USA TODAY -TEXAS PRIMARIES NOW TIED -- 92/92 (edit)

[TexanDem]

http://content.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/results-all.aspx?src=campaign:reprise_google_politics_election+Generic+Politics+Senate+CT

This is not counting the caucus segment of the total. Those totals may not be final till freakin' June. But the breakdown is Obama is ahead 56/44 -- with 41% precincts completed.

Woo-hoo!!! Media, this your chance for some BREAKING NEWS! why don't you give this some air time and educate the public! Better yet, how about a corrected story and an apology for being so excited to make this call for Hillary! And don't forget to change your map colors!



Edited:
Conflict of numbers:
CNN website states 65 Hillary; 61 Obama for primaries and same as USA Today for Caucus. Perhaps USA Today has a typo???

Nevertheless --- though a tie sounds better -- he still won Texas. You have to take it as a whole -- both primary and caucus.

To those diligent Hillary supporters who keep pointing out the popular vote lead, please remember that primaries are not, nor have they ever been determined by popular vote. That's our American system.

[featherman]

1. Obama will win Texas in delegates and popular vote when all is done

[rug]

2. She beat him by 100,000 votes with 100% reporting.

[TheWraith]

5. Um, you're ignoring the caucuses.

And apparently doing so deliberately.

[theredpen]

9. The OP was *about* the primaries

I think that rug was ignoring the caucuses because the OP was specifically about the primary. Yes, the caucus counts and Obama will win TX in the final tally, but Clinton did win the primary by a little bit.

[TheWraith]

17. And since the primary vote is settled, obviously #1 was referring to the entire Texas election.

[theredpen]

18. Oh yeah, good point.

:hi:

[VolcanoJen]

10. Math is sexist.

}(

[Metric System]

12. You could only caucus if you voted in the primary.

[rug]

15. OK. 2,500,000 votes versus 100,000 caususees.

Did I leave anything out?

[JackORoses]

23. There were over a Million Caucusees, dumbass.

so yeah, you're leaving about 900,000 people out.

[rug]

25. Why, when there's "dumbass" in the title, is there always an Obama logo in the message?

[JackORoses]

28. why did you make the dumbass mistake of discounting 900,000+ People?

Just couldn't take the time to get your facts straight before typing, could you?

[rug]

29. Where did you get that information?

[JackORoses]

30. here's a good place

"The Texas Democratic Party estimates 1.1 million Texans attended the precinct conventions, doubling the 508,000 who voted in 2006."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/05/texas.caucus.count/index.html

[Hardrada]

4. If wishes were horses, beggars would ride!

[featherman]

16. I stand by my statement: primary vote + caucus vote

"A few commenters are trying to make a point that Clinton maintains the popular vote lead in Texas. This is factually incorrect.
According to NPR, more than 1 million voters showed up to caucus.

Let's do a little math (Primary vote totals from ABC News):

TX Primary Result
Clinton 1,459,814
Obama 1,358,785

TX Caucus Result
Not formally tabulated but if we derive from the available totals we have good approximate numbers
Clinton 440,000
Obama 560,000

Grand Popular Vote Totals (Primary + Caucus)
Clinton 1,469,814 + 440,000 = 1,909,814
Obama 1,358,785 + 560,000 = 1,918,785"

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/7/11339/50182/559/471347

[Steeler1623]

3. No, that's not correct. there were126 total delegates in the primary

[TexanDem]

24. you are correct -- apparently an error. See "edit" on orig

[theredpen]

6. There's something wrong with this data

There were only 126 delegates allocated in the TX primary.

This site must have added caucus delegates to the primary tally by accident. :(

[TexanDem]

26. Thnx -yes, apparently error on website -- see "edit" in orig post

[saracat]

7. Nothing has changed.She won the popular vote.You are wrong!

Desperate ?

[LSK]

11. desperate with 100+ lead ????

:shrug:

[saracat]

13. Hillary has the lead in the popular vote in texas. That is all i am saying. Nothing has changed muc

[TexanDem]

27. popular vote is not the way it's done. Never has been.

[anigbrowl]

8. Excellent catch! But I think it should be 62-62.

Could be a typo by a USA today employee.

This should be interesting.

[TexanDem]

20. Thanks - evidently you are correct -- an error. orig. edited

CNN does not indicate a change in the calculation of delegates in Primary as USA Today has the last couple of days. Guess we'll have to wait a little longer for official final numbers.

[Beregond2]

14. The Daily News, in Longview, WA

I am happy to say that my little hometown paper is the only media outlet I have seen that did NOT report Clinton as the winner in TX, rightly pointing out that that could not be known for some time.

[TexanDem]

22. At least there's one out there trying to be accurate!

[elixir]

19. I think you read the link wrong. Clinton leads in the primary 51%/47% and they're tied in delegates

[TexanDem]

21. I was looking at delegates; but USA Today perhaps in error.

see edit in original.
Thanks