The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Clinton wins OH & RI, Obama wins VT, TX??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jannus
  • Start date Start date
What's the latest on that?

I don't know. Last I checked about 40% of precincts had reported, and Obama was ahead with a little over 55% of the vote. It could be days before the final numbers are in for the Texas precinct conventions.

This page reports the latest numbers broken out into senatorial districts.
 
I heard a report on CNN yesterday afternoon, that of the 65 Delegates that will be allowed to head to the National Convention in Denver from Texas, that even if it turns out that Hillary Clinton in fact wins the popular vote in Texas, that it's likely that Obama will still lead with 5 more delegates than Clinton, meaning that he will win Texas.

With just over 53 or 55% of the Precincts reporting, Obama appears to have a lead in the Delegate count.

How is this possible?

Early voting in Texas was a record turn out, and lasted for nearly two weeks.

It's possible that many voters changed their vote during the caucus.

Meaning that I could have early voted for Hillary Clinton, but then caucused for Barack Obama on March 4.

edit: It should be noted that I didn't but there's a chance that's what happened in some/most instances.
 
Another possibility, centexfarmer, is that Clinton's primary voters didn't caucus at the same rate as Obama's primary voters.

And yes, a Texas Democrat could vote for one candidate in the primary and then caucus for the other, if he so chose. Given the length of time that early voting was going on and the shift in the polls over that time, that is a completely credible scenario.
 
Another possibility, centexfarmer, is that Clinton's primary voters didn't caucus at the same rate as Obama's primary voters.

And yes, a Texas Democrat could vote for one candidate in the primary and then caucus for the other, if he so chose. Given the length of time that early voting was going on and the shift in the polls over that time, that is a completely credible scenario.

As is yours:

Clinton's primary voters didn't caucus at the same rate as Obama's primary voters.

I didn't think of that one. :)
 
Back
Top