With early voting already under way, Democratic campaigns and volunteers warned of the potential for chaos in Saturday’s Nevada caucus, even though the state party abandoned use of the same faulty mobile application which marred the results of the chaotic Iowa caucus.
Weeks after the Iowa caucuses, the Associated Press still has yet to declare a winner in the Democratic nominating contest because of errors in the reported results. The caucuses went off the rails when an app developed to report results malfunctioned, and a backup phone hotline was similarly overwhelmed.
Nevada scrapped plans to use the same app in its caucus. However, the state Democratic Party has kept mum about its new process — even to the candidates in the race.
“Campaigns said they still have not gotten the party to offer even a basic explanation of how key parts of the process will work,” The Washington Post reported Sunday. “Volunteers are reporting problems with the technology that’s been deployed at the last minute to make the vote count smoother.”
Experts have also raised concerns about the “tool” the state party plans to use in place of the app.
“It feels like the [state party is] making it up as they go along,” one Democratic campaign aide told The Post. “That’s not how we need to be running an election.”
The Nevada Democratic Party denied that it had kept campaigns in the dark.
“We are in constant contact with the campaigns,” a party official told The Post. “We communicate at a very high level with the campaigns . . . and we have kept them informed every step of the way.”
But another Democratic campaign aide claimed that the state party has been less than forthcoming during those discussions, sparking growing concerns.
“If the party had this process well-defined and had confidence in it, I think that we’d know a lot more about it,” the aide said.
Multiple campaigns told the outlet that the party has not only rushed certain decisions but also neglected to notify campaigns before announcing updates to reporters.
“We have been learning more about this process from the media than the state party or the DNC,” a campaign aide told The Post.
Another aide said the Democratic National Committee was similarly not helpful.
“They are the ones who also can demand answers,” the aide said. “They are supposed to be the ones who are the adults in the room, who can trust and verify. And that hasn’t happened to our knowledge.”
DNC spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa pushed back on that claim, saying both the committee and the state party were in “regular communication with campaigns.”
“We are confident that they are doing everything they can to implement lessons learned in Iowa, and we have deployed staff to help across the board, including tech support and volunteer recruitment,” Hinojosa said.
Beyond issues with the process, experts are also worried that the state party is using Google Forms to check in voters and report results.
“Browser-based forms don’t work well,” Joe Verschueren, who runs a company that makes custom forms, told The Post. “Google Forms is very simple.”
The state party told The Post that it consulted with the Department of Homeland Security and Google to “ensure the process would remain secure.” However, the report noted that it was “not clear exactly how the party has been working to vet security issues.”
Early voting has already kicked off in Nevada, and some precincts have already reported issues, including problems with the Google Forms registration that caused some sites to switch to paper. The state party blamed high turnout for the problems.
“There was no training on the tool because they’re still working on it,” Seth Morrison, a site lead for several precincts in Nevada, told CNN. “We’ve had a lot of training in how the process works, but no training on the tool, how we get the voting data or how we get results to the party Saturday night. All they have said on the tool and calculation side is: ‘Trust us. We’ve got it well in hand. We can’t tell you what vendors we use, because then they’ll be hacked.’”
Morrison decried the process and called for the end of caucuses entirely during his appearance on CNN.
“We’re counting on this untested tool that we haven’t been trained on,” he said, slamming the “horrendous” caucus process. “Both parties need to really eliminate it.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.