc. The app was developed on a tight schedule because of delays in caucus planning and “sometimes froze” when precinct leaders used it to report results, the Times wrote. “When precinct chairs reported issues [with the app], the state party referred them to a lone help-desk employee , who did not always respond to calls and emails, “the Times wrote. The app was broken enough that state party leaders decided “to abandon digital methods and rely on the old ways, gathering data over the phone and doing the math by hand. ” But when precinct leaders tried to phone in results instead of reporting them through the broken app, “calls to the state party hotline sometimes languished on hold for five hours,” the article also said. The attempt by 4chan users to “clog the lines” apparently contributed to that problem. Results collected over the phone “were riddled with errors.” The Times said it reviewed caucus data and found that “at least percent of precincts appeared to have improperly allocated their delegates, based on reported vote totals. ” There were mistakes “at every stage of the tabulation process: in recording votes, in calculating and awarding delegates, and in entering the data into the state party’s database.” The Times called the fiasco “a total system breakdown that casts doubt on how a critical contest on the American political calendar has been managed for years. ” Problems in Iowa’s caucus system became more apparent this time around because of new reporting requirements. For the first time , the state party publicly reported vote totals in the first and second
, as well as the state delegate equivalents reported in previous elections.