To see a breakdown by Senate District for Obama/Clinton, follow the link below:
TX Presidential Race by Senate District
Last Updated: 2:21:46 PM
Precincts Reporting: 8233 of 8,247
99.83%
Statewide Turnout: 2857301 of 12,752,417
22.41%
President/Vice-President
NAME
EARLY VOTES
PERCENT
TOTAL VOTES
DELEGATES
Joe Biden
2489
0.19%
5297
0.18%
0
Hillary Clinton
612726
47.75%
1453139
50.85%
65
Chris Dodd
1707
0.13%
3718
John Edwards
12507
0.97%
29808
1.04%
Barack Obama
648630
50.55%
1354672
47.41%
61
Bill Richardson
4934
0.38%
10667
0.37%
To post this comment click here:
Otherwise click cancel.
My extended family on both sides are fundamentalist Christians. I'm an atheist. There are a lot of factors other than family that go into a person's religious beliefs and I'm quite certain the Senator Obama has a good grasp of his own religious influences. What is it about him that you don't know but think you should know? He has described his personal embrace of Christianity in Dreams from My Father, which rang pretty true to me.
The information is out there if you take the time to look for it. Just as the information was there about George W. Bush before he became president--you only had to be familiar with his governance of Texas to know that he wasn't bringing anything great to the table. On the other hand, I like what Obama brings to the table. I don't like your misinformed innuendo and I've already given you more attention than you deserve.
Pct #367 went 63% for Obama tonight after over 440ish people showed up (forgot that exact number).
FINAL: 30 Del for Obama 17 Del for Clinton
http://www.theeagle.com/
There were 114 people at our precinct convention. It split 76 Obama, 38 Clinton. So, he got 9 delegates and she got 5.
There were 11 Republicans standing outside the throng of Democrats who had taken over the atrium of the Ringer Library. It was disorganized and it took an hour and a half to get everyone signed in and to vote, but it was done without any rancor or even crying babies. There were quite a few children in the crowd, mine among them. At one point she asked, "Dad are we participating?" I replied that we were. People of all colors and every age bracket. I spoke to one woman who was voting for the first time in her life. The long wait to check everyone's card and then to vote did not diminish our resolve to find out who won. Sometimes democracy in action is like a concession stand line at a sold out game. Good thing we've still got politics in Texas - finest form of free entertainment ever invented. Molly Ivins
385 total people showed up and signed in, and I bet about 75 or so showed up and then left before signing in. It took almost two hours to sign in and then another hour to do all the counting and math. In the end it came out like this ---
Obama - 37 delegates Clinton - 14 delegates
According to the Clinton captain in the precinct, there was no name in the precinct and that there was no precinct chair. She was told this by the Clinton coordinator for the county, Choco Meza. The Clinton captain lied to my face, because my name was on the packet as the precinct chair.
I had to fight for about 10 minutes to get the packet back. I had to call the Bexar County Democratic Party, who in fact told the captain I was the precinct chair and that I should be the one with the packet.
All in all, these few Clinton leaders as well as some of her supporters were somewhat rude and aggressive and left a very bad impression on me. There were some other Clinton supporters there who were very nice and argued on my behalf that I should have the packet.
I eventually got the packet and was the convention chair, but it still ticks me off that her supporters acted in this fashion.
This is just one experience though, but it makes me wonder if this behavior came from the top down.
FYI, my precinct had 15 delegates. Clinton got 8, Obama got 7.
But remember...it's the same coin.
On the other hand, the election day vote was 55,438 for Clinton and 16,766 for Obama.
If Clinton had picked up only 1,062 more of the early votes, that would have given her 62.5%, enough for her to claim three of SD 26's four delegates.
What a magnificent performance by our electronic voting machines.
Totals for Chet's counties was Hillary 38,648 -- Obama 31,613.
My question is - will this board be in an uproar for Chet to swith to Clinton to follow the will of the people in his district, home county, and the state?
Now that super delegate arguments are no longer abstract for us in TX, I'll be curious how the conversation on supers in general goes on BOR.
After all, we are a representative democracy and our elected leaders are expected to use their judgment; not to vote by home district polls like Ross Perot once proposed.
I'm just wondering if the BOR community will be so vocal in the "vote the way your district voted" argument now that the races have come to TX and various contradictions show themselves.
Personally I think the idea of free agent super delegates is a very bad one that was bound to end in an outcome that would upset one side or another of a close race. However those are the rules.
I totally agree with the political argument and discussion BOR has of how a super's endorsement could help or hurt them in the future based on home state or district results. Those arguments are on point in my opinion.
I find the moral posturing that supers who go against their home dist or state vote are somehow abrogating the "will of the people" off point. Super delegates by design are to show their will, not the "will of the people".
Beyond loyalty to the Clinton name there is a very big underling message from the Texas and the Ohio primaries.
I caucused for Hillary and one thing I heard consistently from suburban white women is that they would consider John McCain over Barack Obama. It's alarming but the issue was not race but preparedness.
If your interested in information to support this look at the Texas head to head contest question in the March 3rd BELO Texas tracking poll, http://www.kvue.com/politics/p...
The poll shows on page 8 that in Texas McCain beats Obama 51% to 42%. In a match-up with Hillary, McCain is ahead 50% to 46% with +/- 3.5% margin of error. Beyond the amazing fact that she's within a statistical tie in Texas in this poll, it reinforces my argument that not every Hillary voter is automatically an Obama voter.
Hillarycrats, women voting for a women president, are going back to issues that matter to them. I'm concerned that if national security becomes a general issue those women fold to McCain.
Furthermore, the elephant in the room that no one wants to touch but is a truth of our society is race. There are some die-hard Democrats I've met nationally in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Texas that will not vote for an African American.
Obama is losing consistently with some exceptions, voters in swing states that are part of any battle ground composite for a democratic victory women and seniors. Will he make up the difference with a new engaged vote? I think he has peaked with that group and it was not enough to overcome the Hillary victories.
If a new engaged voter did not come out in the primary where he out spent the Hillary's campaign 3 to 1 to turnout those voters how will the Obama campaign expect to increase that number in November when fewer resources can be allocated?
But those were a tiny minority. At my precinct convention I got an enthusiastic round of applause for suggesting that as soon as the nomination is decided, we all need to work on the same side to get the nominee elected in November, whether that nominee is Clinton or Obama. This applause wasn't really for me, however, or for what I said. It's the result of a close contest between two phenomenal candidates, either one of whom would change the course of history, and both of whom share between 90 and 95% of their policy positions.
That's why the campaign rhetoric is revolving around issues of style rather than substance, and we hear a lot about judgement and experience. Either candidate would would bring about a monumental change for the better. And the turnout we saw in the past two weeks proves that both candidates are electable. Either one can beat McCain if all of us work together to make it happen.
Florida Registration in '06 http://election.dos.state.fl.u... Democratic 4,219,531 Republican 3,935,675
Florida Registration in '04 http://election.dos.state.fl.u... Democratic 4,261,249 Republican 3,892,492
We hold a significant lead in registration but we're always losing. I've managed or worked on 5 campaigns in Florida. Florida emphasizes my point you may be a loyal Democrat and I may be a loyal Democrat but we're in the minority. There are Democrats for example Regan Democrats that vote on the issues.
In a general election you have to have more than a message of change or changing Washington. In '04 we didn't want Bush and we all wanted change but he won the popular vote and the electoral vote, how? He used a very similar strategy that Obam is now using against Hillary increase his numbers by going after non-battleground states to increase turnout to inflate numbers. In my precinct 789 people voted in the Democratic Primary but only 181 caucused. Obama won by 25 votes but the caucus didn't represent that result.
A caucus is great for Obama for example in Kansas where the party has a ground presence since '06 and MoveOn has a network of support to put the two together for caucusing. True a caucus shows a campaign's ability to organize and that's important but it doesn't necessarily represent the sentiment of precinct.
It's never mattered what system a state was using because its rare to have two campaigns so well financed. Is Mark Peen an idiot for under estimating the need to compete in every state Barack was in, absolutely. But it doesn't change the polling information and registration facts.
