Political columnist Daniel Loud with the some pertinent details about last week’s Iowa caucus.
In the past few days, Bernie Sanders has criticized the conduct of the Iowa caucuses, arguing that the voting, like many other elections in the country, was decided by money. This monetary influence over the caucus did not come from big business, but instead from the six coin tosses that decided key votes in the state.
“Every American is aware that money holds enormous sway over elections in the U.S.” explained Margaret Thompson, a Sanders spokesperson, “and nowhere was it more blatant than in Iowa this past week.”
In last week’s Iowa caucuses for the Democratic party, Hillary Clinton barely edged out Sanders, and it has widely been reported that the coin tosses, if they had gone differently, could have given Sanders the win. To many involved with the campaign, this is just another symbol of the corrupting influence money has on elections.
“The only way to ensure free elections in this country is to remove money from the equation completely, or else money will always decide the elections,” argued Thompson. “This time around, money literally decided the election. Like people did what money told them to do. If that isn’t corrupt I don’t know what is.”
Tackling the corrupt system of campaign finance has been a staple of the Sanders campaign, which makes the Iowa incident hit particularly close to home. “Even six cents, if they aren’t in our favor, could corrupt the voters, and that’s exactly what happened in Iowa,” commented Thompson before the recent debate between Sanders and Clinton. “Hopefully, all the voters will just leave their wallets at home before the next primary.”
Among many conservatives, it is believed that the coin tosses represent divine intervention; that money and, by extension, the very system of American capitalism has rejected Bernie Sanders and his toxic brand of socialism — very similar to when a Bald Eagle attacked Donald Trump.