Texas Caucus Results Page

***Updated March 11***

OBAMA WINS TEXAS CAUCUS: CNN is reporting that Barack Obama has won the Texas Caucus, the second part of the so-called Texas Two-Step, giving him more delegates than Hillary Clinton from the Lone Star State:

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama has won the Texas Democratic caucuses and will get more delegates out of the state than his rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, who won the state's primary, according to CNN estimates.

Under the Texas Democratic Party's complex delegate selection plan, Texas voters participated in both a primary and caucuses on March 4. Two-thirds of the state's 193 delegates were at stake at the primary, while the remaining third were decided by the caucuses.

An additional 35 superdelegates were not tied to either contest. Clinton, of New York, defeated Obama in the primary by a 51-47 percent margin. But results of the caucuses were up in the air on election night and for several days afterward, due to state party rules that did not require local caucus officials to report their results to a centralized location.

Partial caucus results, representing 41 percent of all caucus precincts, showed Obama last week with 56 percent of the county-level delegates chosen at the caucuses to 44 percent for Clinton. The state party says it will not be able to provide a further breakdown of the caucus results from March 4.

After a comprehensive review of these results, CNN estimates that Obama won more support from Texas caucus-goers than Clinton. Based on the state party's tally, Obama's caucus victory translates into 38 national convention delegates, compared to 29 for Clinton.

And though Clinton won more delegates than Obama in the primary, 65 to 61, Obama's wider delegate margin in the caucuses gives him the overall statewide delegate lead, 99 to 94 -- or once superdelegate endorsements are factored in, 109 to 106.

Read HuffPost's OffTheBus Superdelegate Investigation

Story continues below

advertisement

EARLIER:The Associated Press is reporting that Obama is regaining delegate ground in the caucus results:

Barack Obama regained lost ground in the fierce competition for Democratic convention delegates on Wednesday based on results from the Texas caucuses, partially negating the impact of Hillary Rodham Clinton's string of comeback primary victories.

Late returns showed Clinton emerged from Rhode Island, Vermont, Texas and Ohio with a gain of 12 delegates on her rival for the night, with another dozen yet to be awarded in The Associated Press' count.

Via the Texas Democratic Party:

All Precinct Convention Results are unofficial until certified by the Credentials committee at the County or Senatorial District Convention on March 29th. However, in response to overwhelming interest from the public and the press, the Texas Democratic Party developed a reporting system that will allow the Chair of each Precinct Convention to call in results as soon as their meeting adjourns.

The results posted below reflect the number of delegates elected from the Precinct convention to the county or Senatorial District convention. Precinct convention results are likely to come in more slowly than primary election results because the convention may not begin until the last voter in line has voted, and other party business is conducted in addition to signing in and selecting delegates for presidential candidates.

Check the results here.

Comments

[zorrobozo]

Yippee-ky-yeah, yi-yeah!

[JayFlanders]

The Clinton Texas Cover up?

Clinton won the Primary votes in Texas 51% to 47%. The caucus portion of the ‘Texas Two Step” has quietly disappeared from the media and the results have ground to a halt with about 40% reported. Obama holds the lead in the caucuses, 56% to Clinton’s 44%.
Where are the results? How is it that everyone continues to talk about Clintons revival from her “Win” in Texas when a clear picture has not been released?
The answer might lie in two overlooked tidbits. The first is a rumored memo obtained from the Clinton’s caucus organizing materials, and the second is an obscure rule in the Texas Democratic Party Caucus process.
The Clinton campaign apparently instructed their volunteers to get control of administrative roles in the caucuses. When I read this I wondered, why? Surely they couldn’t change votes, and the chaos of Nevada not withstanding, could not change the outcome in this way. As it turns out, what they could change was the way the outcome was perceived and presented by the media.
According to Texas Democratic Party Rules, those persons controlling the administrative materials for each caucus are not required to phone in the results until the State convention. Like much of the process, it operates on the “honor system”.
So, is it possible that the 40% reporting number in the Texas represents the percentage of administrative packets secured by the Obama camp who diligently reported their results, while the remaining unreported results are being covered up by Clinton people?
Unfortunately, it seems like a strong possibility.
In Ohio, Clinton’s early lead continued to diminish over the course of the evening, settling finally at a strong, but not overwhelming, 10 point lead. Her victory in Rhode Island was the flip side of Obama’s win in Vermont and they effectively cancelled each other out. It was the declaration of a win for her in Texas that shaped the narrative of the reporting, and launched her “comeback”. If the caucus results hold up, the results in delegate allocation could easily counter Clinton’s 4 point primary advantage. There is a very good chance that Obama could win more delegates out of Texas when the results are finally released.
In the days before Texas and Ohio, the Clinton campaign launched underhanded attacks on Obama, including photos of him in a turban, exploiting a now largely debunked NAFTA memo. (The meeting that generated the memo in question was a month earlier, long before Ohio, and the Clinton camp has now been identified as having told the Canadians to take her position “with a grain of salt”.) On top of this they ran the old “Red Phone” ad, a classic scare tactic, and tried to embarrass the media with claims of bias in against her. The results turned the momentum in the closing hours toward Clinton. Would this have been enough to create the impression that she had made the comeback without a “Win” in Texas?
It’s hard to gauge. What isn’t difficult to see is that the Clinton camp is, in fact, willing to stoop very low in their effort to win the nomination.
---
Mark Jay Flanders

[WAdem]

There is not coverup in TX, Jay. For the same reason that Ruben Studdard beat Clay Aiken during American Idol's second season, Obama garnered more votes with the caucuses. Unfortunately for him and his followers, we all get to vote in November and with all hands on deck, Obama has no chance. It is only when a disproportionate number of blacks and young voters basically stuff the ballot box that we see these anomalies. You do understand that there will be a more broad based electorate in the general election, right?

[busybeez]

And you do understand you need to plan to vote early in November, because the lines will be very long with Obama supporters? We haven't seen any long lines on the Republican side yet. Maybe they will wake up by then though and show up to vote.

[redox21]

So true, WAdem, that's why McCain is sure to win against Hillary in the general election. She's shown no potential to win votes outside the Dem party faithful (except for Limbaugh's Repubs in Texas who voted for her to drag out the Dem dogfight).

[MarkieBee]

Yeah, stuffing the ballot boxes with more votes than your candidate's. Stuffing the ballot box means putting more than one vote in per person. So are you making the allegation that Obama's win is tainted somehow? Give me some proof sock puppet or STFU.

[Halfwit]

I am an Obama delegate to the County Convention here in Houston for Senate district 6. We are hearing that the preliminary count is 98 for Obama and 95 for Clinton.
BUT - we have the county conventions coming up on March 29 and that number could change there depending on whose delegates actually show up. This is new for most of us and it is likely that all the delegates for each candidate might not show up. Then the state convention is in June and the same thing could happen there, although less likely because those people would have bothered to show up for the county convention and so, presumably will show up for the State convention.

[magjohn1]

How dare we declare a winner of the Democratic Texas primacaucus without first counting the caucus votes??!! The Texas election had two components - a primary and a caucus. The votes for the primary came in first, and they are stil counting the votes at the caucuses. Shouldn't we wait for all the results before declaring a winner, especially since the primary outcome was so close? We know the caucuses account for one-third of the delegates. But I am not even talking about the delegate allocation. I am simply referring to the actual voting results. We behave as if these caucus-goers never voted!!! What we should have done is wait for all the results, from both components of the election, and THEN declare a winner based by weighting the two results according to the Texas rules (2/3 for the primary and 1/3 for the caucuses). Then, and only then may we truly and fairly say who won the Texas election for the Democratic nominee!!! If Obama wins the caucuses by 55% or more, there is a sincere case that can be made, with integrity and conviction, that Obama won Texas or at least that the win was split... especially considering that Clinton only won the primary portion of the Texas election by such a slim margin. Would someone in the national forums and media please discuss this dynamic? We talked so much about the "Texas two-step" and yet we treat the election as if it was done just like the other three states!! Seems patently unfair to dismiss the work and votes of all those voters who went back to caucus that night. I know the big "comeback" story loses its lustre... but this is about fundamental honesty and justice for the voters and the candidates.

[tanghorse]

You are absolutely right! I've been checking on CNN throughout the day and as of 5:19 Texas time, only 41% of the Texas caucus results are reported, with 56% for Obama and 44% for Clinton. 67 Total delegates are tied to the caucuses, according to CNN, and 126 total to the primary. From the primary, Clinton received 65 delegates, Obama 61 delegates - and if the current caucus percentage split holds, Clinton would receive 29 and Obama 38 delegates, resulting in Obama winning 5 more total delegates from Texas than Clinton did. The winner should not be declared yet - a lot of us went back to our precincts after voting in the primary and waited hours to vote in the caucus!

[rmetz74]

Just this weekend, it was announced that the delegate totals for California (where I live) were mis-calculated, and are just now being corrected - in Obama's favor.

http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/obamas-california-comeback-295/?mod=googlenews_wsj

And everyone should remember that regardless of all the numbers, at the end of the day, delegates can change their minds!

I think most people think the delegate numbers are a lot more concrete than they are. They're estimates.

[Dari]

PART 2

As the news has come in during the day my suspicions are being overwhelmingly confirmed. Our local talk shows are getting calls reporting the same thing I experienced from the most heavily Republican precincts in our county. The big news is coming from just to the north of us in legendary Williamson County, known nationwide as a scary bastion of ultra-conservatism. In Williamson County, where it's hard to find a Democrat to laugh at and poke with a stick, they were already running out of Democratic ballots at noon. They had to reassign poll workers from the Republican primary to the Democratic primary on the fly to meet up with demand as thousands of Republicans crossed over to vote in the Democratic primary.

Until today I would have called Texas for Obama based on his enormous groundswell of grassroots support and snowballing momentum, but so many Republicans are crossing over to vote for Hillary that Obama's authentic popular support may not be enough to carry the election. In some precincts anecdotal reports have over 90% of the Republican voters crossing to the other side.

The strategy behind this is simple. It's been promoted both by Rush Limbaugh and other national talk show personalities and by local Republican icons. All of the polls show that John McCain can beat Hillary Clinton in a general election and that he can't beat Barack Obama in the general election, so the message has gone out that Republicans who want to keep the White House should vote for Clinton so that she stays in the race and continues to have a shot at the Democratic nomination.

Comments from crossover voters show an interesting mix of motivations. While some Reagan Democrats seem to have seen this as an opportunity to return to the Democratic party, most of those commenting are convinced that McCain has a lock on the nomination and that they can do more good undermining the Democrats by keeping the chaos of the campaign going and by giving Clinton a boost. There also seems to be a strain of pranksterism. Apparently a lot of people are finding the bloody Democratic campaign entertaining and they don't want it to end. Today's weather is beautiful, and that seems to have put voters in a mood to go out and have some fun at the polls.....

[Dari]

My apologies, please see full story below.

Thought the original post had gone into the ethers.

[clearvoyant]

Those are not repugs Dummy. They are Democrats who have been intimidated by the Nazis that took over the State in 94. They have finally found some motivation. We have not run decent candidates or full slates in many of the Texas races because too many people threw in the towel to the so called Bush Mandate. Unfortunately they believed that crap. They are waking up now. I guess I should be grateful ... better late than never. Bush had a 6 year head start on screwing up Texas. The problem here as with the rest of the country is people have not paid attention to what was actually happening versus what they were told and the Media has been comatose thanks to Karen Hughes. Scandals are breaking often here and they involve Repugs and they are serious. People are seeing what they have in office and don't like it. The Williamson County Sheriff(R) was caught staggering down the street in Round Rock a few years ago and that was the start of it there. The Harris County D.A. (R) just resigned.(­read up it's a hoot) I was in Travis(next to Williamson) when the sheriff thing happened and I am in Houston now. We have had the Media after a long time County Comm.(R) and the County jail run by a Repug Sheriff is under investigation by D.O.J.
Karma Dudes!

[JesusHChrist]

Verily, only My Dad's intervention will garner Hillary the nomination. And after her latest negative campaign ads against Barack, Dad's ready to reassign her as Undersecretary of Dog Catching in hell.

Your Savior

Jesus H Christ

[athenalong]

Your name is the SHIT dude.

HILARIOUS.

[Dari]

PART 3

So, in my assessment, after seeing the percentage split in that county, I have to wonder WHO won what?

Perhaps, the REAL victory goes to Rush Limbaugh and the Republicans!

By prolonging this race:

Democrats are willing to fracture their party and give the Republicans the time, momentum

and

via Senator Clinton's campaigning tactics, the ammunition for the fall.


We do really have a choice here!

Clinton = I WILL do it FOR you

Obama = We CAN do it together

In the end, I wonder whether we had better start practicing to say:

President John McCain

[Dari]

My apologies. Thought the original post had gone into the ethers.

See full post below.

[Dari]

I think it is valuable to assess these "DEMOCRATIC" victories:


Full Link:

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2008/03/04/1730362.php

Here's how it starts:

On the Ground in Texas - Attack of the Merry Pranksters
Written by Dave Nalle
Published March 04, 2008
Part of On The Road To 2008

I knew there was something wrong when I went to vote at 10 A.M. and I was only the second Republican to show up at my precinct; the first was my wife who'd voted an hour earlier. As I was leaving I saw familiar Republican comrades standing in the wrong line and it dawned on me. They've actually been listening to the talk radio strategists, and I knew from their sheepish faces that they were all crossing over to vote for Hillary.

As the news has come in during the day my suspicions are being overwhelmingly confirmed. Our local talk shows are getting calls reporting the same thing I experienced from the most heavily Republican precincts in our county. The big news is coming from just to the north of us in legendary Williamson County, known nationwide as a scary bastion of ultra-conservatism. In Williamson County, where it's hard to find a Democrat to laugh at and poke with a stick, they were already running out of Democratic ballots at noon. They had to reassign poll workers from the Republican primary to the Democratic primary on the fly to meet up with demand as thousands of Republicans crossed over to vote in the Democratic primary.

Until today I would have called Texas for Obama based on his enormous groundswell of grassroots support and snowballing momentum, but so many Republicans are crossing over to vote for Hillary that Obama's authentic popular support may not be enough to carry the election. In some precincts anecdotal reports have over 90% of the Republican voters crossing to the other side.

The strategy behind this is simple. It's been promoted both by Rush Limbaugh and other national talk show personalities and by local Republican icons. All of the polls show that John McCain can beat Hillary Clinton in a general election and that he can't beat Barack Obama in the general election, so the message has gone out that Republicans who want to keep the White House should vote for Clinton so that she stays in the race and continues to have a shot at the Democratic nomination.

Comments from crossover voters show an interesting mix of motivations. While some Reagan Democrats seem to have seen this as an opportunity to return to the Democratic party, most of those commenting are convinced that McCain has a lock on the nomination and that they can do more good undermining the Democrats by keeping the chaos of the campaign going and by giving Clinton a boost. There also seems to be a strain of pranksterism. Apparently a lot of people are finding the bloody Democratic campaign entertaining and they don't want it to end. Today's weather is beautiful, and that seems to have put voters in a mood to go out and have some fun at the polls.....

See Full Link for the rest of the story.

So, in my assessment, after seeing the percentage split in that county, I have to wonder WHO won what?

Perhaps, the REAL victory goes to Rush Limbaugh and the Republicans!

By prolonging this race:

Democrats are willing to fracture their party and give the Republicans the time, momentum

and

via Senator Clinton's campaigning tactics, the ammunition for the fall.


We do really have a choice here!

Clinton = I WILL do it FOR you

Obama = We CAN do it together

In the end, I wonder whether we had better start practising to say:

President John McCain

[WAdem]

Polls show that Obama loses as many crossover voters to McCain as he gains against him. Caucuses only show that small groups can dominate the result. They have no correlation to success in the general election.

[DaviddeKanterArndt]

I cannot believe the media are calling 3/4 a "big victory" for Clinton when she is only going to pick up about 12 delegates.

12 delegates is not a significant step towards closing the gap on Obama.

For her own good, for the Democratic party, and for the good of the country, she should concede now.

It seems likely that the only real question is whether she will lose graciously or viciously.

[Prakosh]

I'm becoming more and more dismayed with this process. The raw numbers tell a rather disheartening story; a story many slap-happy democrats are evidently completely ignoring. Here are the raw numbers from Rhode Island: Clinton - 106,471 Obama - 73,609 that's over 180,000 votes for the Democrats in Rhode Island. The Republican vote was shocking. McCain had 17,342 while Huckabee had a whopping 5, 766. That's an incredible total count of 23,105. And as lop-sided as this count is at roughly 8.5 to 1, it's only slightly less lop-sided than some of the earlier contests. Yesterday we had Rush Limbaugh telling his dim-witted listeners to vote for Clinton and last night white males (most of Limbaugh's bobble-headed listeners are white males) were voting for Clinton and evidently according to some pundits put her over the top, with Clinton taking the white male vote by 55-44 percent in Ohio, where the French TV-5 channel interviewed some white males who claimed to be Democrats and Clinton voters saying they wouldn't vote for a Black man for President (why isn’t American television showing this racism?), and in Texas 50-49. What is most appalling is that the Republicans are apparently controlling the Democratic primary and aiding Clinton in her politics of personal destruction because a weakened or bifurcated Democratic ticket aids McCain. The Democrats have now backed themselves into a corner that is going to be hard to get out of and Clinton's attempt to placate Obama supporters by "hinting" that he may be her VP choice smacks of pandering.

[pamelagoodenough]

Kip,
And I say thank heavens for that. Hillary Clinton cannot beat John McCain in the general election. I do not know where some of the info is coming from that she can. Only Obama can bring in the Republicans in the general election, and the independents. Hillary brought in Republicans last night because Rush Limbaugh sent his Republican minions to the polls to vote for her so she would beat Obama. At least that is what I see. I thnk those who vote for her like her and think they know her--it is an illusion. She will be a spoiler and we will be defeated by the war mongerers.

I hope the superdelegates make the call soon. Hillary is dividing the party. She is playing dirty and using Rove's smear tactics. Obama has tried to make the campaign about real issues, not negative attacks that are false, not lies that Clinton is spinning.

I watched a video the other day of her husband, a young Bill Clinton, signing the NAFTA in 1992. it sent shudders up my spine. Her campaign comes out and reports lies from Canada on polling day in Ohio.

If we Dems fail to understand these complications we could give the White House back to the Republicans for another season of war war war. Clinton must drop for the good of humanity.

No more Clinton Bush Clinton Bush. Enough of the backddoor politics of the Clinton Campaign.

[WAdem]

Pamela, do the math. In caucuses, Obama gets disproportionate turnout from black and young voters. Sure, they are highy motivated to win, but these contests don't look at all like the general election will. For starters, despite huge Dem turnouts in the red states, Repugnants will swamp us in November. The fact that HRC beats Obama usually in the larger, blue or Dem states shows that she is stronger for the real contest. Polls which show Obama with a larger advantage vs. McCain than Hillary don't take into account that we vote in November and he can more easily be attacked by the GOP since he has not really faced a tough Repugnant before whereas she has and she has prevailed despite very negative attack ads.

[redox21]

OK Wadem, here is your math: Obama has handily won independents, conservative leaning Dems and liberal leaning Repubs in the primaries - exactly the voters you need to win against McCain. So Hillary eeked out victories in the democratic strongholds - that doesn't mean jack in a general election decided by independents. Sure, Hillary will win the dem faithful in November but she doesn't have what it takes to inspire the more general electorate to vote for her. And all of Hillary's perceived advantages over Obama (experience, handling phone calls at 3am, etc) will evaporate against McCain. A fresh face is the way to beat the old man.

[mrJJ]

Texas primary delegate allocation: as of 7:15 AM

Sen Obama 62
Sen Clinton 63

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pJ0M6W5tNQCPLz7oU3-llfg

228 Texas Delegates at stake

126 "primary-chosen" delegates, allocated based on the results of votes cast on March 4.

42 at-large, "caucus-chosen" delegates that come up through the primary and county convention.

25 pledged "party delegates" allocated by the presidential preference of delegates attending the State convention.

35 unpledged "super delegates" -texas senate type not elite type



The 67 caucus delegate count signified by senate district 1 thru 31 are still being tabulated thus far

Sen Obama is winning SD 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 23, 24, 25

Sen Clinton is winning SD 6, 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31

updated unofficial tabulated precinct caucus totals thus far can be viewed at the following link

http://precinctconventionresults.txdemocrats.org/election08district

[howardl]

I've looked over the "results" page and I can't make any sense of it. You (Mr JJ) seem to have a good grip on this, though I welcome responses from anyone who knows the answers. Suppose Obama wins these 20 districts, and Hillary wins 11. How many of the 42 at-large will go to each candidate? Is that easy to figure out? Will the additional 25 pledged delegates chosen at the state convention be "winner-take-all" for one candidate or the other, or will the convention give some delegates to each of the two?

[Macready]

good news: "Barack Obama regained lost ground in the fierce competition for Democratic convention delegates on Wednesday based on results from the Texas caucuses, partially negating the impact of Hillary Rodham Clinton's string of comeback primary victories.­"

hillary hasn't gained much . . . unfortunately it is enuf to keep her in the race . . . . . .XXXXXX expletives deleted!

[kipmartin]

even if Obama had won with huge landslides, this primary would not lock him into the candidacy. this goes to the convention no matter who wins more delegates over the next few months. and yesterday, everyone knew that--its been impossible for either candidate to clinch the nomination for a couple weeks now.

Obama still has a COMMANDING lead and unless he's caught in a bathroom stall with Larry Craig, he will prevail.

[ann1]

Getting caught in the stall with Larry is funny! No matter how rough it gets, Obama will come out victorious. Evil never prevails.

[WAdem]

I think we need to take a closer look at who can win in November, kip. Unless Obama can limit the voters to blacks and young voters as we have witnessed these last couple of months, he will be road kill for McCain. All of this myopic insight into delegates is foolish. The worst possible outcome would be a GOP president in 2009.