Should states where Clinton won the popular vote, but Obama won the delegate count, go on his side, because the image is showing the pledged delegate count not popular vote count? -— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.61.85 ( talk • contribs) 19:39, 8 March 2008
Why does the image show that Obama won 2 delegates and Clinton 1 when Obama really won all three? Jeltz talk 11:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Obama won Texas. If you add primary + precinct conventions, you'll see that Obama have 5 delegates more than Clinton. 84.40.210.164 ( talk) 13:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm making a new graph that will be geographically situated to get rid of the "states won" alignment... expect it tomorrow. Northwesterner1 ( talk) 15:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Good job Northwesterner, but could you make the colors for Edwards and not assigned different? Now that you've fixed the geographical arrangement, that's the only thing I can think of to complain. Other than that, it is a great map. — Scouter Sig 20:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Should states where Clinton won the popular vote, but Obama won the delegate count, go on his side, because the image is showing the pledged delegate count not popular vote count? -— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.61.85 ( talk • contribs) 19:39, 8 March 2008
Why does the image show that Obama won 2 delegates and Clinton 1 when Obama really won all three? Jeltz talk 11:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Obama won Texas. If you add primary + precinct conventions, you'll see that Obama have 5 delegates more than Clinton. 84.40.210.164 ( talk) 13:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm making a new graph that will be geographically situated to get rid of the "states won" alignment... expect it tomorrow. Northwesterner1 ( talk) 15:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Good job Northwesterner, but could you make the colors for Edwards and not assigned different? Now that you've fixed the geographical arrangement, that's the only thing I can think of to complain. Other than that, it is a great map. — Scouter Sig 20:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)