More evidence that Team Clinton was completely unprepared for the Texas contest?
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, herself last night told reporters, per ABC News’ Eloise Harper: “I’ve got people trying to understand it as we speak. Grown men are crying as we speak. I had no idea it was so bizarre.”
Does the Clinton camp think this is cute? These are really odd admissions for a campaign that claims experience and preparedness.
Former Rep. Martin Frost, D-Texas, writing in a column today says that "the delegate selection process in Texas is so complicated that it is more than theoretically possible that the candidate who wins the popular vote may not, in fact, win the most delegates."
He calls it a "Rube Goldberg-esque delegate selection process."
But then he explains it fairly well. And if I can get a hold of the basic idea, certainly Clinton campaign staffers should be able to get it.
The state will send 228 delegates to the Democratic National Convention, 126 of which will be elected from the state’s 31 state senatorial districts on primary day itself, March 4.
These 126 are distributed throughout state senate districts, which e between 2 and 8 delegates, depending on how Democrats did in recent general elections. These delegates will be awarded proportionally to Obama or Clinton within that district.
There are also 67 delegates that will be assigned per a caucus that begins after the polls close and finishes during the state part convention in June. Voters have to vote in the primary to participate in the caucus.
There are also 35 superdelegates.
In any case, what seems most glaring is that Clinton has been unprepared for this. And I don’t think that’s particularly amusing, really.