Time Magazine Prepares for Texas Correction; Clinton Prepares to Delay Results

Photos

(pics)

see larger image

uploaded by jaurez

Just as Texas nomination results are promising to lead to an Obama win, Clinton has thrown in a request to postpone the March 29 count as well as the state Senate district conventions until 1 million caucus-goers are verified.

In the meantime, Time Magazine raises the question "Who Won Texas?" after already having declared Clinton a winner, preparing for a different outcome. Americans, it seems, have found it difficult to get a clear grasp on the Democratic nomination process, and the Texas Two-Step has left many confused as to what the definition of a "winner" is in the contest. A further complication is the use of the word primary as in "primary election" and its non-use as in "primary caucus" leading to an understanding, though erroneous, that a primary election vote results in a primary nomination contest winner.

Perhaps after years of ambiguities regarding the electoral process in the US, Americans are finding the moment opportune to fully understand the nuances of the process, and if a process does not achieve an intended objective, could find the means to change the processes before they are next used, rather than calling "foul" in mid-play to already accepted rules.

For a country of sport patriots, Americans seem to waffle when abiding by this game's rules.

End result? On the US primary nominations map, Texas remains colour-assigned as a Clinton win, despite information indicating the contrary. News agencies report that the nominee needs to achieve the 2,025 magic number of delegates, when the magic number is now, according to the Democratic Party rules, the majority of 4,047 or 2,024 following the death of superdelegate Tom Lantos.

Is it Math or is it US History/Government that needs to be re-vamped in American high-schools?