Posted on 03/10/2012 1:25:53 PM PST by Mr. K
Edited on 03/10/2012 3:58:29 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Rick Santorum swept to victory in the Kansas Republican presidential caucuses Saturday, marking his strongest caucus finish yet but still struggling to make a dent in Mitt Romney's delegate lead.
Kansas offers a total haul of 40 delegates, and Santorum is expected to take at least 30 of them. If Santorum can keep Romney from crossing a certain threshold, he could conceivably take them all.
With 98 percent of precincts reporting, Santorum was well ahead with 51 percent. Romney trailed with 21 percent, followed by Gingrich with 14 percent. Ron Paul was in last place with 13 percent.
However, Santorum still trails Romney by more than 200 delegates. Romney frustrated the Santorum campaign's gains on Saturday with a series of smaller victories in far-flung locales like Guam. Romney picked up at least 23 delegates over the weekend.
The candidates head next into Mississippi and Alabama for primaries on Tuesday, as well as caucuses in Hawaii.
Winner take all?
Good, now can he learn a conservative solution to the income tax? His progressive plan of 10% and 28% tax brackets is only to the right of Democrats.
That speech was really quite inspiring - until Greg Jarret or whatever his name is - INTERRUPTED IT!
He must have gotten a call from Romney in his IFB ordering him to cut Santorum off. It was right at the pinnacle of his speech, I was PISSED.
Looks like if you get 50%..they’re all yours.
Having been beaten into third place by Romney, will Gingrich get the message that his southern strategy is now in flames and withdraw?
If Congress gives him something better, I don’t thin he’s veto it.
Publius321
Proud Allen West voter (primary and general election)
Oh Dear Lord my Dyslexia is getting worse. “I don’t THINK HE’d veto it.”
Whatever policy stances and ideas Santorum might actually have are probably irrelevant to his average voter. He projects an image of being a good little Christian family man, which makes them feel good inside and that’s enough.
This keeps up, it looks like a Santorum/Gingrich ticket. I can’t complain too much about getting that as the presidential team in 2013, though Santorum may have a campaign optics problem that the liberals will make out to look as though he wants to make the Fedguv an arm of the Roman Catholic Church. I don’t believe Santorum would actually govern that way, but you’re talking about liberals who monopolize the news media. This is an issue that Gingrich does not have.
</sarcasm>
Santorum/West !!!!!
Watch the libs heads explode...
Click the following for the formular. There is a 20% threshold to share in the delegates.
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/KS-R#0310
Is Kansas a caucus state?
No, Romney will pick up 6 if he stays just above 20% as he is now.
http://www.kwch.com/news/kwch-kansas-caucus-results-20120309,0,2769801.story
yes............
[ Is Kansas a caucus state? ]
Yes. We used to be a primary state and changed it in 2008.
Just out of curiosity how many people voted?
Pavlovian idiots for Santorum.
Is that what you are saying?
Old guys as VP, led to the mess we are in now, with a big fight for who is the rightful heir.
“Just out of curiosity how many people voted?”
Less than 1% of the Kansas population.
Awesome!!
I read that Rick got 32 delegates out of a possible 40. Not bad at all.
He’s never been all that great at getting the message and it’s hard to teach an old you-know-what new tricks.
So let me get ths straight. 53% of 1%?
Of what total vote? Thanks.
Yep.
28,856 with 94.5% counted.
Is there a problem with being a good "little" Christian family man? BTW, Rick has solid proposals for all of the issues that confront the country from Iran to the economy.
He doesn’t get ANY delegates, who are unbound. They can vote for whomever they want at the Convention in Tampa.
OF course, nobody actually lives in Kansas, and nobody cares at all what people in Kansas think. Rick is always running off to these no-nothing states that nobody wants to bother with.
Not like Gingrich, who only competes in the states with important people. As Gingrich says, anybody can win in backwards middle-america states that nobody gives a damn about.
Kansas and Tennessee don’t count as actual southern states; to be a southern state you have to have a contiguous border with Georgia.
Please post a new thread “Santroum Leads in BOTH HARD and SOFT delegate count”.
Used to be caucuses here in Oklahoma. Back in those days I was a Dem and during one never to be forgotten primary I spend hours trying to find the house where my precinct caucus was being held. After the 5th or 6th phone call it became clear that I was not wanted at the caucus and they weren't going to give me clear directions to that hidden home, which was out in the country. Democrats were pretty sleazy even then.
I would bet that less than 10% of the number of primary voters would actually attend a caucus rather than a voting election. So a very limited number of people choose the actual candidate. I tend to view the results of caucauses as very questionable given the small sample of people voting.
” as Gingrich says, anybody can win in backwards middle-america states that nobody gives a damn about”.
Gingrich said this? Could you please give us the source?
If Gingrich had just come to Kansas and spent a LITTLE bit of time, he might have drawn off enough of the Romney vote to keep Romney below 20%. Or, to drive up the total vote just enough to keep Romney below 20%.
If Gingrich had gotten 1500 MORE caucus voters, Romney would be below 20%. If he had taken a mere 300 votes from Romney, Romney would be below 20%.
Anywhere between stealing 300 Romney supporters, or bringing 1500 new supporters, and Romney would have been denied delegates — and it wouldn’t have even mattered if Gingrich also drew more Santorum voters.
It was another case where the important thing was to do one thing, and Gingrich didn’t do that.
Just like in Georgia, where the most important thing was to let Santorum stay above 20% in order to draw delegates from Romney, but instead Gingrich ran a biting negative Robocall not against Romney, but against Santorum, thus pushing Santorum below 20% and getting Romney at least 4 additional delegates.
Tennessee does share a border with Georgia.
"Saturday 10 March 2012: All 40 of Kansas' delegates to the Republican National Convention are allocated to presidential contenders based on the results of the voting in today's Precinct Caucuses. Caucuses begin at 10:00 AM CST. [Section II. 1.] Each voter casts 1 ballot for the candidate of his or her choice. [Section IV. 2. B.]
Not every caucus leads to unbound delegates, or even to the more common "step-wise caucuses" which contrary to the Gingrich supporters claims also lead to the candidate really getting delegates, only later.
Of course, you are also the one acting with glee about only "1%" voting. Which is the way caucuses work, although nobody forces people to stay home.
But taking your 1% seriously, just for a second, I guess that there are only 4,185 people in ALL OF KANSAS who support Gingrich, while millions apparently hate his guts.
Can you cite me an example of were unbound delegates awarded to a candidate didn’t support their guy at the convention?
Hey CharlesWayne, that was a pretty nasty statement you said Gingrich made. I nicely asked for a source, do you have a source or did you make it up? We don’t have much of a choice when it comes to the MSM reporting garbage, but I don’t see any reason why it should happen here.
” As Gingrich says, anybody can win in backwards middle-america states that nobody gives a damn about.”
Too bad the KS GOP didn’t do a MI GOP and give Rick the remaining delegates:
Allocation
Santorum: Won all 4 CD’s (3*4) and got 51% of the vote (.51*25) plus the 3 bound Superdelegates for a total of 28 delegates.
Romney got 21% of the vote (.21*25) for 6 delegates.
There’s 6 delegates left over. I believe they should all go to Rick, but I know they won’t. Looks like they just did it again based on the vote (.51*6) = 4 and (.21*6) = 2 to give
Rick 32 Delegates and Romney 8.
I was playing on and exagerating the excuse Gingrich made for why Santorum was able to string together a set of 1st and 2nd-place finishes in February while Gingrich pulled 4th in most contests:
Gingrich: I'm Taking Santoruim's Advice:
“I’m taking Rick Santorum’s advice,” Mr. Gingrich said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “He stayed in, he was running fourth in every single primary, suddenly he very cleverly went to three states nobody else went to, and he became the media darling and bounced back.”So, the question is, why did Gingrich think "nobody else went to" Colorado and Minnesota? And why did Gingrich skip Michigan, and Kansas, and so many other states?
But seriously, I was just helping the Gingrich folks by posting the objections they usually make when Santorum beats Gingrich in a contest (which has happened in all but a handful so far).
BTW, the quote from Gingrich is also factually incorrect, as Santorum had not actually had a string of 4th-place finishes. His finishes were 1st, 4th, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, prior to his 3 wins.
Back to your original question -- as a rule, if I am actually quoting someone, I will actually provide quotes and a link.
Yes, having the younger Santorum as the veep seems to make more sense for building a small dynasty. Gingrich would be quite elderly after 8 years. However if the “people” are happier with Santorum as the GOP presidential candidate, that is what makes sense for winning an election.
Oh, come on, throw me a bone here, I’m trying my best to come up with a good excuse....
Yes it does
Great news.
The problem with the “good little Christian family man” is the word “good”. A serial adulterer who talks real good is far better, dontcha know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.