How did Hillary do it to win Texas, RI and Ohio..

[cloud75]

before the primaries on Tuesday some dumb ass from newsweek wanted Hillary to drop out of the race and more people on DU agreed with him. But something happened what was it the nafta lie, the phone call ad, the appearances on Daily Show and SNL what did she do to beat Nobama and shut up the naysayers?

[Hawkeye-X]

1. She didn't win Texas

She lost Texas by 3 delegates...

[thunder rising]

5. Shhh...that's a secret!

[MonkeyFunk]

18. She won the Texas primary

[awaysidetraveler]

26. And lost the Texas caucus by more than she won the primary: therefore she lost the Texas election.

You see it's one state, not two. It has two steps to its election process, but that doesn't mean it has two elections.

[BzaDem]

99. Yup, 100,000 more voters voted for Hillary than Obama, and Hillary loses.

I love this Obama math, where because Obama got more people to vote TWICE for him, Hillary loses. It's hillarious.

[theredpen]

110. A lot of people voted twice for Hillary, too

Just not enough.

Maybe Clinton supporters think that they can shit on Texas Democrats because we won't matter in the general. We will if Obama is the candidate.

[BzaDem]

112. So you think elections should be determined based upon how many people vote twice?

Do you also think that votes should be weighted by the amount of taxes people pay? Where do you draw the line from one-person-one vote?

[theredpen]

122. There is a primary and a caucus

That's the way the electoral system works in Texas. I live in Texas and I'm fine with it. If you don't live here then you don't have to worry about it.

Straw man arguments about taxes or whatever notwithstanding.

Finally, if Clinton wins, it will be because of superdelegates overriding the popular vote and the delegate counts. How democratic is THAT?

[Singular73]

119. Let me know when Popular Vote means anything in Democratic primaries and caucuses

KThanxBye

[BeyondGeography]

40. "Obama likely Texas delegate winner"

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/302704.html

[Little Star]

53. Not the popular vote winner though

[IsItJustMe]

116. Oh, quit hair splitting. He won the damn thing. Whats with you people and your technicalities.

You sound like a bunch of petty ass lawyers arguing over what is is. Enough with this non-sense.

[okasha]

55. You guys are very good at ignoring the fact

that no one is going to win the Texas "caucuses" until June. Claiming the victory at this point is pure spin and/or pure lie. (And it'll sure leave a mark if the state convention goes to Hillary--which I think it will.)

[BeyondGeography]

61. I supplied a link for my point of view; you're flapping your gums

[okasha]

67. Wrong.

I'm a Texas voter, a delegate to my county convention, and someone who's read the rules. I suggest you also read the rules.

[PseudoIntellect]

70. Fine then. He WILL end up winning Texas. And HRC will not.

[okasha]

91. Read the rules.

Pay attention to the fact that delegates can switch. Notice the way the 15% rule proliferates upward and all those light blue areas on CNN's map.

Obama may win the Texas convention in June. Or he very well may not. We don't know yet. I do know that my county will be sending no Obama delegates to state, even though he will have some representatives at the county convention. They'll have to switch to Hillary or sign in as uncommitted.

[11 Bravo]

89. No matter which side you're on, it's always fun to see the uniformed ...

served with a healthy dose of "shut the fuck up". Nice job!

[okasha]

92. Thanks.

I'm the first to admit that the Texas system is bizarro, and it was strained almost to breaking by the huge turnout that no one was quite prepared for. (My precinct had 40 chairs for an expected "crowd"--then some 200 voters turned up, most of whom had never participated in a precinct convention before.) But once you get into it, the math and the process take over, and it can render results rather different from the initial raw vote.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

66. a tiny win, not the big win she was claiming she would have

[calimary]

94. I'm concerned, though, that she won because the limbots went out and voted for her

to game the system for November. Remember, deep down, they ALL want to run against her because they think it's a lock that they can beat her. Obama they don't know what to do with.

[calimary]

95. Oops - double post.

Sorry... hit the button twice by accident.

[StevieM]

46. Nice try. Obama lost Texas. In 1992 one of front runner Bill Clinton's most humilating losses

was in Connecticut where Jerry Brown defeated him. But Clinton actually got a few more delegates. NOBODY called Clinton the winner. But the rules don't apply if you're Barack Obama--just like they didn't apply to George Bush and Karl Rove. He is not an honorable man and if he is our nominee he will not get my vote in November.

Steve

[WolverineDG]

63. In 1992, Bill Clinton used the Texas caucuses to win Texas

In 2008, his wife claimed she'd never heard of the Texas system & whined about how unfair it was. The only difference, besides 16 years, is the fact that Bill was winning in 1992 & Hill is losing in 2008.

dg

[tammywammy]

72. Too much logic Wolverine!

Our little Texas system is soooo unfair, don't you understand. I mean we just put it in place this year....well like 20 years ago, but still Hillary didn't win so it's unfair!

[WolverineDG]

83. Yeah, it's unfair because she lost!

Jeezus, can you imagine this tactic in international negotiations, apart from calling foreign dignitaries Prime Minister/President Whatever?

Might as well have another 8 years of shrubbie.

dg

[Skwmom]

78. More than the delegates. She only won the primary portion b/c 8%

of her vote were Republicans (Limbaugh and crowd must be so proud).

[K Gardner]

2. If you think she "shut up the naysayers" then you don't read much

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

45. Nay.

[kwenu]

97. Double NAY!

[Tribetime]

3. 59% women 41% men ohio

[hisownpetard]

4. Yay! OBAMA wins Texas!!!!

[StevieM]

48. Sorry, Obama lost Texas and now he has dishonored the people of that state by claiming victory (eom)

x

[hisownpetard]

60. I haven't heard him 'claim victory' - I heard it on the news (MSNBC).

[housewolf]

62. It was on his website earlier today that he won Texas n/t

[kwenu]

98. Speak for yourself. On behalf of Texans everywhere--GO OBAMA!!!!

[galadrium]

6. The net gain for Hillary was less than 10 delegates for that huge "win"

She'll run out of states if she keeps winning like that.

[ExFreeper4Obama]

9. Obama got that many net delegates out of Washington D.C. nt

[galadrium]

43. Thats why he's going to win

[Diane R]

7. She lost Texas. Obama won 2 states, Clinton won 2 state. In her view, that's a 'big' win.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

54. 2-2 sounds like a tie, but hey, Hillary did say Obama had to take all 4 to win.

[Growler]

8. Good lord...

Hillary did NOT win Texas!!! What the hell is up with your post?

[cloud75]

105. she won!!! wake up...accept it move on take your lumps...it's reality baby...

she won the popular vote the caucus votes are still mess but the facts are that she won the popular vote which is very important in the grand scheme of things just admit it move one.

[snappyturtle]

117. Are you aware that in a general election a candidate can win with

more electoral votes while losing the popular vote? See any similarities here? What makes you think the caucus votes are a "mess"?

[lapfog_1]

10. The NAFTA lie

the real story is that Hillary didn't issue a conditional denial of her staff reassuring the Canadian government... she issued a flat denial.

And her campaign called the Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister and uttered the now famous "take the rhetoric on NAFTA with a grain of salt".

It was HER campaign that reassured the Canadians on NAFTA and Hillary is the one that lied about it.

Not to mention, Hillary didn't win Texas.

Just so you know.

[tabatha]

13. Actually that has been denied by the Canadians.

There have been so many stories it is difficult to know what the truth is.

[lapfog_1]

24. Well, the Canadians also issued a denial about Obama

but that doesn't stop the Clintonistas here from continuing the lie, does it.

Which story from the Canadian government should we believe?

a) The story that the economic adviser to the Obama campaign said that "its just politics, not policy"

b) The Canadian governments denial that that is what the guy said, along with HIS denial that he said that.

c) The story that the Clinton camp call the PM's chief of staff (a phone call overheard by a room full of people) and said "it's just rhetoric, take it with a grain of salt"

or

d) A denial of that story from the Canadian government... (which I haven't even seen yet).

Seems to me that they repeat a story and then issue a denial about every news cycle. And this is from the conservative government in Canada, Bush's buddies. They wouldn't want to muddy the waters in our primaries, would they??? :sarcasm:

[madmom]

50. "They wouldn't want to muddy the waters in our primaries, would they???"

I've been asking this question for 2-3 days now and nobody seems to get it. McCain is the only one benefiting from this story why are we killing each other with it? JESUS CHRIST people get a fucking clue! you're playing right into they're hand! Some one needs to call they're bluff and make them prove anything happened the way they said. Clinton and Obama need to come united in this fight because it's definitely an underhanded attempt by somebody to sway our election. :banghead:

[Quixote1818]

25. They denied the Obama story too. nt

[skids]

11. Who could have predicted it !?!??!!!1111!!

:sarcasm:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/5/134525/2787/152/469712

[JohnnyLib2]

12. Odd, how we talk about Gore winning the popular vote and

the popular votes last Tuesday are discounted.

Maybe Mark Twain explained this, I'll take a look. :shrug:

[JackORoses]

17. In Democratic Primaries, the only reason Popular votes are tallied is to award Delegates

No need to look at Twain, just read the DNC rules

[Growler]

22. What don't you understand??

Too bad you don't know what you are talking about. The popular votes in Texas were counted. Hillary got a lot of delegates from them. There was ALSO a caucus. Or don't you understand that?

At this point I'm starting to think that some people on this board don't WANT to understand...

[lapfog_1]

34. And just what don't YOU understand.

the state wide totals for the popular vote are not used for a damn thing.

Delegates are not awarded state wide, they are awarded district by district.

And, because of odd ways the party awards delegates, not to mention the odd ways the party assigns delegates (certain precincts have DISPROPORTIONAL representation), it's very easy for the "victor" in the state popular vote to be awarded fewer delegates than their opponent. And this is without even looking at the caucus portion.

State wide popular vote means absolutely zilch. The winner is the one awarded more delegates. That would be Senator Obama for Texas.

It's ALL about the delegates.

[Mooney]

14. She started shrieking like an idiot

and people like to vote for the lowest common denominator.

[cloud75]

106. trash...trash...trash another obama supporter wallowing in gutter.

[Little Star]

15. I think Obama not being truthful about the Canadian meeting denying

it took place. People do not like to be lied to.

[tabatha]

32. I think the story is a little complex.

The initial story was that the Obama camp contacted the Canadians.
They did not, and denied it.

Then it turns out the Candaians contacted an advisor to the Obama camp.
I don't think the Obama camp were aware of it and what was said.

[DearAbby]

16. Hillary won Texas?

News to me, better check out Obama's website, Texas is listed in the win column

[MonkeyFunk]

She won the Texas primary

[awaysidetraveler]

33. And she lost the Texas caucus, meaning yes--she lost Texas--and isn't it interesting

that so many here are so quick to act on the misunderstandings presented by our mischevious media?

There's only one Texas election, and it has two parts. Whoever won most of the delegates from both parts won Texas.

[MonkeyFunk]

68. She won the primary

She got the most votes. More texans, given the chance, supported Clinton over Obama.

The news reports list her as the winner. CNN has a checkmark next to HER name.

[snappyturtle]

118. But, in the end, it's all about delegates. n/t

[StevieM]

44. Which shows how dishonest he is. He pretends to win where he lost. Disgraceful. (eom)

x

[awaysidetraveler]

49. It's an easy to reference fact that Obama won Texas.

[StevieM]

56. Yep, it's on Obama's website along with Nevada. Both lies. And the people of those states will

remember his betrayal of them in November if he succeeds in stealing the nomination.

Steve

[PseudoIntellect]

71. Just who wants to STEAL the nomination? Hint: not BHO.

He's projected to win Texas.

[tammywammy]

73. Since this is a race for delegates

Even Hillary Clinton has said so and it's just a fact, if someone won more delegates in a state then they won the state.

[stillcool]

76. He did win Nevada...don't you remember...

the Clinton's lost their lawsuit.

http://graphics.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/20080112_nevada_lawsuit.pdf
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/17/a-feisty-bill-clinton-defends-nevada-lawsuit/
CLINTON ALLIES SUPPRESS THE VOTE IN NEVADA...
On Meet the Press on Sunday, Hillary Clinton said her campaign had nothing to do with a lawsuit--written about by Nation Editor Katrina vanden Heuvel--that threatens to prevent thousands of workers from voting in the Nevada caucus on Saturday.
Back in March, the Nevada Democratic Party agreed to set up caucus locations on the Vegas strip for low-income shift workers, many of them members of the state's influential Culinary Union, who commute long distances to work and wouldn't be able to get home in time to caucus. It was an uncontroversial idea until the Culinary Union endorsed Barack Obama and the Nevada State Education Association, whose top officials support Clinton, sued to shut down the caucus sites.
The Clinton camp played dumb until yesterday, when President Clinton came out in favor of the lawsuit.
Clinton's comments drew a heated response from D. Taylor, the head of Nevada's Culinary Union, on MSNBC's Hardball. "He is in support of disenfranchising thousands upon thousands of workers, not even just our members," Taylor said of Clinton. "The teachers union is just being used here. We understand that This is the Clinton campaign. They tried to disenfranchise students in Iowa. Now they're trying to disenfranchise people here in Nevada, who are union members and people of color and women."
Rank-and-file members of Nevada's teachers union also come out against the lawsuit filed by their leadership. "We never thought our union and Senator Clinton would put politics ahead of what's right for our students, but that's exactly what they're doing," the letter stated. "As teachers, and proud Democrats, we hope they will drop this undemocratic lawsuit and help all Nevadans caucus, no matter which candidate they support."
The lawsuit's opponents make a persuasive point. Creating obstacles to voting is what the GOP does to Democrats, not what Democrats should be doing to other Democrats.

[StevieM]

77. Nope, it was OBAMA who tried to steal Nevada by having the union bosses tell workers that

they could only go caucus if they supported Obama. If Hillary had done that she would have been expelled from the Senate and indicted. But alas...the rules only apply if you're Hillary.

Steve

[stillcool]

87. Did you read that in an article...

or do you just make shit up to suit your needs. It's pathetic. And obvious.

[stillcool]

102. You have to read more..

Maybe you should choose your bullshit battles better.

[snappyturtle]

120. It's all about delegates as it is all about electoral votes in the GE. n/t

[salbi]

90. He didn't lose

By reporting her win when only the primary votes were in, gave a very distorted view of the election there. The primary did count for 2/3, but the caucus was 1/3. With her narrow win in the primary and his overwhelming win in the caucus, he came out the overall winner. I know that will be hard for many to understand after it was so widely reported that Hill won Texas, but facts are facts.

[grantcart]

19. not blow her 20 point lead

[OhioBlue]

20. she threw the "kitchen sink" and now has nothing

We held the line in Ohio - she didn't gain much.
She LOST Texas
She LOST VT
and won RI

what did she net - like 8 delegates out of Tuesday?

BFD

She came into Ohio like she was "Hurricane Hillary" and left the State a mess. All storms fizzle.

[jlake]

23. "All storms fizzle" Yep... We are watching Obama fizzle out now.

[awaysidetraveler]

27. Once you realize that Hillary lost the election, will you vote for Obama?

?

As it stands (notwithstanding superdelegates) Hillary Clinton needs to beat Barak Obama by an average of 24% in the remaining elections to surpass Obama's 141 pledged delegate lead (AP) and win the nomination.

http://www.slate.com/features/delegatecounter /

If she keeps her 32 superdelegate lead, she needs only an 18% average lead over Barak Obama to beat his 109 total delegate lead.

If Florida and Michigan hold new elections and allow Obama to campaign, Rasmussen projects that Hillary Clinton
would win. In Florida she would gain about 55% of the vote, giving her roughly 108 delegates, and Obama would
lose with only 39% of the vote, gaining 77 delegates. However, they are statistically tied in Michigan, meaning
that Obama would likely split the vote there with Clinton. Therefore, Clinton should gain 31 delegates in this
scenario, which we'll call scenario A.

In scenario A, after the FL and MI re-vote, Clinton will only need a 12% average lead over Obama to secure the democratic nomination.

Florida's election put Hillary Clinton at 49% (105 delegates), Barak Obama at 33% (67 delegates),
with Edwards at 14% (13 delegates). So if Florida is seated as is, Clinton stands to gain a net
of 38 pledged delegates. Michigan's election gave Hillary Clinton 55% of the vote (73 delegates),
and "undeclared" might go for Obama in a settlement, leaving him 40% of the vote and 55 delegates.

So if these delegates are seated as is, Clinton will gain a net of 56 delegates in this scenario,
which we'll call scenario B.

In scenario B, Hillary keeps her superdelegate lead, convinces Howard Dean to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates
as is, and then she wins the remaining races by an average of 8% in each of the remaining elections.

Will "scenario B" occur? If it could occur, would it be advisable? The answer to that is no, and again no.
Democrats agree on fair rules where everybody gets to vote and all the votes get counted:
if you can't agree to that, then you're simply not one of us--no matter who you vote for.

So that leaves the 12% hope of Hillary Clinton in scenario A, which is an almost impossible scenario.

Why hasn't the media divulged this mathematical reality to Hillary Clinton and her supporters? Well... it is complicated math, I'll grant you that. But why isn't the media breaking it down and reporting it as a simple fact?

I suspect that they want us to slug it out in the streets. Should we let them divide our party that way?

No.

Best of luck as you find your way back home to the Democratic Party.

[jlake]

30. Obama has won all of the "dark and deserted states"

Hillary will win this thing!

[awaysidetraveler]

37. The dark squares are dark with percentages of population. Can you answer the question now?

How do you forsee her winning?

[ExtraGriz]

31. he sizzled and then fizzled.

:P

[jlake]

35. lol

[JackORoses]

36. actually, what you are watching is the slow realization of Hillarites

They are coming to understand that their candidate is now inviable and is actually becoming a dangerto the Democratic Party.

I don't expect you to change, but you will find your team dwindling.

[jlake]

38. Here in PA, team Hillary grows daily. She will be the nominee.

Obama will be so damaged he won't win re-election to the senate in 2010.

[awaysidetraveler]

39. So you're all about damaging Obama? Is that your goal tonight?

How about punching the numbers for PA into slate.com's delegate counter. Do a little math tonight, instead.

[jlake]

41. Hilly's going to win with 75%+ of the vote.

Obama is damaging himself with his two faced campaign.
Politics of dope.

[awaysidetraveler]

47. So you're saying that Hillary Clinton will win 75% of the vote for each of the remaining states?

And you think I'm practicing the politics of dope?

Well, I agree with you on one thing: she'll need about an average of 75% of the remaining vote to defeat Obama.

There's other scenarios, but none of them are likely outcomes. So I guess that you must really hate Obama
to work at destroying the unity of the Democratic Party.

[tammywammy]

74. Can I have some of what you're smoking?

"Hilly's going to win with 75%+ of the vote."

:rofl:

[OhioBlue]

52. you truly need help. n/t

[JackORoses]

69. she didn't even have any events scheduled until the past few days.

Obama has had teams on the ground and events scheduled and advertised for weeks now.

Once again, Hillary is beaten on the ground.

She couldn't even get a full slate of delegates certified in PA. This will cost her delegates from the districts they represented.

[seabeyond]

21. she won two, obama won two.... n/t

[OhioBlue]

28. btw - the truth about the NAFTA lie

was that somehow she convinced Ohioans to vote for her despite the fact that BILL CLINTON signed NAFTA.

HE F-in SIGNED IT. She was in the WH gaining all of the so-called experience on her resume. She did nothing. She says she was against it... (which I call BS on) and she says she is a "doer" well then why the Hell did she sit on her ass and do nothing but "think" it might not be the best thing? She didn't take any f-in action to stop it.

Tell that to the thousands of people that have seen their jobs eliminated and benefits disappear as factories have closed all over Ohio.

That is the GD NAFTA lie.

[Dogmudgeon]

29. The Obama rock-star effect is wearing off

Obama's persona is changing; he can't very well get down-and-dirty if he continues to play his role as a secular saint. Plus he's become the front-runner and his ground operation has been doing his dirty work, which people perceive as being two-faced. But the main cause of the erosion of his Mo is not from his blunders -- it's from the passing of time.

I don't think Hillary did all that much beyond introducing instability into the campaign. And it takes so little to do it; look how we all explode in outrage at the smallest of slights. Hillary knows she can work that, while Obama is trying to get disentangled from his "narrative". So while she has nowhere to go but up, he has nowhere to go but down.

Of course, it will change again. And again. Now THAT is Change You Can Count On. And while it sounds ironic to say so, it's solidly true; change is the only thing we can ever count on.

It's like the old saying from Maimonides -- "We make our plans, and God laughs".

--p!

[awaysidetraveler]

42. When will the math effect sink in: Hillary is already lost; it is time to unite behind the winner.

And you're busy talking about style... you should be ashamed.

[Dogmudgeon]

58. "You should be ashamed"

I'm not. It's because I'm not a prig. And only prigs go around trying to shame people.

If you want to shame someone, have a child.

--p!

[thoughtcrime1984]

75. The change will happen in office

He'll never get there if he doesn't fight back against Dirty Hill and Filthy Bill. Of course they want him to not go negative on them, that might be too effective!

[cloud75]

107. true that it's like you have to be peaking at the right time to win this thing. nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

51. Hillary did it the old fashioned way, she Roved her opponent.

[Dark]

57. Limbaugh crossovers. There was one at my precinct when I went in.

n/t

[RBInMaine]

59. Machine politics advantage, demographics advantage, AND...

went VERY negative in the endgame. (In fairness, Obama did not hit back well enough, and also Hillary did do a good job morphing into the "populist fighter" which played well to the working class folks.)
Sad though that Hillary decided to go so negative.

[housewolf]

64. Here's how she got as many votes as she did in theTexas primary

and probably Ohio too. Rhode Island has been hers from the get-go.

The Limbaugh Effect on Clinton’s Texas Win
read this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4960469



And boy has he been laughing at Democrats ever since!

[fliesincircles]

65. In Ohio she campaigned statewide

Don't know what she did in TX or RI. In Ohio, either herself, Bill, Gov. Strickland and others went to moderate areas statewide, not just urban strongholds, to get folks excited about Dem policies. They voted for Hillary because she came to them. Barack stayed in the urban strongholds, preaching to the choir. Gore tried this in 2000, Kerry in 04. If Barack tries that in November, Ohio could be much, much closer than it should be.

[OzarkDem]

86. She was always ahead in Ohio and TX

Obama just lost his ability to gin up his celebrity campaign and overtake her at the last minute.

Voters are getting serious and taking a closer look at the candidates. Obama's initial bounce has run its course, the newness has worn off his image and now he's just another candidate who gives a good speech but doesn't have much more going for him.

[Jennos20]

79. She won the latino vote in Texas

by an extremely large margin! That is how she won! I was offended by obama's pandering to hispanics.

[WolverineDG]

84. So you're okay with using racism to win the Latino vote?

because that's what they did here in the Spanish media.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4851663

dg

[okasha]

100. Nope. They didn't.

It's not Raymond who refers to Obama's "Muslim origins", it's the reporter. And "Muslim" refers to religion, by the way, not "race."

[WolverineDG]

101. He's quoting Raymond

and it's racist to go spread this stuff in the Spanish because you don't think the other side understands it.

dg

[okasha]

108. Uhm, no.

Quotations have quotation marks around them, remember? The paragraph containing reference to Obama's so-called "Muslim origins" has no quote marks.

"it's racist to go spread this stuff in the Spanish because you don't think the other side understands it."

You mean it discriminates against whites? But as I've pointed out, there's no "stuff" to be "spread." Sorry if you feel handicapped because you're monolingual and believe folks who speak other languages are somehow conspiring against you. You can address the first difficulty by enrolling in a language course. The second problem--you might want to see a shrink.

[WolverineDG]

109. Again, wrong

if it were the case of the reporter saying these things, why has the paper not apologized &/or printed a retraction? The only thing they did was change the online version to remove those remarks.

And, btw, I'm tri-lingual & know for a fact that sometimes people do speak negatively about another in a language they think that person doesn't understand. Not all the time, but often enough, so don't try to BS me on this issue.

So by saying these things only in the Spanish media, not the English media, Raymond was playing the race card. And why would he say white Republicans instead of just Republicans, if he wasn't doing just that?

dg

[okasha]

121. I'm a polyglot and a linguist

and yes, I do know that sometimes you speak a particular language to keep others from understanding. But Raymond was speaking Spanish to a Spanish-speaking audience--El Manana is the main newspaper in Nuevo Laredo--though most of the border population is at least bilingual. So the idea that he was saying something secret to keep the Anglos from understanding is caca de toro. Speaking Spanish to Spanish speakers is racist only in the eyes of English-only rethugs and KKK-types.

If you want to know why the paper didn't apologize or issue a retraction, why don't you use your Spanish skills to ask them? And I'll ask you--if the paper was quoting Raymond, as it was in the paragraphs before and after the offensive passage, why didn't it also use quote marks to demarcate those words?

Sorry, what you've got here is just another case of manufactured outrage on behalf of Counsin Bam Bam.

[Jennos20]

103. I don't really know what you are talking about

and quite honestly I don't care what you think. My community really appreciates everything the Clinton's did for us, and I don't appreciate Obama coming over here and pretending he cares about our problems. He didn't give a crap about the latino vote until he saw what happened in california. Him and his dirty politics can kiss my ass.

[WolverineDG]

104. Not my fault you have a reading comprehension problem

The Clintons have done nothing for South Texas. I know, because I've lived here my entire life. The only time they show up is when they need money or votes.

Bye to you & your support of racism.

dg

[Jennos20]

113. I have also

lived in south texas my whole life you koolaid drinking fool. At least the clinton's have acknowledge our existence unlike your mediocre leader who does not give a crap about you. My goodness does everything have to be about racism with you? Please educate yourself. Oh and by the way obama wouldn't appreciate your attitude. Hope and Change!

[cooolandrew]

80. NAFTA gate she called Canada and asked them to consult Barack on NAFTA...

... so his tema didn't make the call.

[Hepburn]

81. How did Hillary win? She cheated and played dirty. n/t

[aquarius dawning]

82. There weren't enough black voters in ohio to put him over the top. eom

[stillcool]

88. I thought Clinton was 'supposed' to win...

Ohio. I thought it was because of BLACK_BARACK_SCARY_MUSLIM_HUSSEIN_TERROR_OSAMA_OBAMA

[OzarkDem]

85. Obama's campaign is losing steam

Clinton was always ahead in Ohio and Texas. Before those contests, Obama could depend on outspending Clinton and relying on his "cult of personality" to draw the crowds and support.

But the act is wearing thin and the more Obama campaigns the more voters realize they still don't know much about him and realize he's an untested, inexperienced candidate who isn't ready to be POTUS.

Its simple. The hype is wearing thin, economic times are getting harder, people are more worried about the future so they are less likely to take a gamble on an untested candidate with no experience.

[Exilednight]

93. How Hillary 'won' Texas....

On March 1,2008, the Dallas Morning News published an article with excerpts from Hillary Clinton’s Texas caucus training material.

“The control of the sign-in sheets and the announcement of the delegates allotted to each candidate are the critical functions of the Chair and Secretary. This is why it is so important that Hillary supporters hold these positions.”

Today the Daily Texan published an article showing three cases of possible voter fraud at the Jester Center caucus.

“At least three students who signed the list verified that the candidates attached to their names were not the candidates they voted for.”

It was also reported that Hillary herself instructed around 200 of her caucus leaders.

[TheZug]

96. She used the exact same tactics that home security companies do.

See your precious little white girl sleeping peacefully? Well, a scary black man is going to put her in danger! Vote for me/buy our alarm system, and we'll protect her!

[OzarkDem]

111. Reality checks: economy sinking, job losses

people are worried and they're not thinking of the election as another version of American Idol anymore.

[George_Bonanza]

114. Maybe it was the massive head start she had?

Do people forget that she had a 20% lead to begin with?

[anonymous171]

115. It was fear 24/7. That's why she won the rural white vote.

[Texasgal]

123. She "won" Texas

By crossover voters.

Republicans who think that McCain can beat Hillary in the general.

Trust me, as a poll worker there were PLENTY of those types of voters.