“Super Tuesday II” Election Results: Hillary Wins 3 in a Row!






Hi, everyone! Are you excited about this hot Presidential Primary as I am? Yep, I thought so. So hey, why not hang out with us tonight as we get results from the 4 states voting today!

So where should we get started? Basically, you can find Rhode Island results here, Vermont results here, Ohio results here, and finally last but not least… Texas results here. Please feel free to check out these official election sites, or just give us the latest news from whatever news channel you have on the teevee. I’ll update you throughout the evening as soon as each state is called for Hillary or Barack.

Get it? Got it? Great! Let’s sit back and enjoy as our fellow Democrats in these four states cast their final votes… And let’s see how they voted! 🙂

  49 comments for ““Super Tuesday II” Election Results: Hillary Wins 3 in a Row!

  1. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 4:53 pm

    By the way everyone, here’s another great place to follow the election results as they start to come in…


    Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft is reporting that Fox exit polls show close races in Rhode Island, Ohio, and Texas. But as BTD says so well, who knows what that actually means, considering it’s from Faux News… 😉

  2. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 5:01 pm

    OK, first win of the night:



  3. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 6:25 pm

    OK, here are new numbers from all 4 states:

    2 percent reporting
    Obama 54 — 524,162
    Clinton 45 — 438,675
    Delegates (126 from primary, 67 from caucus, 12 super)
    Obama 0
    Clinton 0

    Rhode Island
    4 percent reporting
    Clinton 50
    Obama 49
    Delegates (21 pledged, 12 super)
    Obama 0
    Clinton 0

    0 percent reporting
    Clinton 62
    Obama 36
    Delegates (141 pledged, 21 super)
    Obama 0
    Clinton 0

    43 percent reporting
    Obama 59
    Clinton 39
    Delegates (15 pledged, 8 super)
    Obama 8
    Clinton 4

  4. Regarding Texas
    March 4, 2008 at 7:32 pm

    John King on CNN, “Obama is winning where the people are.”

  5. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    Regarding Texas-

    One problem: Obama still isn’t winning where many Latino people are in San Antonio, El Paso, and the Border Counties… That’s why Hillary’s narrowed the gap to only about 7,000 votes with 80% yet to report.

    20 percent reporting
    Obama 49 — 696,576
    Clinton 49 — 689,286
    Delegates (126 from primary, 67 from caucus, 12 super)
    Obama 0
    Clinton 0

    Rhode Island
    82 percent reporting
    Clinton 59
    Obama 40
    Delegates (21 pledged, 12 super)
    Clinton 5
    Obama 1

    47 percent reporting
    Clinton 56
    Obama 42
    Delegates (141 pledged, 21 super)
    Obama 0
    Clinton 0

    75 percent reporting
    Obama 60
    Clinton 38
    Delegates (15 pledged, 8 super)
    Obama 8
    Clinton 4

  6. March 4, 2008 at 7:43 pm


    Don’t worry no matter if Hillary wins 3 of 4 primaries tonight, the mainstream media and hacks like John King will spin it against her.

    Hillary wins in the big states! California, New York, Ohio and maybe Texas. She’ll also win Pennsylvania.

  7. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 7:46 pm

    Oh wait… I have CNN on now. Hillary is now LEADING TEXAS BY JUST OVER 1,000 VOTES. With 24% reporting in Texas, Hillary is now ahead. 🙂

  8. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 8:23 pm

    “Hillary wins in the big states! ”

    Myth! With her win in OH, she has 6 of 11 big states so far. Obama has won 5 of 11. If he wins TX, then they will be tied again at 6 each, with three remaining (not inlcuding FL and MI). So don’t give me (or any of us) this he can’t win big states shi*t

    She cannot catch up in delegates. That is not to say that Obama can win the 2025 either, but she will be behind unless she wins in double digits in EVERY STATE from here on out!

    This will go to the convention, with both vying to be the top of the ticket. In the end Bill will threaten enough supers to swing her way and she will win the top of the ticket, causing people like me to be soured on the whole process.

  9. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 8:29 pm

    Moreover, if she continues to say things like she did the other day, McCain and I have experience, Obama just has a speech. I don’t want any part of *her* Democratic party with her as the nominee or the president. I am sure the Lieberman for Lieberman party will welcome her with open arms.

  10. March 4, 2008 at 8:31 pm


    While Hillary has been projected as the winner in Ohio, I would not count on her margin to hold. The big cities (where Obama is strongest) have many more outstanding votes to count.

    Texas is an even bigger problem for Hillary. The percentage reporting from the big cities are very low at this point. Obama will most likely reclaim his lead andwin Texas. (I think Texas is one of those BIG STATES)

  11. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 8:50 pm


    Sorry, but I don’t see how Obama can overcome Hillary’s Ohio lead now. He might do well in Cleveland, but that’s not enough to overtake Hill’s advantage in the rest of the state. And regarding Texas, there are also still many more votes to be counted in El Paso & the Border Counties, Latino-heavy areas where Hillary is winning handily. Anything can still happen in Texas, but don’t get too overconfident about Obama’s chances there. Tonight’s results have shown us that Democrats still want a conversation on who is best suited to fight for our values all the way to the White House.


    Huh? When did Hillary become part of the “Lieberman Party”? Last I checked, Lieberman isn’t even a Democrat any more. No, what I’ve heard from Hillary has been a consistent message of fighting hard to make our hopes into reality. She doesn’t tell us one thing while saying something completely different to foreign governments, and she doesn’t promise “change” while campaigning as more of the same.

    She doesn’t just say “we can”… She’s ready to work with us to make sure WE WILL get universal health care, climate & energy solutions, peace with the world community, and an economy that works for all working people. 🙂

  12. March 4, 2008 at 9:03 pm


    I never said Obama would “overcome” Clinton’s lead in Ohio. I said it would narrow. As for Texas, Check out the CNN county map for yourself the counties around the major cities and look at the percent reporting. The counties around Houston are a good example of what I mean. Then look at the oounties that Clinton has won is is leading in. Most are smaller and most show 100% reported.

    Whatever the case, it’s going to be a long night.

  13. Dan Chmielewski
    March 4, 2008 at 9:08 pm

    Folks — this is a nip and tuck race and it will go down to the wire with neither of them getting the correct amount of delegates. Follow the rules of the Party. If Hillary takes the nomination, I expect the Obama supporters to fall in line and support our nominee. After all, if Obama wins, we’ll fall in line behind him. Eye on the Prize people — we don’t want four years of John McCain which is really another four years of George W.’s policies. Let’s watch this play out. Support your candidate and remember who the real enemy is….

  14. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 9:12 pm

    I did not she is a member of the Lies for Lies party, but if she is going to go around touting the credentials of the Republican candidate, perhaps she can go join McWar’s BFF’s party. Because if that is Democratic party she is trying to create, then I want no part of it.

    And you’re right, she does not say “we can”, ever. I hear a lot of “I” and if she thinks she can do it alone … let her try… she will fail miserably. Obama knows he cannot do it alone and that it will take all of us to get the change we want. He is demanding that we as citizens become active, get involved, and in the words of another great President, he “asks not what our country can do for [us], but what [we] can do for our country.” And you know what? That is the country I want to live in. I want to feel important again, I want feel part of a bigger national community, and I want to be able to hold my head up high and say to the rest of the world that we are not the country of GWB.

  15. thesunkenroad
    March 4, 2008 at 9:12 pm

    The democrats are eating their own, and they’ve only just begun to chew.

  16. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 9:16 pm

    “If Hillary takes the nomination, I expect the Obama supporters to fall in line and support our nominee.”

    Well, some may. Not sure I am one of them.

  17. thesunkenroad
    March 4, 2008 at 9:43 pm

    “If Hillary takes the nomination, I expect the Obama supporters to fall in line and support our nominee.”

    This is a yellow dog argument. You may want to expect it. But the truth is only the yellow dogs will follow it as easily as your expectation. Independents, moderate republicans, anti-war Democrats, and many of these young people with big eyes and passion… some of them are going to peel away… because they’re not yellow dogs. You’ll get some back, but others will stay home, vote Green, or vote for the “maverick” McCain.

    I still think, with Chris, that Texas may go for Obama outright. I think tonight is a wash at best for Hillary. She may yet lose a little ground in delegates. We’ll see…

  18. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 9:52 pm

    james/sunkenroad & Eric-

    Come on, you’re sounding ridiculous now. You both say you don’t like McCain… But you don’t have a problem allowing McCain to become President? How would you both feel if Dan and I and other Hillary supporters were to withhold any support for Obama because of his campaign’s dirty right-wing smears of Hillary and her policy plans? Or for Obama’s embrace of right-wing frames on economics and health care issues?

    But you know what? I won’t throw a fit like that. I’ll support the Dem nominee, whether it’s Hillary or Barack. And why’s that? I want our nation to move forward with a Dem President, not backwards with McCain. Think about that before you throw another fit and tell me you’ll leave the door open for McCain.

  19. otherlisa
    March 4, 2008 at 9:57 pm

    I’m a yellow dog. I’m a Clinton supporter but I’ll vote for Obama if he’s the nominee.

    I’ve read some interesting polling which suggests that Obama loses as many Clinton supporters as Clinton loses Obama supporters.

  20. March 4, 2008 at 10:02 pm

    There will be no major change in delegate count. Obama will still be ahead in pledged delegates and number of states won (No, Andrew, MI & FL still don’t yet count) and neither one will achieve 2025 delegates.

  21. The Truth
    March 4, 2008 at 10:07 pm

    Here is what Democratic Party genius Markos Moulitsas Zuniga wrote this morning on his blog, Dailykos:

    “Later this week I will go back and tally up all my predictions this cycle. Get this — some were good, and some were bad. Some were REAL bad. It’s like flipping a coin — but fun!

    So here goes again. I must admit that my Texas prediction feels pretty good.”

    Ohio: Clinton +4
    Texas: Obama +12
    Rhode Island: Clinton +6
    Vermont: Obama +35″

    So, how did the Democratic Party’s eminent blogger do on this most important night in Democratic politics? Especially in Texas, where his prediction of a 12-point Obama win made him feel “pretty good?”

    Markoa. Why Democrats take him seriously is beyond me.

  22. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 10:09 pm

    “How would you both feel if Dan and I and other Hillary supporters were to withhold any support for Obama because of his campaign’s dirty right-wing smears of Hillary and her policy plans?”

    I would think you were my partner posing on this site. Because I hear that everyday.

    And if I lived in a state that will be in play in Nov, I would vote against McCain. I could not vote FOR Hillary. But since, CA will not be in play, if she wins, which is possible. I will just leave it blank.

    I don’t support the nominee (or the party) right or wrong. I support them when they are right, and do what I can to make it right when they are wrong. And I don’t think Clinton is right as the nominee. There are too many levels of bad judgment.

  23. March 4, 2008 at 10:14 pm

    Hillary has won 3 in a row. The momentum is on her side. For the good of the party Obama should step aside.


    It is a good night indeed.

    Shout out to you Andrew!!! Now let me say HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

  24. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 10:18 pm


    Nice try, but the spin doesn’t quite cut it. How have Democrats voted? What about the swing states we need to win in November (yes, INCLUDING Michigan & Florida)? What do all the Democrats want? I think enough Democrats have spoken to give Hillary reason to keep up the good fight.


    And you know what? Many of my friends say the EXACT same thing… Except they tell me there’s no reason they’ll vote for Obama because they don’t like his dirty campaign tactics and his right-wing pandering on pocketbook issues. And you know what? I tell them that despite our differences with Obama, he’s still a hell of a lot better than McCain and we just can’t let McCain win. I just hope all you Obama folks show as much loyalty to this party as all the rest of us are ready to. That’s all.

  25. March 4, 2008 at 10:18 pm

    I could be wrong (won’t be the first time), but I think CNN called Texas too early. Bottom line, even with all the “wins” the delegate count won’t change in Hillary’s favor. At the end of the day (week) Obama will probably end up with more of a delegate lead than he started with.

  26. March 4, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    For the record, no matter who the nominee is, I will support the Democrat. I just don’t see the math working out for Hillary.

  27. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 10:21 pm

    “For the good of the party Obama should step aside.”

    Because the previous 12 consecutive wins don’t count? Or because he has more pledged delegates? Or because he more states? Because he has more of the popular vote? Because he will probably end up only 1 or 2 delegates net loss below where he was yesterday?

    Are you kidding me?

  28. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 10:24 pm


    Sorry, but I think you’re wrong. I still have CNN on, and even John King (who’s been talking up Obama’s chances in Texas ALL NIGHT) is now admitting Obama’s margin in Houston and DFW will NOT be enough to overtake Hillary’s lead. With 83% reporting, Hillary has a 90,000 vote lead. Stick a fork in it, Hillary just won the Texas Primary. And yes, this DOES change the state of the race in that the Obama folks can’t just pressure Hill to drop out… Enough Democrats want her in to keep the conversation going.


    LOL! Yep, this is the BEST. BIRTHDAY. GIFT. EVER!!!! Now all I need is to see Hillary win in November, and I think I’ll really feel excited about this nation’s future. 🙂

  29. March 4, 2008 at 10:24 pm

    “Are you kidding me?”

    Of course I am kidding. I am simply showing how ridiculous the calls for Hillary to drop out are.

  30. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 10:24 pm

    My partner disagrees. He will not vote for Obama. He says that McCain will be “a hell of lot better” then a President Barack “Carter”

    So I figure it’s a wash. He won’t vote for him and I won’t vote for her.

  31. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 10:33 pm

    Even as much as I do not like her, I have said (not on here) that if she won TX and OH tonight (which it looks like she may have done), then she should not drop out. There is no reason for her to do so. But if she does lose either state, then she should. Because that was HER criteria.

    Despite my rhetoric and divisive statements (and I admit openly that it’s divisive), she has roughly 50% of the vote, and frankly a prolonged primary improves the candidate (whoever he or she is) in the end. Moreover, if you just look at the news coverage tonight, the Dems got (pulling a number out of the air) a 3-1 amount of coverage over, who’s that guy over there that just secured the nomination? Now that there is a nominee on that side, let the DNC do the dirty work of attacking him. Let each of our candidates continue to create the Bush-McWar narrative (and hopefully stay out of too much of the mud with the other) while highlighting the (albeit minute) policy differences between the two.

  32. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 10:40 pm

    Oh and Obama will win the Caucus portion of the TX vote tonight by a bigger margin than she won the primary portion. For whatever that is worth.

  33. thesunkenroad
    March 4, 2008 at 11:02 pm


    What fit? That’s a silly point. And the lesser-of-two evils argument you make is merely a cliche. Clinton is an unacceptable candidate to me. It is not because of whatever her ads are saying about other candidates, as you seem to think, despite the fact that I didn’t write about that. That too is a silly point you make. My reasons are about the DLC, NAFTA, Mark Penn, and the Iraq vote. You might not agree with me, but my position is hardly “ridiculous.” Millions of us in the streets opposed that war authorization from before the vote in 2002. Twenty three Senators and over 100 members of the house voted against that war authorization, including the current speaker. But Clinton voted for that war, and I find her (vacillating) statements about ending it utterly unpersuasive. I’m not voting for her. I won’t apologize for that. Now, should Obama actually win the nomination of your party, you go ahead and choose not to vote for him.

  34. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 11:12 pm

    Given that I have been writing my masters thesis for roughly 8 hours a day for the past three weeks on top of working 8 hours a day, my head is a bit cloudy. But TSR very eloquently put into words the way I feel about her. I won’t vote for a lesser of two evils again. I did that before.

    Thanks TSR 🙂

  35. March 4, 2008 at 11:12 pm

    I would like to know why folks don’t seem to mind it if someone says they “won’t” vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination, but the have an absolute fit if someone says they won’t vote for Obama.

    Whoever wins the nomination is our nominee. The rules should be applied equally.

  36. Eric
    March 4, 2008 at 11:31 pm

    Sean I will set the record str8 at least for me … if someone won’t vote for Obama bc of basically the same reasons I won’t for Clinton … that is your (generic you) choice. I don’t get it, (much like I am sure people don’t get why I won’t vote for her), but it is your choice.

  37. Andrew Davey
    March 4, 2008 at 11:32 pm


    “Merely a cliche”? Sorry if I’m showing no sympathy tonight, but I do call that ridiculous. So you’re now blaming Hillary for Bush’s war on Iraq? Fantastic. So is Tom Daschle (then Senate Majority Leader, now Obama Campaign Co-chair) also to blame? And John Kerry? And John Edwards? Let’s get real here. Maybe their reasoning for their 2002 votes weren’t perfect, but they weren’t a President misleading an entire nation to war.

    And let’s see, what’s Hillary doing now? She’s working on legislation to END THE WAR. And as President, she WILL.

    Oh, and please don’t throw the same old “DLC Mark Penn Bogeyman” stuff in my face. After all, what is supposed “progressive hero” Obama doing having his economic advisor telling the Canadian Government he won’t do anything about NAFTA? And what is Obama doing using the same right-wing garbage the insurance industry used to kill universal health care in 1994 to smear Hillary now? Oh yes, and why is Obama’s economic team so damn Friedmanite?

    Really, don’t go there with me. I can dish it out just as well as you can. But do you hear me saying I won’t ever vote Obama because he’s not perfect?


    Right on! I’m glad I’m not the only one here who sees it this way. 🙂

  38. Eric
    March 5, 2008 at 12:10 am

    Andrew you are wrong on at least one thing:
    ““progressive hero” Obama doing having his economic advisor telling the Canadian Government he won’t do anything about NAFTA”

    Even the Canadian Govt has admitted they came to the Obama staffer as an economic professor not as an Obama staffer and that the staffer (whose name escapes me at the moment) said basically the same thing that Obama has been saying on the campaign and apologized for the whole incident.

    And who exactly killed the UHC of 94?

    And yes, Hillary is blame (along with every other senator and house member who voted yes) for the war, including Daschle, Kerry, and Edwards. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. And until she unequivocally apologizes for her vote, she lacks the credibility to be president.

  39. Andrew Davey
    March 5, 2008 at 12:23 am


    First off, here’s a good summary of what’s actually been happening with Obama’s NAFTA-gate:


    And regarding Iraq, would you also blame BARACK OBAMA for this? After all, he said in 2004 that he didn’t know how he would have voted on Iraq in 2002. And as soon as he started his 2004 US Senate campaign, he scrubbed his famous “antiwar speech” off his web site. Oh yes, and his voting record on Iraq is no different from Hillary’s.

    But again, am I saying I will never vote for Obama because his actions sometimes don’t match his words?

  40. Bladerunner
    March 5, 2008 at 1:49 am

    Smugness is an unattractive feeling that can be dangerous, sometimes even fatal, in a political context. The smugness of the Clinton campaign and its sense of inevitability masked some significant weaknesses in the campaign. The reality of Iowa, South Carolina and other Obama victories was a reality check for the Clinton campaign. They wiped that smugness away and got down to business. With her back against the wall, Clinton won what she had to win and has no reason to drop out now.

    The Obama campaign, caught up in their own rhetoric about 11 victories in a roll, developed their own smugness and sense of inevitability. Texas and Ohio are the reality checks for the Barack Brigades. This is an election, not a coronation, and you don’t stop the race before its really won.

    Andrew–To each his or her own, but there is little gained with engaging Drive By Democrats who cut and run with their marbles when their candidate doesn’t win. I suppose there’s always the socratic value of discussion as you have when you troll over at Red County. But strong women leaders, whether HIllary or Diane Feinstein or Mother Jones or Margaret Thatcher, always attract over the top and obsessed critics. This election cycle these folks have been writing Hillary’s death certificate all primary season and they’ve been wrong .Many could care less if she loses in November. No point in pandering to people who are quick to announce that they’ll drive by for their Democrat but drive off and leave you stranded if their Democrat doesn’t get to ride shotgun.

  41. March 5, 2008 at 7:19 am

    This does make things interesting, doesn’t it? Clinton hit a nerve and it’s obvious she’s still in it. Of course I’d like to see a nominee out of this now rather than later, but it looks like that is not going to happen.

    “The more Democrats talk about national security the better it is for our party” just now from a Republican strategist. I don’t know about that, I think it just shows how much we care about the issue and it’s not just something owned by Republicans.

  42. just...asking?
    March 5, 2008 at 9:35 am

    We have the two best candidates and they both remain strong and appealing to dems, independents and many new voters. Thats the best part about all of this. While I too would have liked to be down to one by now, watch the coverage, its all Hillary and Barack. As long as they continue to both look strong and presidential, which they both do, we’ll be ok.

    The one area of concern for me is the lack of latino support for Barack. If you look at the last two Bush victories this is a segments that went against tradition and sided with Bush. McCain’s work on immigration even in defeat was roundly applauded by border states and latino organizations. Some point to the Nader impact in the Gore race, but I think it was really the loss of traditional support from latino communities that cost us. Hopefully Barack will reach out to this community more. It proved to be a mistake for him to avoid border towns in Texas.

    We all need our candidate to be able to bring together our traditional and progressive supporters. Last night was great for Hillary, I think Pennsylvania will be the momentum decider. Neither will get the needed amount, so it will come down to strength and which states were won.

  43. March 5, 2008 at 10:11 am


    Kudos on your statement. I think you nailed it.

  44. It's too bad...
    March 5, 2008 at 10:23 am

    The same goes for the African American community. I know he was trying to defend his wife, but President Clinton shamed the community in South Carolina. The numbers Tim Russert rolled out on Sunday were sobering. 86% of African Americans are supporting Obama, that along with him the energizing the youth vote, has me worried that Clinton can’t win in November. I hope she starts being more positive soon. It’s getting harder for me to support her if she is the nominee.

  45. just...asking?
    March 5, 2008 at 10:37 am

    It’s too bad…

    I was not trying to discount Barack’s strength in the African American community. What he is doing in bringing out voters is outstanding. But when you analyze likely to vote results, latino’s while providing poor turnouts still make up a larger percentage of key states. In Bush’s wins he lost the African American vote by equally wide margins, and it didn’t make a difference. Gore and Kerry took this vote for granted and didn’t reach the popularity of Bill Clinton. Even with the South Carolina dust-up, I think Hillary will be able to reach out to these voters.

  46. Dan Chmielewski
    March 5, 2008 at 12:04 pm

    “If Hillary takes the nomination, I expect the Obama supporters to fall in line and support our nominee.”

    ***Well, some may. Not sure I am one of them.****

    Then you would be a fool and allow a McCain presidency to be that much closer to realtiy. Our party has set up rules on how to win the nomination As it stands now, neither Clinton or Obama will reach the promised land. The rules of the party then dictate the next steps in the process.

    Majority rule didn’t help Al Gore in 2000; 60,000 Votes in Ohio would swing the election for Kerry in 2004 even though he lost the popular vote. The rules of the party’s nomination process will determine who the Democratic noninee is. If you’re tired of Republican rule, you vote Blue this year even if you hold your nose when you do so.

    I will support the nominee of the Democratic Party with my time, my vote and my money — even if the nominee is a Ham Sandwich.

  47. anon
    March 5, 2008 at 1:33 pm


    You’d be making a mistake to perceive the Latino vote as anything close to monolithically progressive. Many Latinos are devout Catholics, and thus would never consider voting for a Democrat just on the issue of abortion. Many are also quite conservative when it comes to foreign policy…much in the way many Asians are. So that means many Latinos who ARE Dems identify more readily with Clinton’s more centrist policies.

    That said, don’t worry…with the shambles that the Reeps have made of the immigration issue, most Latinos will fall in line behind Barack if he’s the nominee.

  48. anon
    March 5, 2008 at 1:49 pm


    With Barack still ahead by between 110-140 delegates?


  49. just...asking?
    March 5, 2008 at 1:56 pm

    annon 1:33,

    You mistake my comments. I’m not saying how I’ll vote or what I think might happen. I’m simply stating facts, not whether its right or wrong.

    I will support strongly the Democratic nominee. But I’d venture to say most if not all of us on this blog would, and did in 2000 and 2004. The difference those years was not us! It was the segments of voters who switched traditional allegiances.

    While your statement is supported by data on 1st and 2nd generation asian voters, you are way off on latino voters. Latino’s trend to vote liberal socially but conservative fiscally. Think this is why Clinton(s) do well with this community. Just look here in the OC, much of our increase has been in the latino community. A community Hillary took with about 65% as she did in Texas.

    I want to win! if its Barack or Hillary I’ll be there to support either one!

Comments are closed.