I don't think that really matters, though. Even the appearance of impropriety is an unacceptable risk to the integrity of the caucus. Doubly so in a time of conspiracy theories and misinformation run rampant.
The problem isn't that people are believing the (not yet debunked) conspiracy theory. The problem is that a clear, verifiable, conflict of interest exists, this is a top public concern with really high stakes, and the app in question should have been open source.
The "rigging" possibility is just a maybe on top of that.
Reminds of people saying YouGov (being "founded by a Tory") were biased in the lead up to the election, despite that being a literal kamikaze attack on their business model.
They ended up being almost literally bang on, ironically enough.
Pandemonium and uncertainty in this situation favors the losing candidates. Would the underdogs in this fight be getting the same level of attention today if the results were clear? I do not think it was rigged, but there are many levels of deniable sabotage that have the same result. Like just purposefully doing a garbage job.
I don't necessarily think they purposefully rigged the app, but do you not think the campaign may have gotten extra training or a direct line to Shadow for support questions on how to use the app that other campaigns wouldn't have gotten?
I'm seeing on Twitter that the app interface wasn't very intuitive and officials there were confused on how to use it.
>you not think the campaign may have gotten extra training or a direct line to Shadow for support questions on how to use the app that other campaigns wouldn't have gotten?
Well other than there is no evidence of that and would that have even helped? My understanding of how the Iowa caucuses work ... what you describe would not advantage anyone. As I understand it the campaigns themselves are not reporting "I got X votes" directly.
I've not been to Iowa but I've been to some caucuses.. what you describe would not advantage anyone in my experience.
