Need help with understanding Texas - is it winner take all?

[DURHAM D]

Also, it looks like people should vote twice - once during the day in a voting booth and later that night at a caucus.

Can someone make sense of all of this.

[ButterflyBlood]

1. NO Democratic contest is winner take all

It's proportional like all others. And yes, it's both a primary and a caucus.

[DGoldman1212]

2. From what I understand...

It's a strange 80/20 thing. 80% primary, 20% caucus.

[ButterflyBlood]

5. It's about 2/3 primary, 1/3 caucus. n/t

[frazzled]

3. Some delegates will be awarded propotionally via primary; some via caucus

Only people who vote in the democratic primary that day may attend the caucus that evening, as I understand it.

[Blue State Bandit]

4. It's largely a primary with elements of caucuses mixed in.

[texas_indy]

6. and since it is an open primary Obama is going to win Texas! (nt)

[Samantha]

7. I started a thread about Texas a couple of days ago and learned

a lot about it's unusual system from the Texas DU'ers here. Perhaps some of them will respond to your question.

I generally know it is both a primary and caucus system. First there is a primary, from which a substantial number of delegates are awarded. Following the primary, they go into a caucus. That caucus runs until the legislature meets. Then the balance of the delegates are awarded. I don't remember the numbers at all but it is something 125 delegates from the primary votes and maybe around 50 from the caucus delegates. Someone from Texas will have to correct me with the exact figures.

I also learned that extra delegates will be awarded to those precincts (or districts) where there was a huge turnout in 2004. The Texas African-American vote was substantial in 2004, and three counties will be awarded extra delegates as a result (I think it's at least 3 - this will have to be confirmed by someone from Texas as well). In that regard, Obama has better odds than have been predicted because of (1) the caucus element; (2) the bonus delegates awarded from 2004 are in African-American areas.

There seemed to be some disagreement over who would prevail. There is a substantial Latino vote in Texas but that turnout has never been as heavy (percentage-wise) as the African-American turnout. Some posters seemed to passionately think Hillary would win; but the Obama camp shot in with statistical rebuttals. I left that thread very happy about what I learned through the generosity of the Texas DU'ers here who volunteered their time and effort to explain it. Because it is so unusual, if I had simply waited until the March 4 vote, I probably could not have understood the results, whatever they might be, from the commentators. Now I feel I can.

[DURHAM D]

11. Thanks - what a mess.

Can not imagine that the pundits will be able to explain this on election night unless they get hand puppets.

[meow mix]

8. Open Primary and a Caucus?!!?!! OMG

i suddenly feel a little better about texas. ty

[Tatiana]

9. 3/4 primary, 1/4 caucus. Or something like that.

Essentially, 75% of the delegates (126 out of 168) awarded will be based on the primary ballots.

15 minutes after the polls close, those who voted must return to their precinct. This "precinct convention" (caucus) will determine how the remaining 42 delegates will be allocated.

[tammywammy]

10. No, it's not winner take all. No state is winner take all for democrats

Texas is a little different, here's some links that Sonias provided that explains the process:

There is No Such Thing as a Texas Primary
Part 1 http://electioninspection.wordpress.com/2008/02/08/there-is-no-such-thing-as-the-texas-primary-part-i/
Part 2 http://electioninspection.wordpress.com/2008/02/11/there-is-no-such-thing-as-the-texas-primary-part-ii-delegate-predictions/