Hey, @knircky.

This was what is called a caucus, so it's a bit different than a regular vote. I think Iowa and maybe one or two others are the very few who do it. Iowa stands out, of course, because they're first in the process and alone when it happens.

Until yesterday, there's been no issues because all they've produced from them is the winner of each caucus, and then totaled those up statewide. This time, they decided to add two other bits of information and report on them—first preference for nominee and second preference for nominee.

However, in doing so, they apparently didn't have a uniform way of collecting the information, and they wanted to have a paper trail. So, basically, they changed the formatting without testing it or extensive training on how to do it, and so this is what you get.

I'd have to look to see how well Iowa has predicted the outcomes for either major party, but in a lot of cases, it's meant only to give certain candidates some momentum going into primaries, rather than give the first place contender such a lead that they maintain it throughout the rest of the election process.

In other words, it can be much ado about nothing, especially now, when the results have been delayed.

Oh, and the voting deal is more like 232 years. :)