The first confirmed death in the US.

Fron CNN:

A child in Texas has become the first fatality from swine flu in the United States, the acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Wednesday.

“I can confirm the very sad news out of Texas that a child has died of the H1N1 virus,” the CDC’s Dr. Richard Besser said.

“As a parent and a pediatrician, my heart goes out to the family.”

He said the child was about 2 years old.

However, to put this all in perspective…

Common seasonal flu kills 250,000 to 500,000 people every year worldwide, far more than the current outbreak of swine flu.

So it doesn’t make the child’s death any less tragic, but some proper context is appropriate since the normal flu is always deadly.

More as it develops…

UPDATE:
The title of the post has changed to reflect the fact that the child was from Mexico and travelled to the US for treatment.

Sorry for any confusion.

“Texas is a unique place. When we came into the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that.”
- Texas Governor Rick Perry hinting at secession at a Tea Party rally today

And here’s the audio…

First off, he’s wrong. Texas never had an option to secede. They were granted the right to divide into five states, but not secede.

However, I would LOVE if Texas divided into five states…just so long as Austin and the area surrounding it for 50 miles was one of them. That would be a fantastic place to visit.

But getting back on track, do this thought experiment with me…imagine if a Democratic Governor would have said this during the Bush years.

Discuss…

Here in Texas, longtime Republican Speaker of the House Tom Craddick has resigned his position due to opposition from the moderate wing of his own party. Poised to replace him is Joe Straus, a 49 year-old representative from San Antonio known for his willingness to work with Democrats.

Straus will almost certainly be elected Speaker later this month because he was able to assemble a coalition of Democrats and Republicans to support his candidacy. Most expect him to be a more inclusive and far less combative leader of the House, which Republicans control by a 76-74 vote margin.

I’m pleased to see Craddick ousted. The man put partisanship and petty politics over the interests of the state. Straus, while relatively inexperienced, has a record of thinking for himself and not towing the party line just because that’s the easy thing to do. I also happen to live in Straus’ district (heck, I live in his precinct), so I’m familiar with his style and have readily voted for him in the last several contests.

What will be interesting for Republicans, is whether or not Straus’ leadership can help the GOP keep control of the State House. A lot of Republicans felt Craddick’s style was to blame for their diminishing power. If a moderate Republican can reenergize the party, then more such Republicans may have a chance of gaining power. If not, moderate Republicanism in Texas may be short lived.

Over two months since Hurricane Ike hit the Texas coast, there is still substantial damage and many state authorities are accusing FEMA of dragging its feet. Texas Governor Rick Perry has even announced he’s giving up on waiting for FEMA and will pay for the cleanup out of state coffers. He plans to stick FEMA with the bill later.

The problems aren’t just from Ike. Hurricane Dolly left its own trail of destruction along the state’s coastline near Mexico and officials there are also complaining that FEMA has done far too little, far too slowly.

The main complaint is the mountains of paperwork FEMA requires before providing aid. FEMA claims they are just protecting against fraud but that reasoning isn’t sitting well with counties where debris still litters the streets and snakes and alligators are moving in. The general consensus is FEMA is disorganized and bureaucratic to the point of being paralytic. Once again, FEMA has become a synonym for what’s wrong with government disaster relief.

In a perfect world, we wouldn’t need FEMA. States and localities could handle disaster relief themselves. The problem is, the cost of cleanup and aid is so immense that only the federal government has the kinds of resources necessary to provide adequate assistance. Without federal help, disaster-struck states and cities would go broke.

But, if we have to have a FEMA, can’t we at least make the organization more agile and more responsive? Obviously, there is no perfect disaster relief and those effected by calamity are always going to be impatient to get their lives back to normal. FEMA will never be loved. But can’t it at least be more efficient? One of the Texas counties hit by Ike just got the first part of a promised $3 million in aid — for cleanup after Hurricane Rita. Certainly FEMA can find a way to disburse funds in less than three years.

The Bush Administration became known for its inability to adequately manage the federal government. Hopefully Barack Obama and his appointees can better handle the complicated assortment of departments, programs and resources that make up the executive branch. One of the first priorities has to be reforming our disaster relief system.

Barack Obama lost Texas by eleven points. That’s why my state is always such an afterthought in presidential politics. We’re crimson red, right? Hold that thought.

Something interesting occurred in this election. While Obama improved on John Kerry’s overall state numbers by just six points, he won the counties where the state’s four largest cities are located. Dallas County went 57/42 for Obama, Harris County (Houston) went 50/49, Bexar County (San Antonio) went 52/47 and Travis County (Austin) went 64/35. Of those, only Travis County didn’t favor Bush four years ago.

Why does this matter? Traditionally, successful statewide candidates get their starts in the larger cities. If a national Democratic candidate can win Texas’ major cities, there is plenty of reason to believe locally tailored Democratic candidates can perform even better.

This reality should be of concern to the Republicans who currently dominate Texas politics. Democrats might not have time to build up their strength before the anticipated special-election for Senator in 2010 (Kay Bailey Hutchinson is set to retire), but Obama’s strong performance in the major cities here must give the Democrats the most hope they’ve had in 20 years. Particularly when you factor in that 54% of the state’s next wave of voters (the 18-30 year-olds) went for Obama.

I don’t predict Texas “going blue” anytime soon, but I think the state is trending more moderate and the days of one-party control are waning.

And that’s a peek at some local politics in the nation’s second most-populous state.

Since a political campaign can hardly be expected to provide a linguistic lesson in its promotional materials, I’ve been meaning to share the Maverick story. Fortunately for me, Jan Jarboe Russell of the San Antonio Express News published a great column yesterday detailing how the Maverick family of San Antonio became the original, original mavericks.

If you like a little history with your language, give the column a read. Don’t mind the negative slant towards McCain. The history is still quite interesting.

Republican Suzanna Hupp, a former state House member, called up Libertarians in three particularly close races and asked them to drop out. She felt that without the Libertarians, the Republican candidate would pick up the votes and win the election.

To no one’s surprise, except Hupp’s and whichever Republicans she conspired with, the Libertarians refused to drop from the race. It is surprising that she considers the Libertarian Party as a Republican lapdog to rollover as needed. Third party candidates rarely have expectations to win, but they do believe in elections as a forum. Hupp may do well to check out the differences in the two parties’ platforms next time.

One of the Libertarians said that while Hupp did not directly offer board seats on local commissions, it was left open as a possibility. Hupp denied anything of the sort.

Wes Benedict, head of the Libertarian Party for Texas, dismissed the Republican requests for Libertarians to drop out. “Republicans need to earn those votes,” Benedict said.

(For more foolish stories visit Foolocracy.com)

I don’t think anybody believes that Texas can turn blue this election cycle, but last month McCain was leading by 14, and the fact that we’re not seeing single digits is definitely unexpected.

How has Obama made up ground in this solidly red state?

The details…

McCain has a dominant 50% to 33% lead among men in Texas, but the two candidates are essentially tied among women.

The Republican draws support from 79% of voters in his own party, Obama is backed by 72% of Democrats and McCain leads 49% to 32% among unaffiliated voters. He led 56% to 30% among unaffiliateds in early June.

McCain is viewed favorably by 61% and unfavorably by 34%. Obama’s ratings are 50% favorably and 48% unfavorable.

Once again, women are helping out Obama. The question now…what does he need to do to extend his lead among that demographic to make the race tight enough so McCain has to start spending money there?

She lost 1 to Obama and picked up 2 undecideds, so that’s +1 for today.

So who was the super? Rep. Ciro Rodriguez from Texas:

“A big reason is because his district voted so overwhelmingly for her, that’s one of the biggest reasons,” said Rodriguez’ spokesman Josh Rosenblum.

Rodriguez said in a statement issued by the Clinton campaign that he still believes she can win.

“Not only can she win, I am convinced that she will be a truly great president,” Rodriguez said. “In two areas of special importance to me, caring for our veterans and improving our schools, Hillary has been a real leader. I am happy to follow the clear choice of my constituents and support Hillary for President.”

Post-Pennsylvania Delegate Pickups:
Obama – 40
Clinton – 13.5

Total Superdelegates:
Clinton – 272.5
Obama – 271

Total post-PA pickups after the jump…

Obama superdelegate pickups:
Joe Johnson (VA), DNC – May 9, 2008
Vernon Watkins (CA), DNC – May 9, 2008
Wilber Lee Jeffcoat (SC), DNC Vice Chairman – May 9, 2008
Laurie Weahkee (NM), DNC – May 9, 2008
Mazie Hirono (HI), Representative – May 9, 2008
Ed Espinoza (CA), DNC – May 9, 2008
John Gage (MD), DNC – May 9, 2008
Peter DeFazio (OR), Representative – May 9, 2008
Donald Payne (NJ), Representative – May 9, 2008
Rick Larsen (WA), Representative – May 8, 2008
Brad Miller (NC), Representative – May 8, 2008
Jennifer McClellan (VA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Inola Henry (CA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Jerry Meek (NC), Dem Chairman – May 7, 2008
Jeanette Council (NC), DNC – May 7, 2008
Lauren Dugas Glover (MD), DNC Vice Chairman – May 5, 2008
Michael Cryor (MD), DNC Chairman – May 5, 2008
Kalyn Free (OK), DNC – May 5, 2008
Jaime Paulino (Guam), DNC & Territory Vice Chair – May 4, 2008
Parris Glendening (MD), Governor – May 3, 2008
Inez Tenenbaum (SC), DNC – May 3, 2008
Brian Colón (TX), DNC – May 3, 2008
Paul G. Kirk, Jr. (MA), DNC – May 2, 2008
John Patrick (TX), DNC – May 1, 2008
Barbara Flynn Currie (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Todd Stroger (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Richard M. Daley (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Joe Andrew (IN), DNC – May 1, 2008
Bruce Braley (IA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Lois Capps (CA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Baron Hill (IN), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Ben Chandler (KY), Representative – Apr 29, 2008
Richard Machacek (IA), DNC – Apr 29, 2008
Jeff Bingaman (NM), Senator – Apr 28, 2008
Charlene Fernandez (AZ), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 26, 2008
David Wu (OR), Representative – Apr 24, 2008
Audra Ostergard (NE), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 23, 2008
Brad Henry (OK), Governor – Apr 23, 2008

Clinton superdelegate pickups:
Ciro Rodriguez (TX), Representative – May 9, 2008
Chris Carney (PA), Representative – May 9, 2008
Brad Ellsworth (IN), Representative – May 7, 2008
Heath Shuler (NC), Representative – May 7, 2008
Theresa Morelli (Dems Abroad), DNC May 5, 2008
Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (MD), Lt. Governor – May 3, 2008
Jaime A. Gonzalez Jr. (TX), DNC – May 2, 2008
Andrew Cuomo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Thomas DiNapoli (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
C. Virginia Field (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Carmen Arroyo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
John Olsen (CT), DNC – May 1, 2008
Luisette Cabanas (PR), DNC & Territory Vice Chair – Apr 30, 2008
William George (PA), DNC – Apr 30, 2008
Ike Skelton (MO), Representative, Apr 29, 2008
Mike Easley (NC), Governor – Apr 28, 2008
Kathy Sullivan (NH), Add-On – Apr 26, 2008
John Tanner (TN), Representative – Apr 23, 2008

Clinton superdelegate losses:
Donald Payne (NJ), Representative – May 9, 2008
Jennifer McClellan (VA), DNC – May 7, 2008
Arlene P. Bordallo (Guam), DNC & Former Territory Vice Chair- May 4, 2008
Joe Andrew (IN), DNC – May 1, 2008

A Texas DNC member, Jaime A. Gonzalez Jr., is coming out for Clinton, a campaign source says.

The move by Gonzalez, a trial lawyer, gives her a net gain on the day.

ALSO: He’s on Rules & Bylaws, which could be handy in a fight over Florida and Michigan.

I didn’t hear about any other superdelegate pickup for Clinton today, and since Obama picked up a former DNC chair Paul G. Kirk I thought it was a tie for the day, but please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

Post Pennsylvania pickups are now 16 to 12, with Obama leading.

The totals after the jump…

Obama superdelegate pickups:
Paul G. Kirk, Jr. (MA), DNC – May 2, 2008
John Patrick (TX), DNC – May 1, 2008
Barbara Flynn Currie (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Todd Stroger (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Richard M. Daley (IL), DNC – May 1, 2008
Joe Andrew (IN), DNC – May 1, 2008
Bruce Braley (IA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Lois Capps (CA), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Baron Hill (IN), Representative – Apr 30, 2008
Ben Chandler (KY), Representative – Apr 29, 2008
Richard Machacek (IA), DNC – Apr 29, 2008
Jeff Bingaman (NM), Senator – Apr 28, 2008
Charlene Fernandez (AZ), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 26, 2008
David Wu (OR), Representative – Apr 24, 2008
Audra Ostergard (NE), DNC & State Vice Chair – Apr 23, 2008
Brad Henry (OK), Governor – Apr 23, 2008

Clinton superdelegate pickups:
Jaime A. Gonzalez Jr. (TX), DNC – May 2, 2008
Andrew Cuomo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Thomas DiNapoli (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
C. Virginia Field (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
Carmen Arroyo (NY), DNC – May 1, 2008
John Olsen (CT), DNC – May 1, 2008
Luisette Cabanas (PR), DNC & Territory Vice Chair – Apr 30, 2008
William George (PA), DNC – Apr 30, 2008
Ike Skelton (MO), Representative, Apr 29, 2008
Mike Easley (NC), Governor – Apr 28, 2008
Kathy Sullivan (NH), Add-On – Apr 26, 2008
John Tanner (TN), Representative – Apr 23, 2008

Our Travis County gathering of 8,000 was important enough to attract dozens of speeches by local candidates, elected representatives and included Terry McAuliffe of the Clinton Campaign. State leaders of the Clinton and Obama campaigns participated in our convention. The credentials committees that deal with disputes resolved scores of issues . My particular precinct had 60 delegates: 45 for Obama and 15 for Clinton and we were as warm and accommodating to each other as I can imagine. I saw no fights or loud arguments. It was in fact as cooperative and tame a gathering of passionate adults one can imagine in spite of the jury rigged processes set up to deal with a delegation crowd at least ten times larger than any in recent memory.

I find it strange that McAuliffe was there? Shouldn’t he be out raising money for his cash strapped candidate?

Personally, I never thought Rush had this much pull, but if we’re talking about 60,000 people here or 80,000 people there, it begins to make sense. Not a lot of voters are needed to really swing these things or make them closer than they would have been. And closing the gap even by 5% is important in this proportional delegate process the Dems have to slog through.

In any event, that’s the word from the Boston Globe:

For a party that loves to hate the Clintons, Republican voters have cast an awful lot of ballots lately for Senator Hillary Clinton: About 100,000 GOP loyalists voted for her in Ohio, 119,000 in Texas, and about 38,000 in Mississippi, exit polls show.

Spurred by conservative talk radio, GOP voters who say they would never back Clinton in a general election are voting for her now for strategic reasons: Some want to prolong her bitter nomination battle with Barack Obama, others believe she would be easier to beat than Obama in the fall, or they simply want to register objections to Obama.

“It’s as simple as, I don’t think McCain can beat Obama if Obama is the Democratic choice,” said Kyle Britt, 49, a Republican-leaning independent from Huntsville, Texas, who voted for Clinton in the March 4 primary. “I do believe Hillary can mobilize enough [anti-Clinton] people to keep her out of office.”

Britt, who works in financial services, said he is certain he will vote for McCain in November.

About 1,100 miles north, in Granville, Ohio, Ben Rader, a 66-year-old retired entrepreneur, said he voted for Clinton in Ohio’s primary to further confuse the Democratic race. “I’m pretty much tired of the Clintons, and to see her squirm for three or four months with Obama beating her up, it’s great, it’s wonderful,” he said. “It broke my heart, but I had to.”

Local Republican activists say stories like these abound in Texas, Ohio, and Mississippi, the three states where the recent surge in Republicans voting for Clinton was evident.

One thing’s for sure. In the networks’ exit polling of Dem races, they need to start asking Republicans if they plan on voting for the Dem they voted for in the general election. If the answer is no, then you know it’s most likely the Limbaugh effect.

Here’s how that may have effected Texas:

It is also possible, though perhaps unlikely, that enough strategically minded Republicans voted for Clinton in Texas to give her a crucial primary victory there: Clinton received roughly 119,000 GOP votes in Texas, according to exit polls, and she beat Obama by about 101,000 votes.

Will the pollsters start listening?

Apparently Rush had a guest host that day because he was “sick.” Heh, okay…

Folks, this is an ex-President! That is absolutely nuts! But he apparently wanted to get all those ditto heads to come vote for Hillary so she could stay in the race.

Sully has some choice words…

Now just wrap your mind around this: the Clintons were happy to support a cynical, partisan Republican campaign to wound the Democratic front-runner, and they were brazen enough to go on the Limbaugh show to do so.

There also seems little doubt that Republican mischief played a real role in affecting the results. And they call Obama’s call for them to release their tax returns a tactic worthy of Ken Starr. I repeat: the chutzpah and the cynicism just leave you speechless. And as you find it impossible to do much but splutter, the Clintons plow on with new self-serving lies.

And to think she made an issue of Obama’s mention of Ronald Reagan, as if he were some Republican in Democrat’s clothing.

The “do and say anything” crew strikes again.

When the caucus votes are FINALLY tallied, that’s the probably outcome.

From NPR:

[...] one-third of the 193 delegates at stake this week were not awarded by the primary but by the caucuses held after the polls were closed. A record 4 million voters showed up for the primary, and a record 1.1 million also stayed for the caucuses at more than 8,000 sites around the Lone Star state. And in these caucuses, Obama won handily.

They call this hybrid the “Texas Two-Step,” and it’s had its fans and critics since invented in 1988. But this year it’s really going to cause some howling.

The Texas Democratic Party says Obama’s wider caucus margin will probably give him a 37-30 break in the delegates allocated from the caucuses. The primary had almost twice that many delegates at stake, but Clinton’s primary margin there was much narrower. So when the two steps are all done, the projection is for Obama to emerge with 98 delegates to Clinton’s 95.

So it’ll be kind of like Nevada, right? Where she claimed a win, but he won more delegates? I’m sure the Obama camp will be completely fine with that.

TPM has the answer (emphasis mine):

Eric Kleefeld called down to Texas, and the Democratic Party tells him, in so many words, that the caucus reporting was voluntary.

Precincts were not required to report results to the state party, but they set up a voluntary reporting system so that the media would have results to report. Nice of them, no? [...]

We’re told not to expect too much more in the way of caucus returns. Sort of makes sense. If you were going to comply with the “voluntary program,” you probably would have done so by now.

Hahahahaha…jeezus h…

Still, if the numbers hold up in Obama’s favor, here’s what that means for the delegate math…again from TPM:

On the assumption that the current results coming from all around the state represent a decent cross-section of the state as a whole, and that all the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama district delegates show up to their conventions in their proper proportions, we can make an educated guess.

Give or take, Obama would get 37 delegates to Hillary’s 30 delegates, netting Obama a +3 delegate advantage for the combined Texas prima-caucus. “This is believed to be a good sample of what’s available throughout the state,” Nieto said. “And if this trend continues, one could estimate that.”

Bottom line: Hillary’s overall gain for March 4, which had 370 total delegates up for grabs, will be about +8.

But again, who knows if we’ll ever get a full tally from the Texas caucuses.

More as it develops…

I don’t think so, and the numbers don’t either…

- Obama won Republicans more narrowly than usual, 52-47. In vote terms, that translates to roughly 134,000 to 123,000.

- Overall, Clinton won Texas by just under 100,000 votes.

It’s a close call, but unless the vast majority of Republicans who voted for Clinton (more than 80%) did so at Rush’s suggestion, they probably didn’t put Clinton over the top. They may have given her a point or two bump in the end, but it seems unlikely they were the deciding factor for Clinton last night.

Simply put, Rush doesn’t have that much influence. He’s a sideshow. A popular sideshow, no doubt, but his listeners aren’t “Ditto Heads” he thinks they are.

I said earlier today to watch San Antonio which makes up most of Bexar County. Obama must have thought the same as he’s here tonight for the victory speech which may never come. Right now with half of the vote in, Clinton is comfortably ahead by 13 points. My feeling was that if Obama could win or place even in San Antonio, he could win the state. If he did poorly here, I thought that would indicate a general weakness throughout state. He’s not doing well enough.

Of course, with Texas’ screwy system of delegate apportionment, Obama will likely come out ahead in the delegate count. We’ll all find out tomorrow as this thing will go on pretty late.

The state party seriously needs to reconsider this two-step system. It’s already asking a lot for voters to show up to the polls for a primary vote and then show up again for a caucus. How many parents with childcare issues and how many workers who couldn’t get away from their jobs were disenfranchised today? And then the party can’t even run these things smartly and quickly? Unacceptable.

Clinton – 731,235 – 49%
Obama – 723,944 – 49%

The biggest caveat with these numbers? They don’t include Dallas, Houston or Austin. So we might see a big swing back toward Obama after those come in.

Keep checking back!

UPDATE:
She pulls into the lead for real…

Clinton – 772,543 – 50%
Obama – 753,832 – 49%

The big cities should be coming in momentarily.

UPDATE 2:
Want to know how crazy the delegate math is?

These are the latest numbers from Texas:

Hillary Clinton – 776,495 – 49.59%
Barack Obama – 758,974 – 48.47%

She’s leading right? Well, in the popular vote, yes, but in the delegate count she’s losing by a lot.

In fact, Hillary has won 57 delegates tonight and Barack has won 69. Yep, 12 more delegates with clearly less vote.

Now just imagine what happens when the vote comes in from the big cities.

From CNN:

Clinton holds roughly a 10-point advantage over Obama among those in Ohio who decided who to vote for in the last three days. Among those voters who decided before that, Clinton and Obama are split.

In Texas, Clinton holds even a larger advantage among late deciders. Those who decided in the last three days went for her by 23 points over Obama, 61 percent to 38 percent.

The attacks worked.

Expect more.