Guam Final Result: Obama by Seven Votes

Unofficial result:

Obama 2,264
Clinton 2,257

How's that for GOTV being crucial? Actually, of course, Obama and Clinton will each gain 2 pledged delegates from this result, but since new Guam party chair Pilar Lujan has said that as a superdelegate she would vote for the caucus winner, it gives Obama an advantage. Lujan's running mate had already endorsed Obama.

KUAM stresses that these results are unofficial and that there was significant ballot spoilage in Dededo, where Clinton had a strong win.

•  So who is this "spoilage" supposed to favor?

  Just so I can know which direction the spin is coming from.

  by Joe Beese on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:40:06 PM PDT

  •  Are we getting the word that there was tampering?

    is that what you mean by spoilage??

    by wargolem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:40:53 PM PDT

    •  how can you spoil a caucus?

      that doesn't make sense.. what did they vote twice?

      by Steven R on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:41:31 PM PDT

      •  that is what i am trying to figure out ... WHERE

        ARE OUR EIGHT GUAMAINIANS!!!!!  to explain wtf is going on!!!

        by wargolem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:42:29 PM PDT

        •  somebody must have mislaid a box

          of ballots. these numbers are simply not credible

          by carlyle4 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:08:47 PM PDT

          •  MyDD saying "Recount Imminent"

            http://www.mydd.com/...

            The results will not be certified until the spoilage has been investigated monday or tuesday.

            by Squalish on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:31:56 PM PDT

      •  It's not really a caucus

        There is secret ballot voting, similar to a primary.

        by smash artist on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:42:38 PM PDT

      •  The Caucus

        It was a presidential preference poll, not a caucus in the Iowa/Texas/Nevada sense of the word.

        Basically, it was a primary that was privatized/outsourced to the Democratic Party of Guam.

        by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:44:30 PM PDT

        •  It's called a "Firehouse Caucus"

          like we had in NM.  Essentially it's a primary election run by the party, not the gummint.

          by NM Ward Chair on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:16:20 PM PDT

      •  how can you spoil a caucus?

        Ballots are used in some caucuses, in others they just take a "head count" of the people who form groups. Spoilage is when a ballot is marked incorrectly. Millions of ballots are tossed out due to "spoilage" nationwide every election and it's never mentioned.

        Recipe for a Cooked Election by Greg Palast

        http://www.google.com/...

        by William Domingo on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:54:09 PM PDT

    •  Maybe they mean mildew.

      Someone got the ballots damp.

      by ablington on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:42:59 PM PDT

      •  I know that in Puerto Rico you can "spoil"

        a paper ballot by voting for two canditates for a position, for example, when only one is allowed or by making extraneous marks. That is a relatively common mistake.  

        by cachola on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:47:23 PM PDT

  •  Looks Fishy to me

    Obama up 6 points, with one precint to go, and Hillary ends up losing by 7 votes.

    I think somebody did something wrong, to try to steal one for Hillary.

    It will be interesting, to hear what the Hillary camp says about his, and if they try to use it as a media distraction.

    But if Obama, was really down 10points previously (depending on how long ago), I guess I'll take the even 2 delegate win (ala Hillary, when you win a state, and pick up no delegates). Lol.

    by Excelscior1 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:54:02 PM PDT

    •  somebody did something wrong trying to steal

      What they did was "mis-underestimate" how much they needed to steal. The same thing happened to Karl Rove in 2006.

      by William Domingo on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:12:07 PM PDT

  •  Officials say Guam recount is imminent

    Pacific News Center Staff Reporter 04.MAY.08
    9:30 a.m. Guam – Herbie Perez, Democrat Party Nominating Committee Chairperson, says officials will look over the large amount of "spoiled" ballots in the coming days...well over 500 ballots were deemed invalid during the tabulation process.

    ...She is also looking into missing ballots. In total, over 8,100 were printed in response to reports of shortages at precinct sites. But when the final vote count was given, only a little over 4.500 ballots were used.

    http://pacificnewscenter.com/....

    by henna218 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:21:33 PM PDT

    •  a recount. in Guam. incredible.

      is anyone else having a hard time believing this is happening?

      by TrueBlueMajority on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:35:07 PM PDT

      •  Not really

        Given all the things I've heard about epidemic cronyism and corruption in the Northern Marianas, it's easy to imagine similar things happening in Guam.

        Not that I really know anything about Guam except that it's near the Northern Marianas and apparently has a major snake problem.

        by Geenius at Wrok on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:04:20 PM PDT

  •  Hillary threw them a bone

    by saying she would push for giving them authority to vote in national election. I assume that is conditional on them voting for her.

    by digno dave on Sat May 03, 2008 at 08:38:44 PM PDT

    •  Can Someone Explain?

      What does this mean?  The election of the president is governed by the constitution.  It's not like you can sign an executive order or even pass a law.  And, if she is proposing a constitutional amendment, what is it?  Would Guam get 1 electoral vote? 3? What about other US territories?  I cannot imagine any proposal that would not be DOA.  Seems like a transparent, pander, but I'm withholding judgment until I hear the details.

      by Sicembears on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:46:17 PM PDT

•  ballot spoilage???? n/t

  by wargolem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:40:11 PM PDT

  •  wtf does this actually mean?

    by Canadian4Obama on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:45:27 PM PDT

    •  You know...like in Canada...

      when you're little x doesn't completely cut across the entire circle...especially when you're voting for Quebec to secede from the Conferdation.

      by David Kroning on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:47:35 PM PDT

    •  All you wanted to know

      and maybe more about ballot spoilage.

      by conlakappa on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:50:15 PM PDT

  •  It Means All Those Pesky Obama Ballots

    Accidentally got caught in the crossfire when the Mr. Coffee blew up at one of the polling stations.  Act O' God, no doubt.  Or at least that's how Antonin Scalia will rule it eventually.

    by terry2wa on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:43:04 PM PDT

•  Seven votes

  rounds up to 10 votes - a blowout victory for Obama!

  by the awful truth on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:40:16 PM PDT

  •  It's a double-digit win!!! n/t

    by astral66 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:43:41 PM PDT

    •  Hey there, did you ever research...

      those other film reviews?

      by David Kroning on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:50:10 PM PDT

    •  It's ONLY a caucus....

      ...even if it is conducted as a closed primary :-P

      by Enterik on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:52:34 PM PDT

•  Ballot spoilage? Did no one check the dates?

  by TexasLiz on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:40:17 PM PDT

•  Yeah needed to spoil 8 more Obama ballots

  Too bad, Hillary!!!!!!!!

  by Beauregard on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:40:17 PM PDT

•  ballot spoilage/big Clinton win

  that precinct was also the last one to report.

  I wonder if that ballot spoilage had anything to do with seafood or fish cuz it smells fishy.

  by jalapeno on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:40:46 PM PDT

  •  It sure does,

    maybe this is like the Texas Caucus..., they delayed that count as long as possible to cement the "Hillary wins Texas" fiction they were selling. My guess? They were desperate to stop an Obama win before Tuesday, any win.

    by PLS on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:01:16 PM PDT

    •  why last district =~33% of total votes? Odd...

      Yeah, how is it that the last district had almost 1,300 votes (or about 1/3 of the total vote for all of Guam)?  That is, with 95% of the districts reporting, it was 1,720 Obama to 1,509 HRC (= total of 3,299 votes) and then with 1 district left to vote, the numbers change to 2,264 Obama to 2,257 HRC (= total of 4,521 votes).  In the last district, 1,292 votes were cast.

      Also, what exactly is spoilage, and why were 10% of the ballots spoiled per http://www.kuam-media.com/...

      by seattlegirl on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:23:00 PM PDT

      •  That's not correct.

        Dededo, the last precinct, reported as follows:

        http://www.guampdn.com/...

        509 for Clinton

        313 for Obama

        The total village-by-village count is below:

        Obama won 14 of 21 districts. Most districts that were won by Clinton were by small margins.

        Obama got 37 votes in Ordot, 19 in Maina, 151 in Inarajan, 46 in Asan, 55 in Chalan Pago, 87 in Santa Rita, 102 in Mongmong-Toto-Maite, 28 in Hagåtña, 158 in Barrigada, 36 in Merizo, 49 in Piti, 131 in Sinajana, 108 in Agana Heights, 194 in Mangilao 192 in Tamuning, 27 in Umatac, 76 in Talofofo, 224 in Yigo, 104 in Yona, 127 in Agat and 313 in Dededo for a total of 2,264 votes.

        Sen. Hillary Clinton took 18 votes in Ordot, 22 in Maina, 87 in Inarajan, 33 in Asan, 87 in Chalan Pago, 73 in Santa Rita, 81 in Mongmong-Toto-Maite, 29 votes in Hagåtña, 166 in Barrigada, 33 in Merizo, 51 in Piti, 89 in Sinajana, 105 in Agana Heights, 155 in Mangilao, 193 in Tamuning, 24 in Umatac, 52 in Talofofo, 211 in Yigo, 98 in Yona, 141 in Agat and 509 in Dededo for a total of 2,257 votes.

        by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:32:31 PM PDT

      •  Something seems off with precinct DED...

        And looking on that site http://www.kuam-media.com/...,
        DED (which is the site that HRC won Obama by a huge margin, the data looks off...it has numbers for Obama and HRC but has 0 for everything else...all other precincts have numbers for all other categories).  It also has no ballots that are subject to "spoilage" (which seems strange too).  Any ideas on what is going on here?

        by seattlegirl on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:35:53 PM PDT

  •  Not a Precinct

    It was a city, and the largest city in Guam, with the most votes.

    Over 500 ballots are in dispute, and the current margin (unofficial) is just 7 votes.

    This is another disaster for Obama, since his own campaign said he would win by at least 11% (no, not 11 votes, 11%%%%%.)

    The final unofficial tally was 2,264 for Obama and 2,257 for Clinton, with 500 contested ballots to be recounted in the biggest city there.

    by tailor324 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:29:49 PM PDT

    •  It is not a disaster at all

      Sometimes Obama has won over their predicted point spread (Virginia, Maryland, Wisconsin, Maine, etc) and sometime they are lower than the point spread (Pennsylvania, etc) but the bottom line is that Obama was BEHIND by 11% according to a poll taken there a week ago and now Obama has possibly won.

      The headline tomorrow is that Obama has won by 7 votes.

      I'll take that!!

      by Drdemocrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:42:51 PM PDT

      •  I didn't think they did polling in Guam.

        by CTMET on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:44:35 PM PDT

      •  Except lately

        it's HRC who keeps beating the predicted point spread.

        Perhaps connected to the saturation coverage of Rev. Wright?

        by Subterranean on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:51:42 PM PDT

        •  More than "perhaps"....

          That's pretty much all the MSM has talked about for the last week.

          by krark on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:34:00 AM PDT

    •  Go away

      and take your party wrecker Hillary Clinton with you.  

      by UpstateDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:13:10 PM PDT

•  That's 7 VOTES...not percentage points.

  GO HILLARY!!!!!

  by ShaShaMae on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:41:09 PM PDT

  •  She has serious momentum right now

    especially in NC

    by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:47:29 PM PDT

    •  She will win NC 65-35.

      Hillmentum.

      by MJJLWolf on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:50:45 PM PDT

      •  two words: bull shit... ok thats one word :)

        by GlowNZ on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:05:03 PM PDT

      •  is that anything like Joementum? n/t

        by TrueBlueMajority on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:36:04 PM PDT

    •  Which will carry her smack into the ceiling of

      her self-inflicted negatives among AA voters.

      It's the superdelegates you need to bamboozle - not us. And they're not buying her shit.

      Thanks for playing. Best of luck in 2016.

      by Joe Beese on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:51:26 PM PDT

  •  Ummm ,,,,, she lost!

    by elwior on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:56:24 PM PDT

    •  RECOUNT has yet to begin

      and she had been losing caucuses by 20-30 points man get real!! She has the momentum and definitely in NC right now.

      by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:00:18 PM PDT

      •  It was NOT a real caucus.

        You went to a polling place, and cast a ballot. Just like... in a primary.

        by GermanAmericanDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:02:00 PM PDT

        •  Keep spinning

          by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:02:54 PM PDT

          •  Uh no spin here

            just facts.

            by GermanAmericanDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:03:38 PM PDT

            •  no a fact is that Obama won by seven votes.

              thats a FUCKING FACT.  And saying its not a real caucus smacks of someone who is a sore loser.

              by GlowNZ on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:06:19 PM PDT

              •  If you cast ballots, in secret

                how is that related at all to the more traditional caucuses of Iowa or other states, where people move to groups affiliated with certain candidates?

                Someone sure is being a sore loser, and chances are it's not the person that, ahem, won Guam.

                by tomjones on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:08:22 PM PDT

              •  Hillary had been losing caucuses by 20-30 points

                She also could possibly win the recount. And by the way, Guam calls it a caucus not a primary so yeah, it's a caucus

                by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:09:16 PM PDT

                •  So wait

                  Obama automagically was favored by 20 points because somebody decided to call this a caucus?

                  You can put lipstick on a pig, my friend, but it's still a pig. And certainly not a duck.

                  by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:12:06 PM PDT

                •  How do you even know that there will be a recount

                  Source please.

                  by GermanAmericanDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:16:44 PM PDT

                  •  See Above

                    Recount has already been announced.

                    by tailor324 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:32:15 PM PDT

              •  It's not meant to be derogatory

                It's meant to be descriptive. The fact is this wasn't a caucus in the usual sense of the word, and resembled a primary in every important sense of the word (except for government sponsorship).

                A caucus usually involves going into a room with your neighbors and making a public stand for a candidate, and then electing delegates to the county convention.

                What Guam did was, they had a ballot box. Caucusers filled out a secret ballot, put it in the box, and then went home.

                Normally, we call that kind of election a "primary." But because the contest was not run by the territorial government, but was rather outsourced/privatized to the Guam Democratic Party, it is technically a caucus.

                by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:11:15 PM PDT

              •  They Are Having A Recount. Let's Wait & See

                by PssttCmere on Sat May 03, 2008 at 08:23:45 PM PDT

              •  It means

                he will be defeated in generla elections.

                by anamaria on Mon May 05, 2008 at 03:38:49 PM PDT

            •  Yeah

              Besides, isn't the standard operating procedure for Hillary never to speak of Guam again, or write it off as irrelevant? Why try to minimize something that almost basically didn't happen?

              by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:07:27 PM PDT

          •  Did You Notice The Link To The Guam Paper

            saying Hillary was 11 points ahead in Guam, just magically disappeared?

            by PssttCmere on Sat May 03, 2008 at 08:33:05 PM PDT

      •  You're not joking, are you?

        This was a caucus in name only.  It was a primary.  And, no, she has very little momentum in NC.  The Insider Advantage poll is a definite outlier.  Remember one poll had Obama winning Pennsylvania.

        by badger1968 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:02:51 PM PDT

      •  She already said no recount

        Link on thread on rec list

        by oscarsmom on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:18:13 PM PDT

    •  Please don't unleash

      those hounds of reason.  It gets in the way of the narrative...

      by conlakappa on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:01:31 PM PDT

  •  Go Home Hillary

    Vote "Spoiling" like the Republicans.

    by JadeJordan on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:46:34 PM PDT

•  Guam Doesn't Count!

  Obama won by only seven votes!

  Guam Doesn't Count!

  /snark

  by LeftHandedMan on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:41:48 PM PDT

•  Hopefully

  Both sides let sleeping dogs lie on this one.

  Guam dosent have the funds or time to waste their time doing a recount which wont really change the delegate math.

  Take a tie and just move on. The Big party is on Tuesday.

  by Snipe6ib on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:41:54 PM PDT

  •  But she needs those 14 popular votes!!!!

    by Beauregard on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:43:42 PM PDT

    •  She sure needs the one SD who's committed to the

      popular vote winner.

      by Joe Beese on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:46:52 PM PDT

      •  Only 140 more to go! nt

        by drizek on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:23:43 PM PDT

    •  She can get those votes

      from Fla and Mi where she won. Count thgose states and she won the popular vote. Don't tell me those p[eople votes don't count. Fla is a big state.

      by anamaria on Mon May 05, 2008 at 03:40:36 PM PDT

  •  She will win the recount

    by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:48:19 PM PDT

    •  Yep. You just know it. Eff Hillary. n/t

      by badger1968 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:57:52 PM PDT

    •  ARE YOU AN ACTUAL HUMAN?

      or just a series of random computer-generated memes?  Little better than the crude content-generated spam links that post to the top of my gmail account.  Also, you've begun to repeat yourself.

      by senex on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:44:52 PM PDT

    •  Just like she'll win the nomination

      despite being behind in every metric imaginable, right?

      by yg17 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:36:41 PM PDT

  •  I say its close enough for Lujan to go either way

    Since there is no clear winner, at this point

    by Enterik on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:53:49 PM PDT

    •  So how big does a win have to be

      for it to be clear?  A win by one vote or 100 votes is still a win.  At least, under the terms of that whole democracy thing.

      by Laughter Shrapnel on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:08:01 PM PDT

      •  Hillary is ahead in the popular vote

        Do you remember?

        by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:10:55 PM PDT

        •  Obama wasn't on the Michigan ballot

          Do you remember?

          by Laughter Shrapnel on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:14:09 PM PDT

        •  You're a pathological liar

          Stop with the Jerome Armstrong school of counting votes. It's intellectually dishonest.

          by PsiFighter37 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:14:28 PM PDT

        •  Funny, I DON'T remember that!

          I do however seem to remember lots of deluded Hillary supporters desperate to twist the numbers to show some sort of fantasy lead for Hillary.

          GIVE.  IT.  UP.  ALREADY!!

          by oscarsmom on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:21:43 PM PDT

        •  god you really belive that popular vote bullshit?

          YOU REALLY THINK THAT OBAMA WOULD HAVE GOTTEN ZERO VOTES IN MICHIGAN? DO YOU??

          what a bumbling idiot.

          by ye ye ye on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:25:36 PM PDT

          •  The popular vote doesn't count.

            The delegates DO COUNT.

            Get real, Hillshrill.

            by Eyes Wide Open on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:06:09 PM PDT

            •  With Michigan and Florida

              Hillary is only 14 delegates behind. Why not have a revote in Michigan? What is there to be afraid of?

              by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:10:29 PM PDT

              •  Hillary herself said

                that Michigan and Florida didnt count.  

                by UpstateDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:13:47 PM PDT

              •  Obama has nothing to be afraid of

                In fact, he'd likely win an MI revote. It's the MI state senate that decided against a revote because they don't want to pay for it. And the Democratic Party already paid for one, they shouldn't have to pay for another.

                by yg17 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:33:19 PM PDT

              •  As an Obama supporter

                I would welcome a revote in MI. Looking at the demographics, he should win.

                The ones who have opposed the revote as MI state legislators. Not Obama.

                by Yirmiyahu on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:29:08 PM PDT

              •  as long as we're at it... can i revote?

                if we are going to change rules midstream, i say let anyone with a username 'ksquire' vote twice. We should also have states whose names are generated from a native american name count for 5/4 of a vote, and put a 33% penalty on any voter over the age of 62, since they won't live long anyway.

                I mean c'mon... if we start changing rules midstream, chaos will ensue, or so says Hillary's campaign chair.

                by ksquire on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:36:11 PM PDT

        •  "Hillary is ahead in the popular vote"

          Prove it.

          by Alohilani on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:25:45 PM PDT

          •  realclearpolitics.com

            there's your proof. Just go read the results with EVERY state included.

            by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:28:53 PM PDT

            •  Bullshit.

              Cannot count Florida and Michigan.  
              You are either:
              a) intellectually dishonest
              b) a pathological liar
              c) a whiny ass titty baby

              Take your pick, you own 'em all.

              by Alohilani on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:33:40 PM PDT

              •  Or possibly all three! /nt

                by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:36:22 PM PDT

              •  Hey numbers don't lie

                by chuckie tomato on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:56:49 PM PDT

                •  You're partly right.

                  Real numbers don't lie.

                  by Alohilani on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:16:29 PM PDT

                •  Only crooked, desperate politicians lie n/t

                  by yg17 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:49:38 PM PDT

                  •  Please tell obama to stop then.

                    by PssttCmere on Sat May 03, 2008 at 08:31:53 PM PDT

                    •  uhhh.....what?

                      by yg17 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:30:44 PM PDT

            •  OK, look

              People have already explained why it is sheer idiocy to count Michigan in the popular vote total, since it wasn't even a beauty contest.

              I'm sure Hillary would win the popular vote count in every state if you disregarded Obama's support. In Michigan they actually did that (by virtue of the fact that he wasn't on the ballot).

              But this is all missing the point. Talking about the popular vote count is like talking about which football team had the most yards or which baseball team had the most hits. It's an important metric in assessing performance, but it's not the bottom line.

              by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:35:59 PM PDT

          •  Your a douche bag disprove that

            by deluge99 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:17:59 PM PDT

        •  Obama wasnt on the

          Ballot in MI do you remember the oath that Hillary signed not to run in those states. If you are going to count MI then you have to give undecided to Obama, to be fair if you do that she is not ahead.

          by deluge99 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:16:58 PM PDT

        •  No She's Not

          Without MI and FL.  She is still 500K behind.  Barack was up by 700K prior to PA.  

          You can't count the other 2 states and her logic of counting is seriously flawed.  Besides they have been seated as of yet.

          He is leading in Most Delegates, states and popular vote.

          Also, if you want to get technical, he is ahead by more than 500K if you want to take into account the 5 caucus states that haven't reported total numbers.

          by Darqhorse on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:33:33 PM PDT

        •  they have ammnesia

          when it comes to Hillary. They refuse to accept she won the big states.

          by anamaria on Mon May 05, 2008 at 03:41:41 PM PDT

      •  What I meant...

        ...If either person had one by a percentage point Lujan's hands would be tied by his initial declaration of supporting the vote winner. However, with only 7 votes separating the candidates, the race is essentially tied. He can certainly endorse Obama with a free conscience, at least at this point. But I doubt there would be much fallout if he endorsed Clinton.

        by Enterik on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:19:56 PM PDT

        •  Ah — I see what you mean. n/t

          by Laughter Shrapnel on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:06:01 PM PDT

  •  There will be a recount

    http://pacificnewscenter.com/...

    by Leonidas Rex on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:09:21 PM PDT

    •  Thanks

      It's not actually a recount, though, it's a review of spoiled ballots.

      by JimTXDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:54:00 PM PDT

  •  They don't want to recount because it will expose

    SHENANIGANS!

    by debrazza on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:36:42 PM PDT

•  Could someone smarter than I am

  calculate what the vote counts would be if Obama had won by 10%?

  by bumblebums on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:42:03 PM PDT

  •  Counts if....

    had Obama won by 10% (O 55%, C 45%), the counts would have been:

    BHO:  2487
    HRC:  2034

    by Ran3dy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:47:54 PM PDT

  •  10% is 452

    There are 4521 votes, so 10% is 452 votes.  

    by John DE on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:47:56 PM PDT

  •  you're right

    The difference between this result and a 10% lead would have been 216 votes.

    by teachingmathnow on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:59:31 PM PDT

•  The tide is turning n/t

  by ParaHammer on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:42:21 PM PDT

  •  Which way? n/t

    by badger1968 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:04:43 PM PDT

•  As long as Obama gets the headlines

  that he won Guam even if it is by 7 votes, than that is fine with me.

  In a few days or a week when they officially tally the vote, that may change but for now Obama needs any good news he can get.

  Because this vote total is so close, the media will be all over this tomorrow saying that Obama won by 7 votes.  This will help damper further Wright coverage tomorrow.

  The shows will be talking about 2 things tomorrow:

  1. Big Brown (Obama) beating the Belle (Hillary's pick) in the Kentucky derby in which at the end she ran so hard that she had to be put to sleep (sad).

  2. Obama beating Hillary in the Guam caucus by 7 votes.

  by Drdemocrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:43:00 PM PDT

  •  i think you need to cut back the caffeine,n/t

    by singe on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:48:18 PM PDT

  •  afraid not

    as I peeked in on cnn to see if they were talking about the win, they showed it on the bottom, (the result listed at 50-50) of course with their rounding issues, but the Wright story was being talked about again...alas...sick!

    by vixenflem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:48:29 PM PDT

  •  It has already dampened Wright coverage

    On the front page of CNN they had Wright's crazy mug with the headline about how he could change the presidential race.

    Now because Obama has unofficially won Guam by 7 votes, that is the front page pic instead.

    by Drdemocrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:56:29 PM PDT

  •  the cool aid

    by anamaria on Mon May 05, 2008 at 03:42:59 PM PDT

•  Fellow Kos-er notes

  Without a presence in Guam, Clinton would have walked away with this caucus.  Instead, the national campaign put human and monetary resources into this race, and, as a result, we are getting to celebrate a victory.

  http://www.dailykos.com/...

  For someone claiming she's crossed the Commander-in-Chief threshold, she sure got her ass outgeneraled.

  by Joe Beese on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:43:32 PM PDT

  •  Rec for the new verb

    "Outgeneraled."  I'm going to find a way to fit it into conversation tomorrow!

    by Ran3dy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:01:44 PM PDT

  •  I wrote something to this effect

    in an earlier diary. Outgeneraled indeed.

    by Geenius at Wrok on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:10:07 PM PDT

    •  I'd have rec'd the diary if I could

      People should follow that link.

      by Joe Beese on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:57:45 PM PDT

      •  Thanks for the endorsement nt

        by Geenius at Wrok on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:47:05 PM PDT

•  Is a candidate beyond their expiration date?

  by BA BarackUS on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:44:16 PM PDT

•  AHAHAHAHAH

  that does sound fishy.  Leading by 6% all day and win by 7 pts. It took more than 12 hrs to count 5 thousand votes?

  I'm thinking we will know next week results at the end of the month heheheh

  by Nath 4 BO on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:44:19 PM PDT

  •  12 hours for 900 votes

    since counting was concurrent in the cities, the last one took 12 hours to count less than 900 ballots... which is 75 ballots per hour, or just over 1 per minute.

    O...baaaaa.....mmmmmm....aaaaaa. check

    by Canadian4Obama on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:48:31 PM PDT

    •  And the 5000 "Spoiled"

      And the count apparently still isn't right.. Still off between 4-8.  Possibly...  Not Knowing.

      If this was Chicago the count would at least be right...

      by Losty on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:42:49 PM PDT

•  Probably 2-2, Obama needs 98pledged for checkmate