The Wall Street Journal has an excellent explanation of how the Nevada caucuses are supposed to work. After seeing the fiasco in Iowa, I can’t say I’m confident that things will go smoothly in the Silver State. The good news is that the early/absentee vote came in at 75,000, which is higher than in 2016 or 2012. The potentially bad news is that it’s going to be complicated to incorporate the early vote into the tallies at the individual caucuses.

Early voting in Nevada began Feb. 15 and ended on Feb. 18. Early voters were given a list of candidates and asked to rank them in order of preference. They were asked to choose at least three candidates and no more than five. The votes are sent to the home-precinct of the early voter.

Try to picture how this is supposed to work. The caucus-goers show up, listen to some speeches advocating for each candidate and then split up into groups. Maybe Biden supporters gather under one basketball hoop and Sanders supporters gather under the other. Klobuchar folks might stand at half-court, while Buttigieg, Steyer, Warren and undecideds go to the corners. The total numbers in each group are tabulated and then this happens:

What makes this a possible clusterfuck is that all the early votes have to be accurately assigned to the precinct where those voters would have caucused if they hadn’t voted early. Those totals then are added to the groups that are standing around in clusters in the room. They then ascertain the total number of participants (those present plus those who voted early) and then calculate a 15 percent threshold number for candidate viability. If there are 100 participants, then a candidate needs 15 voters to get a delegate.

The people supporting viable candidates are locked in and can’t change their vote, but that doesn’t mean anyone is forcing them to stay where they are rather than ambling over to chat with a friend in a different group. The non-viable supporters then have 15 minutes to convince undecideds or supporters of other non-viable candidates to join their cause. If this successfully bring them up to 15 percent, then they’re viable.

Next, the early vote goes through the ranked choice process. Anyone early voter whose first choice did not reach viability will have their vote cast for their choice. If their second choice is also non-viable, then their vote goes to their third choice.

Only once this is all calculated can the results be determined.

But what happens when someone does this?

Chava Bat-Esha, 70, said she cast her ballot Monday at UNR [University of Nevada-Reno] and checked Sanders as every option.

“Bernie first. Bernie second, Bernie third. Bernie fourth. Bernie fifth,” she said. “I thought I might be for a few and then I started reading more about them and who’s supporting them and it’s big money and against the people.”

I have tried to determine whether or not Chava Bat-Esha’s ballot will be disqualified or not, but I am not sure. Certainly, if Sanders is not viable in her caucus, her vote will not count and will not be reassigned. But it could be that filling in Sanders on the second and third choice rather than simply leaving those options blank or marked as undecided will invalidate her vote even if Sanders is viable.

It’s seems pretty unlikely that this process will go smoothly, and even less likely that we’ll see the final results on election night.

There are too many moving parts and the idea that a perfect vote tally is even possible in these circumstances is based on an unfamiliarity with human nature.