home

Texas And More on Delegate Counts

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 10:57:49 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Big Tent Democrat

Hillary Wins Texas says CNN.

Clinton is stretching her lead, up 70,000 with 75% in.

Texas is close. And Hillary has the Latino vote to thanks for that. In El Paso, Hillary is winning by 70-30 with 12% of the returns in. In Webb County, she is winning 77-21, with the votes just started.

We'll keep watching this race until it is called.

On an another note, the delegate race looks promising for Hillary tonight. After Gloria Borger said that Vermont (which divided 9-6 for Obama) would provide the largest delegate margin, CNN currently projects Ohio to provide Hillary a 46-24 delegate advantage with many to be decided. In Rhode Island splits 5-1 currently for Hillary with 15 to be decided. Texas remains to be seen. So far tonight, Hillary has gained 23 delegates with many still to be decided. [More...]

One last thing, for the first time in this campaign, we seem to have had a real Bradley Effect in its classic sense. Obama substantially underperformed the exit polling in all the states so far, including Vermont. The exit poll called Ohio and Rhode Island close. Obama was trounced by double digits in both states. Texas remains to be seen. Obama was trounced by Clinton with whites, women, the working class and Latinos. the questions remain about Obama's ability to win big contested states if he can not perform in these demographics. The Obama fans will play ostrich about these issues, but the issues are there.

< Obama's Speech to Supporters | Hillary Wins Texas >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Texas And More on Delegate Counts | 156 comments (156 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I think it goes on (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by andgarden on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:02:02 PM EST
    Looks like my vote will matter--marginally.

    Why? (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:02:31 PM EST
    You a super delegate?

    Parent
    Pennsylvania voter (5.00 / 5) (#5)
    by andgarden on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:03:15 PM EST


    Parent
    Hello (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by chrisvee on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:07:17 PM EST
    I'm also in PA.  I finally feel relevant and desired. :-)

    Parent
    I'm finding both of you (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:10:32 PM EST
    quite sexy tonight.

    Parent
    Now he tells us. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:03:45 PM EST


    Parent
    John Edwards (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by DandyTIger on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:06:38 PM EST
    if he's ever going to do it, should put his hat in the ring for Hillary. that would add his 20 some delegates. And that would add to the new momentum. Wouldn't that be nice. John, are you listening. Come on, being VP wouldn't be so bad.

    Edwards is waiting to see what (none / 0) (#38)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:19:16 PM EST
    Richardson does (besides urge HRC to bail it, that is).

    Parent
    I have no idea (none / 0) (#65)
    by vigkat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:25:54 PM EST
    What he thinks he's doing, but I'm on the verge of being disappointed in him.  

    Parent
    if these margins hold (5.00 / 5) (#11)
    by Turkana on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:07:12 PM EST
    she's going to get a big delegate bump, and the momentum of the last few days is going be turbocharged. obama's pledged delegate win is no longer a sure thing, if they get revotes in fl and mi.

    She's walked a longer gauntlet than anyone (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by Ellie on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:24:55 PM EST
    ... and survived.

    The entire media has been stacked against her for years and she beat them. The swiftboaters waiting for her are going to look like leaky dinghies being chewed up in the wake of a luxury schooner.

    And how pissy do the boneheads look now, who are still muttering at her to bow out? (Yet McCain's "a fighter" for staying in.)

    Parent

    A fighter (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by blogtopus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:30:37 PM EST
    I think that that is something nobody can deny about Hillary. How can she take it and STILL want to put herself into a position to take more of it for 4 -8 years?

    Parent
    Delegate Count (none / 0) (#47)
    by solon on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:21:07 PM EST
    Senator Clinton may do better than expected in Ohio and Rhode Island and Senator Obama may not have done well in Vermont, but it is very probable that he will win the delegates from the primary and caucus in Texas even if he loses the popular vote.

    According to the Official Texas Count for the primary, Senator Obama has a two delegate lead from the primary, which is a result from how the delegates were assigned based on previous turnout.

    It is unclear when the caucus results will be announced. Maybe tomorrow, maybe at the end of the week.

    Parent

    Hillary wins the delegate night almost for sure (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:27:10 PM EST


    Parent
    I stnad corrected. (none / 0) (#58)
    by solon on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:24:32 PM EST
    The delegate count from the primary is now 63 - 63.

    Parent
    always against NAFTA... (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by DandyTIger on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:07:38 PM EST
    is what Bob Woodward just said about Hillary and is what he said in his book. That was to stomp down on an Obama commentator when he started in on NAFTA. Sweet.

    oops (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by DandyTIger on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:09:15 PM EST
    I meant Burnstein... as in Carl. Why do I get those two mixed up.

    Parent
    Think of Robert Redford (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:18:18 PM EST
    and Dustin Hoffman in the movie. Trust me, when you visualize Redford, and you see Bernstein, you'll never confuse them again.

    Parent
    Russert (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by magster on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:10:41 PM EST
    just read Obama's accidentally disclosed memo from three weeks ago, noting how accurate its projections have been.

    Interesting.

    CNN... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by mindfulmission on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:11:33 PM EST
    "...if current margin in Harris County continues to hold, that will be more than enough to make up the ground that Obama is behind."

    And that doesn't include the rest of the pro-Obama areas that still are not in.

    I think there is a misunderstandng (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:15:34 PM EST
    If Harris County is 15% of the vote, a big if, then it is 400,000 votes. It is not all A-A. Latinos are thre to.

    If Obama wins the remaining 200,000 60-40, that is a 40,000 vote margin. Clinton has that at least in El Paso yet to be counted.

    I think this is not looking good for Obama.

    Parent

    Its not just... (none / 0) (#36)
    by mindfulmission on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:18:37 PM EST
    ... Harris County.

    Fort Worth and surrounding areas, Austin and surrounding areas, and one other (I dont remember) are also at very low reporting rates now, and all are about 60-40 Obama.

    Parent

    Ft Worth is a Clinton area (none / 0) (#45)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:20:13 PM EST


    Parent
    My husband says it is BO territory, lots of (none / 0) (#64)
    by Angel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:25:45 PM EST
    spillover from Dallas.  Those who don't vote for BO go republican.

    Parent
    Not at the moment. . . (none / 0) (#71)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:27:30 PM EST
    With 147,000 votes counted, Obama leads by ten points.

    Parent
    I'm not talking out the calculator ... (none / 0) (#43)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:20:01 PM EST
    but some quick math in my head, looked like that.

    It looks pretty hard for Obama to pull ahead.

    Parent

    his big leads (none / 0) (#60)
    by bigbay on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:25:02 PM EST
    are from early voting. He's getting hammered on votes cast today, which means there won't big margins out there for him anywhere. It looks like a 52-48 win when it's over.

    Parent
    If the CNN tv numbers correct and 65% has been (none / 0) (#48)
    by Angel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:21:16 PM EST
    counted, then there are still over 1 million votes to count.  I don't have a clue where those votes are from.  BTD, do you know?

    Parent
    the latino population far outnumbers the (none / 0) (#82)
    by hellothere on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:30:54 PM EST
    african american population in harris county by the way. harris county has gone republican in the last presidential elections. houston itself has gone democratic but the burbs are republican.

    Parent
    But (none / 0) (#32)
    by Steve M on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:17:59 PM EST
    it also doesn't include the pro-Clinton areas that are not in.

    It's clear Obama still has a shot at Texas but I'd rather be Clinton right now, with the 50,000 vote lead.

    Parent

    I've watched countless primaries ... (none / 0) (#50)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:22:23 PM EST
    and elections and I can count one hand the number of times I've seen a lead flip twice.

    Parent
    Knock wood!! (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:27:15 PM EST
    Kaynahorah!

    Parent
    CNN's.... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Oje on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:19:49 PM EST
    John King totally misrepresented the vote and primary tally process. In Harris County, it was not 14% of the votes, but 14% of the precincts finalized. The early votes have been tallied, though the precincts are still outstanding. King totally misrepresented the potential for Obama to gain votes there, especially if 50% of the county did vote early (half the vote has been counted, not 14%).

    The funny thing is, when he went back to Harris County after that poorly worded segment, it was suddenly at ~37% of precincts reporting, but Obama still down by ~60K in the totals--for no difference.

    Parent

    And one last thing.... (none / 0) (#49)
    by Oje on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:22:01 PM EST
    Obama lost the vote TODAY, people who made up their minds in the past 3 days broke for Clinton. His margins in each of those counties will decline as today's vote is tallied.

    Parent
    Yeah...John King (none / 0) (#62)
    by lilburro on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:25:14 PM EST
    did not sound so confident when explaining what was going on in Texas.  And of course since no one will ever call him out on it, why should he care.

    Thanks.

    Parent

    Woman on Charlie Rose says black radio (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by jawbone on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:11:56 PM EST
    callers are calling for Hillary to get out of the race, just time to let Obama have the nomination.

    Saying young blacks very angry--say they will stay home if she's the nominee.

    Oh, my.

    Woman mentioned the attack on Tavis Smiley for criticizing Obama for not attending the BSOTU in NOLA.

    Halperin talking about the boos if Hillary's name is mentioned at Obama rallies and even at more staid events.  He was telling Sherrod Brown's wife she was deluded to think there wasn't lots of anger at Hillary and Bill about this primary. (And the MCM (mainstream corporate media) had nothing to do with stirring up racist feelings, right?)

    Women are saying the same thing aboutObama (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:16:04 PM EST


    Parent
    "Some" women. (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:17:53 PM EST


    Parent
    My point is (none / 0) (#35)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:18:36 PM EST
    this is a dangerous game for Obama and his supporters.

    Parent
    Why are they even (none / 0) (#42)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:20:00 PM EST
    bringing race back into this?!

    Parent
    Now who's going for Pyrrhic victory? (none / 0) (#57)
    by blogtopus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:24:09 PM EST
    What use is a candidate if people aren't interested in voting for a 'black candidate' only?

    Parent
    I should mention (none / 0) (#75)
    by blogtopus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:28:20 PM EST
    the same thing goes for a 'woman candidate' only. There's more to them than race or gender.

    Parent
    There is for me (none / 0) (#155)
    by splashy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 04:04:04 AM EST
    Whoever is best on health care gets my vote, along with other benefits to the working people.

    Parent
    Why is Obama bringing back race (none / 0) (#88)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:32:19 PM EST
    into this? Because it worked before. And it will work again -- with MSNBC, anyway. With others, well, it will be interesting to see if they've wised up a tad with this comeuppance and cool it for a while.

    Parent
    hmm (none / 0) (#44)
    by andgarden on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:20:11 PM EST
    Obama supporters need to stop playing chicken with the election. ;-)

    Parent
    some women? ok, some african americans also. (none / 0) (#92)
    by hellothere on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:34:40 PM EST
    neither has the women or the african american voters totally on their side. and if voters want to get angry at a fair vote, then let them. if they want to sit home, let them. it is their future. personally i think the great majority of voters will continue on to the the general election. the media has to spin something; they always do.

    Parent
    Not this woman (none / 0) (#51)
    by A little night musing on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:22:42 PM EST
    Really, why the calls on either side for the other to drop out? It's still close, no matter what happens tonight.

    Let's see what happens in the other primaries.

    Parent

    Yeah. It's not necessary. (none / 0) (#78)
    by lilburro on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:29:47 PM EST
    I agree with those who say it will be good for the party esp in the states where they will be campaigning.  What does anyone want from someone dropping out now except the satisfaction of watching someone lose ?

    Parent
    In the '60s they called this (none / 0) (#24)
    by Jim J on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:14:33 PM EST
    "mau-mauing."

    It's extortion, and only the weak fall for it.

    Parent

    I wasn't going to use that term-- (none / 0) (#30)
    by jawbone on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:17:26 PM EST
    Anyway, it's the heat of competition right now--let's hope....

    Parent
    It's extortion. (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by auntmo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:40:30 PM EST
    Don't  be  a weenie.

    Parent
    Aha, now I know what to call (none / 0) (#116)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:44:04 PM EST
    Donna Brazille. Make that Donna "Mau Mau" Brazille.

    Parent
    Sad if true (none / 0) (#27)
    by blogtopus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:16:09 PM EST
    After all that Bill and Hillary did for Civil Rights in their lifetimes.

    Parent
    many didn't show (none / 0) (#67)
    by bigbay on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:26:24 PM EST
    young blacks didn't show up for Obama today, judging by the exit polls.

    Parent
    Now I'm going to go turn on some MSNBC (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:16:14 PM EST


    Heads exploding like dkos? (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by andgarden on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:19:29 PM EST


    Parent
    Fox news showing a caucus (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:28:13 PM EST
    and it looks like an episode of COPS.

    BTD, alternate explanation to Bradley Effect. (none / 0) (#83)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:31:00 PM EST
    I don't think Barack is experiencing a typical Bradley Effect.

    It's possible that voters are telling pollsters they're voting for Obama, not out of liberal guilt, but out of embarrassment about admitting that they actually prefer the disfavored candidate - Hillary.

    Some call it the "embarassed voter effect".

    I like to call it the Inverse Hillary Effect, meaning Hillary has many supporters who deny their support for her; they wait till they're in the privacy of the voting booth and, there, they support her in the way that counts most .

    Parent

    Now is that (none / 0) (#101)
    by blogtopus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:36:50 PM EST
    a symptom of the old bogey "White Liberal Guilt", or just the fact that her name is Clinton and therefore VERBOTEN?

    Honestly, not being snarky, but could people be feeling guilty about voting for "yet another white person?"

    Parent

    Blogtopus, think again. (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 03:04:00 AM EST
    ******************
    The atmosphere of this primary has been entirely permeated by the strident, bullying approach that some Obama supporters, and their media cohorts, (i.e. Russert, Matthews) have taken toward Hillary Clinton and her supporters.

    This has had the effect of making some people feel reluctant about openly expressing their choice of Hillary for President. Hence, polls may not accurately reflect the full extent of her support. That's what I meant by the Inverse Hillary Effect.

    Parent

    How can we know for sure it's the Bradley effect? (none / 0) (#105)
    by lilburro on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:38:08 PM EST
    Are there other factors that contributed to the underperformance?  Did the exit polls poorly predict turnout by demographic?

    The Bradley effect is based upon there being sufficient evidence that people who took the polls lied to the pollers, right?  Or is it more complicated than that?  

    I'd love to read a post on Obama's exit poll underperformance.

    Parent

    WOW - Back to Ohio for a moment... (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:31:56 PM EST
    Check out Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) results:

    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#OH

    Barely, and I mean barely going for Obama...
    51% to 48%
    (25% of the vote counted
    )
    That is shocking quite frankly.

    Do I remember correctly (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by andgarden on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:35:00 PM EST
    that this is Tubbs Jones territory? Does Hillary Cinton owe her a big time appointment?

    Parent
    TJ is terrific, an impressive interview (5.00 / 3) (#109)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:40:06 PM EST
    and so is a young state rep in her district whom I saw tonight, Ohio Rep. Eugene Miller -- an AA explaining why he was not only loyal to Clinton, and to Tubbs-Jones, but more significantly why Clinton was the right one for the issues for his constituents, AA and others. This guy was great, and I hope we see more of him. (And I wrote down his name because I am not donating any more to some of my local pols with their bad behavior in this campaign and might just send a check to a promising young pol in Ohio. Even speaking for Clinton, he impressed the media clusterspluck.)

    Parent
    I saw that. He was very impressive. (none / 0) (#118)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:45:02 PM EST


    Parent
    Obama (none / 0) (#91)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:33:53 PM EST
    will be shocked by those results. Keeping those polls open may not have been a good thing for him.

    Jamal Simmons saying this was not a bad night for Obama on CNN. Is he high?

    Parent

    The media is sick (none / 0) (#117)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:44:48 PM EST
    It goes beyond delusion.  It is downright scary.

    Parent
    Americanincanada, now that Hillary won (none / 0) (#154)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 03:07:52 AM EST
    OH/TX/RI, are you getting any of that sense of euphoria we talked about when Bill Clinton was elected?

    I'm getting there!

    Parent

    People have got to keep repeating (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by ChrisO on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:37:34 PM EST
    that it takes 2,025 delegates for the nomination. Obama's people have managed to frame the conversation, with all of this delegate projection nonsense, to make it seem as if Hillary has to catch Obama in pledged delegates or she loses. If Obama doesn't have 2,025, he hasn't won enough to take the nomination. You don't get the nomination by "almost" getting enough delegates. The notion that Hillary has to pass him in delegates is false, particularly since it's not as though she'll have just barely enough celegates to deny him. They'll be very close to neck and neck, and I think it's legitimate to then look at who will make the better candidate.

    There's certainly a lot of arguments to be made for Obama, but if it's Hillary that's on a roll going into the convention, and she has significant victories in key states, she'll have an excellent argument. Of course, Obama's supporters will claim she's destroying the party, even though they'll be the ones leaving the party. If both candidates go into the convention within 100 or so delgates of each other, that means that they are both the choice of a huge segment of the voters. That means the convention can go to more than one ballot, and I'm not so sure that "destroys the party."

    The one who threatened to leave the party (none / 0) (#113)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:42:41 PM EST
    Donna Brazille, the fool, seemed to tone it down a bit tonight. I wonder how many of those rumored 50 super-d's who were going to announce for Obama tomorrow suddenly left their cell phones off the charger tonight and somehow won't be reachable.

    Parent
    If 50 SD's come out for Obama after (none / 0) (#122)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:47:10 PM EST
    tonight, I think it will backfire. I have no problem with them deciding this race but they need to wait until the regular people have their say first.

    Parent
    funny... (none / 0) (#142)
    by mindfulmission on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:00:40 AM EST
    ... I didn't hear you complaining when Hillary had a huge lead among super delegates.

    Parent
    OMG (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:46:09 PM EST
    Fineman says Obama lost Ohio (and maybe Texas) because he didn't have the time to "introduce himself" to the voters in those states. But with seven weeks until PA, he'll have time to do that.

    PA will be a fight, I agree, but if there's anyone in PA who doesn't know Sen. Obama by now, they're living under a rock.

    LOL! (none / 0) (#128)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:49:11 PM EST
    Some of these media jokesters have no conscience.

    Parent
    mr fineman, we know senator obama. (none / 0) (#146)
    by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:15:05 AM EST
    the truth is sir, you don't know the american people. you media folks smirk and snicker acting like you know the inside joke. the funny thing mr. fineman is you are the joke.

    Parent
    Congrats.... (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by mindfulmission on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:02:56 AM EST
    ... again, to Hillary Clinton

    I strongly believe that Clinton needed both Ohio and Texas to have ANY chance at the nomination.  

    And so the primary season continues... for a long time.

    I am not really sure that I can handle it.

    random thought (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by snow moon on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:40:50 AM EST
    Anyone think the writer's strike might have actually contributed to  Obama's early momentum?

    14 weeks of satire-free TV.

    SNL, Comedy Central- and  especially MAD TV- would have jumped on the "cult" thing much earlier.

    He got a parody-free ride for 100 days.

    I don't think Clinton would have generated much new material. What's left to do?

    Comedy momentum is probably not something that Axlerod has counted on.

    Could get interesting- & Gen Y could be getting bored.  After all, when something's really popular (and is parodied on TV!),  it ceases to be hipster-worthy.

    Interesting point (none / 0) (#156)
    by splashy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 04:45:27 AM EST
    Since there is a lot that can be said with comedy, and comedians love to say a lot about all kinds of things that are not quite right in our society. They are all about pointing out our prejudices, uptight things, and other weird stuff while making us laugh at it.

    I really love comedians, satire, and other forms of comedy!

    Well, except for violent comedy. Not too fond of that.

    Parent

    I got Rhode Island. . . (none / 0) (#1)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:01:32 PM EST
    and Vermont right.

    Still doing better than Zogby, I think.

    My kitten did better than Zogby (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:00:40 AM EST
    because she kept the mess in the litterbox and didn't drop it just anywhere.

    Parent
    I missed Texas, maybe (none / 0) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:06:34 PM EST
    Have to see.

    Parent
    How did you call it? (none / 0) (#13)
    by vigkat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:07:18 PM EST


    Parent
    Obama by 2 (none / 0) (#23)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:12:55 PM EST


    Parent
    JMM (none / 0) (#4)
    by rilkefan on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:03:04 PM EST
    expecting the delegate math to "sink in" over the next few days.

    JMM is a fool (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:06:09 PM EST


    Parent
    Josh (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Steve M on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:19:32 PM EST
    seems to be unable to escape the groupthink that pervades the blogosphere.  Just when I think he'll be sharp enough to reject the latest meme that the Hillary-haters have propagated, he gets sucked right in.

    There are some bloggers, like Atrios, who have the ability to look at what all the other bloggers are outraged about and say "you know, this really isn't such a big deal."  Josh just doesn't seem to be one of them.

    Parent

    I think Josh's success has gone to his head. (none / 0) (#52)
    by Angel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:22:55 PM EST


    Parent
    Atrios is tryng to be scrupulously agnostic (none / 0) (#76)
    by jawbone on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:29:05 PM EST
    about the primary.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#22)
    by rilkefan on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:12:37 PM EST
    I thought too well of him before this campaign to go that far.  I suspect he's a bit biased and much more importantly suffering from the lack of Clinton supporters among his, what, milieu?  (Ok, that does reflect poorly on him if true.) If one reads random liberal blogs one gets a distorted picture.  And the math is in fact difficult for HRC.

    He does seem to be pooh-poohing the Clinton claim that the press is biased against her, and that is harder to explain away.

    Parent

    The spin is itself head-spinning (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by Jim J on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:09:43 PM EST
    Tweety and KO still want her to drop out "for the good of the party."

    Still!

    As for Josh and his "analysis," I don't know what to say. He's fallen further, faster than even KO, which is quite a freefall.

    What is it about Obama that makes people jettison all contact with reality? And why do only certain people fall for it, while others are totally immune?

    Parent

    Blinded by that light which comes down (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by jawbone on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:18:47 PM EST
    from above or through the window? And makes the have to vote for Barack Obama?

    The scariest thing I've heard a politician say, btw.

    Parent

    Good (none / 0) (#29)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:17:04 PM EST
    Question.


    Parent
    Street smarts (none / 0) (#46)
    by vigkat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:20:15 PM EST
    and a fair amount of gravitas.

    Parent
    Still? (none / 0) (#33)
    by vigkat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:18:16 PM EST
    Always.

    Parent
    old habits (none / 0) (#120)
    by snow moon on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:46:31 PM EST
    And why do only certain people fall for it, while others are totally immune?

    I haven't looked closely at this- but aren't many of these people formerly Republicans- or at least leaned that way during the 90s?

    Or at the very least they were Democrats who jumped on the impeach Clinton bandwagon.

    Remember that "move on" began as an email campaign to lobby congress to "move on" from the Clinton investigations that were tying up the government. It wasn't a hugely successful group- at first.

    I suspect that many of these extreme anti-Hillary, Obama supporters are falling back on old behaviors from 10+ years ago (people who did NOT sign on to the "let's move on" campaign).

    Of course they're being egged on by current Republicans infiltrating their comment boards.

    It's sad, really- they don't seem to be aware of the long-term damage to our Party.

    (There is also- as has been fairly well-documented- an ugly strain of misogyny  all across the political spectrum.)

    just my thoughts.

    I am very proud of Hillary tonight- and wish her success.

    Parent

    Now JMM says (none / 0) (#135)
    by rilkefan on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:55:42 PM EST
    "Clinton's actually the candidate who's always been basically pro-NAFTA whereas Obama's the reverse."

    Oy vey.

    Parent

    I'm not sure where Bowers (none / 0) (#7)
    by magster on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:06:03 PM EST
    pulls his projections from, but he only has Clinton gaining 4 delegates, not including the caucuses.

    When are we getting some caucus results?

    Must it be Bradley Effect? (none / 0) (#20)
    by catfish on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:11:44 PM EST
    What about being too embarrassed to admit to voting Hillary? Peer pressure, etc.

    Would like to think some color barriers have been broken this primary.

    SInce there was a movement toward change (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by jawbone on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:23:49 PM EST
    favoring Hillary in the last few days, could that not be the reasons for some polls not matching the outcome?

    BTW, during the MCM's pushing the Bradley Effect for NH, one of the polling blogs pointed out there was no Bradley Effect, that the polls were accurate for the regular voting, but did not account for a high number of absentee ballots.

    Parent

    She is killing (none / 0) (#53)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:23:02 PM EST
    hin in El Paso as well.

    whoa (none / 0) (#54)
    by Turkana on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:23:24 PM EST
    check out cuyahoga county- only 52-48, for obama?

    Obama got smoked in Ohio (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:25:04 PM EST
    Chuck Todd is living in a dreamworld.

    Parent
    Did the polls in the county stay open (none / 0) (#66)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:26:21 PM EST
    later due to court order?

    Parent
    dunno (none / 0) (#97)
    by Turkana on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:36:03 PM EST
    but it's essentially a wash.

    Parent
    Fox seems (none / 0) (#56)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:23:58 PM EST
    almost ready to call Texas.

    Does anyone think we'll know Texas results (none / 0) (#63)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:25:42 PM EST
    tonight? Even approximately? If so, I may need a hangover remedy.

    Dip Larry's hat in tomato juice. (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:27:05 PM EST


    Parent
    lol, I just tried a bologna sandwich. I hadn't (none / 0) (#89)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:32:57 PM EST
    eaten since lunch. That'll either help or I'll be sick for sure.

    Parent
    Ah, I thank you for that, Oculus. (none / 0) (#94)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:34:49 PM EST
    Keep cracking me up to keep me awake. My vow tonight is that as long as Hillary is awake and waiting, so am I. I put away the sleepy-making SoCo and switched to some cold caffeine.:-)

    Parent
    I think it may be called tonight (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:28:08 PM EST


    Parent
    Steve Clemons at Washington Note has a post (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Angel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:30:26 PM EST
    up saying he got a call from a big-wig who says to watch the TV because it will go for Hillary tonight.  

    Parent
    I think it will (none / 0) (#84)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:31:24 PM EST


    Parent
    Zogby lives to dart another day. (none / 0) (#102)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:36:57 PM EST


    Parent
    Sleep if you need to (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by andgarden on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:28:11 PM EST
    It will be 50/50 +/- 3 ;-)

    Parent
    That's a lot of help! (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:34:46 PM EST


    Parent
    Exhausted (none / 0) (#79)
    by chrisvee on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:30:11 PM EST
    I got up at 4:00a this morning...but I can't sleep until I know the TX results (at least the primary results).

    Parent
    Fox (none / 0) (#124)
    by sleepingdogs on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:47:51 PM EST
    just called texas for Hillary

    Parent
    WOO HOO!!!!! (none / 0) (#136)
    by auntmo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:56:15 PM EST
    Go,  Hillary!!

    Let's  count  those  delegates  now,  eh?

    I  tell you  what....after   HIllary  won Ohio  and  Texas ,  if  50  Black  superdelegates  come out  for   Obama  tomorrow,  there  will  be   riots  in the  streets.    

    Parent

    On CNN (none / 0) (#77)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:29:33 PM EST
    David Gerkin or however you spell it, was saying that if Obama gets the popular vote and the Super Delegates vote for Hillary and she wins, it will be horrible as the people will be unhappy. BS to that. If it was only Democrats who voted, I might agree, but since there were so many open primaries, I don't believe this would be the case.

    I guess the only danger (none / 0) (#90)
    by blogtopus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:33:21 PM EST
    is in the GE, where independents and Obama-publicans would abandon the Dem party and vote McCain. Hillary would definitely have an uphill battle. But I think that her performance in the past few weeks has convinced me she can handle those odds.

    Parent
    poor media, they are desperately (none / 0) (#107)
    by hellothere on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:39:06 PM EST
    looking for something to spin, misquote, and misrepresent. all the fun is gone for them,sigh!

    Parent
    I just want (none / 0) (#85)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:31:28 PM EST
    to know the primary results. And I ant to know what is up with the cops at the Texas caucuses.

    Anyone knows?

    Lots of precincts were overwhelmed, not enough (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Angel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:36:23 PM EST
    workers, etc.  And lots of angry people who were tired of waiting, tempers boiled over, accusations were made against each side, etc.  All in all just a freak show with lots of nastiness and name calling and people trying to take over the caucuses for their candidate.  I had a post earlier telling someone that these caucuses have turned into blood sport.  Literally.  Besides the fact that they disenfranchise the disabled, elderly, etc., the militants from the campaigns have taken them over and turned what used to be a civil procedure into an angry fight.  Pathetic.  And one reason we need to eliminate the caucus.  One person-one vote is how it should be.  

    Parent
    Wow, cops at caucuses? (none / 0) (#98)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:36:12 PM EST
    I want to know more, too. Texas, sometimes you just freek me.

    Parent
    On another thread, a commenter (none / 0) (#100)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:36:27 PM EST
    sd. there were allegations Obama supporters were locking out Clinton supporters and law enforcement was called.  

    Parent
    That's what I (none / 0) (#103)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:37:30 PM EST
    am hearing now. Clinton supporters locked out...cops opening doors.

    Parent
    I heard that earlier this evening but I don't have (none / 0) (#106)
    by Angel on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:38:58 PM EST
    evidence of this.  I took my camera to my caucus just in case any crap happened.

    Parent
    No doubt they will be followed. . . (none / 0) (#108)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:39:10 PM EST
    by allegations of Clinton supporters actually eating Obama supporters.

    Parent
    Larry (none / 0) (#123)
    by auntmo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:47:41 PM EST
    Nah,  it's   true.  Texas  Democratic  Party  has  formally---and in writing---reprimanded  the  Obama  campaign   for  same  (locking  doors).  

    Also, Obama  campaign  workers  were   getting  "caucus"  signatures   during  the  day   as  people  voted....turning    lists  of  names  in  at  caucus  without  that  person  even  attending  the  caucus.  

    Happened  all over  the  state.   Check   Taylor Marsh  website  for list  of   precincts.

    Parent

    yes, and with a salsa make in NY :-) (none / 0) (#127)
    by RalphB on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:48:40 PM EST


    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#138)
    by auntmo on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:57:38 PM EST
    She  won    Texas,  Ralph.    Sleep  well.  :):)

    Parent
    The big contested states (none / 0) (#87)
    by ItsGreg on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:32:00 PM EST
    the questions remain about Obama's ability to win big contested states if he can not perform in these demographics.

    I've never quite understood this argument...not just in terms of Clinton v Obama, but also in term of the now defunct Republican contest. Because one candidate fails to beat another candidate of the same party in a given state, what does that have to do with the ability of that candidate to win against a candidate of another party?

    Just because Obama lost to Clinton in Ohio (or, for that matter, because Clinton lost to Obama in Virgina) that doesn't mean the eventual Democratic candidate won't defeat the Republican candidate in those states. I will vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of who it is, even if my preferred candidate doesn't win the nomination. I don't think I'm unusual in that.

    Or am I missing something obvious here?

    it's about getting them to vote (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by DandyTIger on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:51:52 PM EST
    Take Ohio for example. If the Hillary wins by 18% like it's looking, that means there are a lot more dems (was that open? so others too) excited and wanting to vote for Hillary. If Barack wins the nomination, he has to convince all those Hillary voters to vote for him instead in the general. He has to work to win them over. That is, just because he's the dem, doesn't mean those voters will come out and vote for him. He has to win them over.

    So then extrapolate that too all the big states that the dem has to win and can possibly win including OH, PA, FL, etc. Hillary has the voters on her side already, and will have an advantage. Barack will have an uphill battle.

    Anyway, that's the theory. Maybe someone can be more articulate about that as I'm getting sleepy.

    Parent

    That supposed Bradley effect is coming from Repugs (none / 0) (#96)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:35:25 PM EST
    This is my opinion, but I believe the Rush Limbaugh minions had a big effect on any possible Bradley effect.

    The bigger reason for Hillary winning in Ohio and RI was obviously the last weekend, NAFTA-gate, Rezko on Monday, SNL, and women.

    the bradely affect? hillary has (none / 0) (#111)
    by hellothere on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:41:46 PM EST
    campaigned in a very consistent manner. obama has moments but lately he has been on a downhill trajectory. the media no longer sees him as golden.

    Parent
    Key word: Supposed... (none / 0) (#121)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:46:34 PM EST
    I don't believe it is even a reason why Hillary won with Democrats tonight.   But I am saying that if there was any of it at all showing up in exit polls, we have to remember that a lot of Republicans were part of the statistics.

    Parent
    Another big question? (none / 0) (#112)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:42:32 PM EST
    Why didn't African American voters have significant turnout increases in Texas?

    Caucus, 56-44 Obama so far. (none / 0) (#114)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:43:13 PM EST
    Just 5% in.

    Bradley effect or bad polling? (none / 0) (#115)
    by Prabhata on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:44:00 PM EST
    SUSA has again appeared to nail the percents in OH and TX.  Although SUSA's call for TX was 49 to 48 for Obama, it said that the numbers were fluid and moving towards HRC.  I think the same people who worked on bad polls before the vote also did the exit polls.

    Kos predicted TX for Obama (none / 0) (#125)
    by Prabhata on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:48:00 PM EST
    Kos said that Obama would win by 12 points. He also predicted that CA would go to Obama.

    gotta keep the readers happy (none / 0) (#131)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:50:54 PM EST
    even at the expense of all credibility.  I am seeing the same thing from Keith Olbermann.

    Parent
    Guess we forgot to send him the memo... (none / 0) (#151)
    by oldpro on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 01:18:44 AM EST
    Hillary supporters are the ones "Crashing the Gate."

    Parent
    HC wins Texas. She'll lose the caucus (none / 0) (#126)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:48:24 PM EST
    most likely though.

    she'll take it (none / 0) (#134)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:54:24 PM EST
    This makes Hillary extremely viable again and its on to Pennsylvania now where Governor Rendell is on her side and now she can strongly argue for Florida and Michigan to be resolved!

    Parent
    what I meant (none / 0) (#139)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:58:12 PM EST
    when I said "she'll take it" I want to be clear I was not predicting she would win the Texas caucus.

    It's just that Clinton supporters should be extremely happy with tonight even if that TX caucus goes slightly the other way.

    The delegate winner for March 4th was Hillary Clinton.

    Parent

    TX goes to Clinton per CNN!!! (none / 0) (#129)
    by RalphB on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:50:05 PM EST


    CNN, FOX and MSNBC just (none / 0) (#130)
    by americanincanada on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:50:45 PM EST
    called Texas for Hillary.

    HOLY FIREWORKS!!!!!!!!!!! (none / 0) (#132)
    by diplomatic on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:51:35 PM EST


    Parent
    Can she get to TX in time to (none / 0) (#137)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:56:58 PM EST
    make another speech?

    Parent
    Maybe she'll hit the morning shows (none / 0) (#143)
    by diplomatic on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:01:40 AM EST


    Parent
    You are prescient: (none / 0) (#149)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:59:22 AM EST
    HRC TO APPEAR ON SIX SHOWS

    Parent
    My caucus (none / 0) (#140)
    by wasabi on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 11:58:48 PM EST
    I'm in south Austin in a relatively small precinct that is generally 65%-35% Republican/Democratic.  In 2000 we had 6 people caucus.  In 2004 we had 18 people caucus.  Tonight we had 291 people caucus.  40 delegates were broken up with 22 to Obama, and 18 to Clinton.  Our caucus ran great.  It was very slow signing people in but everyone was very patient.  I met the Obama people at a Democratic event this past Saturday, so we all were able to work together well.  No problems whatsoever.

    I'm sure it was chaos in some of the larger precincts.  

    So the nomination goes on (none / 0) (#145)
    by Korha on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:06:40 AM EST
    I think all of us need to think about the greater good of the democratic party at this critical juncture. If the race continues to degenerate between now and PA--or between now and August!!--whoever is the nominee is going to enter the general election severely damaged goods.

    Obama and Clinton are extremely similar on the issues and they will both govern in similar ways. It is much less important who the nominee is than that we actually defeat McCain in November and elect a democratic President. The longer this race goes on, the less our party will be unified and the more likely we will lose the general election.

    Now there is still PA to come and nobody is going anywhere before then. But if Obama wins it and the primary is still deadlocked, Clinton should drop out. If Obama does not win it and the primary is still deadlocked, then he should drop out and accept a spot as Clinton's VP. Defeating McCain is the most important thing.

    Korha (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by auntmo on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 12:25:35 AM EST
    With  all due  respect,  if  Obama   loses  Pennsylvania,    Clinton    does  not  OWE  him  the   VP  slot,   given    how  he and his  staff  have   treated  her  during   this  campaign.  

    If  Edwards  now  steps  forward  and  endorses   Clinton,  giving  her  his  29  delegates,   I think   Edwards  would  be  the  better  VP.      

    Parent

    No no (none / 0) (#150)
    by Korha on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 01:02:51 AM EST
    I don't actually want Obama to take the VP slot--who would want to play third fiddle to the two Clintons? Ideally Clinton would pick someone boring and bland like Evan Bayh. However, Obama needs to take it for the good of the party. It's quite probable that Clinton will not be able to win in November if Obama does not join her on a unity ticket.

    Parent
    Actually, (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by oldpro on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 01:33:19 AM EST
    Obama could learn a lot from the Clintons.  He could learn a lot more about winning at their side and with their support than he could ever learn from those losers he's tied to now...Kerry, Kennedy, Daschle, Dodd, Rockefeller.  They drafted him to take out Hillary but if she wins PA, they need to cut the deal and put him as VP on a unity ticket.  Whether or not to accept that deal would be his political IQ test.

    And it's probably the only hope for survival of the party after this messup of a setup with Fla and Mich disenfranchised and the race a virtual tossup for delegates and popular vote between a female and an AA.

    Parent

    Texas And More on Delegate Counts | 156 comments (156 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment