I’d almost forgotten about Guam, the U.S. territory island in the Western Pacific, because of all the focus on the May 6 primaries in Indiana and North Carolina. Guam voters weighed in on the Democratic candidates in caucuses on Saturday (technically “yesterday” for them - it’s already Sunday in Guam).

After reading about the confusing Guam caucuses, here’s what I do know: Barack Obama is ahead with 1,951 votes to Hillary Clinton’s 1,748, with all but one of the 21 precincts reporting. Votes from Guam’s largest village - an estimated 1,400 - have not been counted yet.

Here’s what I don’t understand: everything else.

Guam has four pledged delegates and five superdelegates up for grabs, but technically eight pledged delegates will be chosen - each with a half of a vote at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. And although the Saturday vote was called a caucus, it was more like a primary - Guam voters filled out their ballots in secret rather than publicly declaring their support for a candidate, which is what they did in Washington’s caucuses.

Now, the most confusing thing of all: Guamanians will have no say in the general election in November. Huh?

A comment on a New York Times political blog expresses my thoughts exactly:

Wait. Let me make sure I understand this. The Guamanians can’t vote in the general election, so they have no voice in the selection of the president. However, they can vote in the primary and influence the selection of the Democratic nominee. Am I the only one who thinks that is silly?

Clinton and Obama apparently addressed this issue in radio and TV advertisements on the island, promising Guamanians the ability to vote for president. Neither candidate made a trip across the international dateline to campaign in Guam, but Obama - no surprise - did open a campaign office there.

I wonder if Guam voters are . . . bitter . . . about their inability to vote in the general election?