Kenia Bush 

Math 1030 
May 30, 2019 
 
Answer: Part I 
 
 
The ​Iowa Caucuses​ are quadrennial electoral events in which 
members of the Democratic and Republican parties in the U.S. 
state of ​Iowa​ meet to select delegates who will vote for their 
party's nominee in the United States presidential election at the 
party convention. The registered party members will congregate together on February 1st 
where they are given time to speak on their own agenda and why the registered party 
members should vote for them. 
 
The Iowa Democratic nomination will have registered party members divided into 
individual groups for their selected Candidate. A Candidate may be considered non-viable 
by having less than 15% of the total vote. Once the party members have settled on their 
Candidate, they may try to convince undecided party members, other Candidates members, 
and any member that select a non-viable Candidate into changing their vote. 
 
Though it had been disputed where the origin of the word “Caucus” came to first 
use, there is a passage from John Adams of Braintree, Massachusetts diary entry giving 
mention of the word back in 1763. The Iowa Caucuses are the first of many scheduled 
Causes throughout the United States. Since Iowa host the first Caucus, it sets the tone for 
stronger Candidate support.   
 
The Difference from the primary is that voter participation is much higher and it is 
more of a democratic decision making system. The primaries allow any eligible voter to cast 
a ballot, regardless of political affiliation. 
 
 
 
 
  
Part III answered   
 
Out of the voting methods employed and the calculations put into place to account 
for the votes, the winner of the election is Marco Rubio, due to winning the majority of these 
methods. Although Trump and Cruz pulled wins in the plurality method and the instant 
runoff voting, Rubio’s win by the Copeland Method proves he is preferred overall in every 
one to one comparison. This final decision rests on the fact Marco Rubio wins over the 
greater number of voters through the more powerful methods that compare every 
candidate. 
 
Adding up Rubio’s Borda Count numbers reveals a strong outcome after being more 
than 30 counts above the second place Borda Count Candidate, Ted Cruz. Since Rubio is 
also the Condorcet Candidate on top of his dominated voting methods, this offers further 
proof he has the most compelling grip on the voters, regardless of the outcome any other 
method put to use could result in. The reality of this election could not be more in favor for 
Rubio since he met two out of the four fairness criteria.   
 
When all four candidates remain in the preference schedule, Rubio commands the 
most potent lead by receiving the majority of votes within the voting methods accounting 
for everything and everyone. Instant runoff voting eliminates candidates until the very end, 
which can offer an unfair advantage to the candidate who would not have had a chance 
when compared to each individual running in the election. For the election to result in the 
most fair of outcomes, choosing Marco Rubio as the winner is the most justified response. 
After dominating within the results and being the Condorcet Candidate throughout the 
entire election, in the end, Marco Rubio’s votes reveal he is the most preferred candidate.