In a democratic system, the most important factor of any election is, of course, the voters. If the voters are misrepresented, or not represented at all, then the election is unfair and, thus, undemocratic. There have been numerous failings throughout the years and the questionable Iowa caucus results are merely the latest in a long list of questionable delegate, and voter counts. In the last fifteen years, there have been several dubious electoral campaigns, beginning with the Bush-Gore heads-up rundown.

The modern American public is informed and intelligent and we know when the wool is being pulled over our eyes, and that is why the Bush presidencies were under such scrutiny. Each of his campaigns were questionable in several ways, from the Florida controversy, to the disenfranchisement of black and Hispanic voters in his second campaign.

During George Bush Jr’s inaugural campaign, he was pitted against Al Gore for the presidency and the race was so tight that it quickly became clear that Florida would decide the next leader of the free world.

The governor of that state was George’s brother, Jeb Bush.

The voting process itself, was a strange one, including ballots that many voters couldn’t properly understand, resulting in a disproportionate amount of votes for third-party candidate, Patrick Buchanan. Buchanan’s vote count was likely bolstered because of the layout of the voting form. The controversial butterfly ballots displayed Gore’s name directly below Bush’s but in actuality, he was the third selectable option.

On top of the confusing ballots and unavoidable conflicts of interest, there was also an alarming amount of disenfranchised African-American voters. There are estimates of upwards of 25 000 black voters (a pittance compared to the disenfranchisements of his second election) unable to cast their ballot for their preferred candidate.

Between the numerous dubious factors of the Bush elections, it is difficult not to wonder, do we actually choose our presidents or are they chosen for us?

In the recent Iowa caucus we have seen similarly off-putting results between the democratic candidates.

The beneficiary, of course, wasn’t the man running as an independent.

Despite both democratic candidates raising questions about the procedure in Iowa, Iowa Democratic Party officials initially refused to review the results. Eventually they adjusted a few of the discrepancies but many remain. Arguably the most important caucus of the election was so close this year that Hillary Clinton was reported to win by less than 1%, effectively, drawing with Bernie Sanders.

In the vast majority of states, this would result in an immediate recount but because of a broken state voting system and arguably fraudulent delegate counts. A few delegates have been shuffled from the Clinton establishment to the Bernie camp but when both candidates raise questions of legitimacy, it may be time for an adjustment.

How did they break the tie?

A coin flip.

Six coin flips, each one favoring Clinton.

There were numerous conflicting reports regarding the coin flips. Many reports claimed that the coin flips had actually went to Sanders but were misreported, and others claimed a sweep of lucky tosses for Clinton. Either way, an inquest should have been properly conducted and, likely, an entire recount would have been justified. But the Iowa Democratic Party refuses to release the results, lending credibility to speculations of malpractice.

The credibility of the American electoral system is being assailed on all sides by independent media, candidates and informed citizens, and for good reason. There have been numerous incidences of corruption, scandal, and poor handling of ballots and voters. The entire system needs to be scrutinized intensely and the inherent problems need to be rectified. If I am elected, I promise to establish a nonpartisan committee to oversee presidential elections and ensure an accurate voting system. Voting for Art Drew is voting for democracy.