Posted on 03/14/2012 8:40:27 AM PDT by Iron Munro
Despite his losses in the Alabama and Mississippi primaries, Mitt Romney appears to have expanded his delegate lead on Tuesday.
The most recent projections from AP show Rick Santorum took 31 delegates from Alabama and Mississippi, while Newt Gingrich took 24 delegates and Romney got 23
But this morning, Romney was projected to win all nine delegates from American Samoa’s caucuses, and he also won the Hawaii caucuses by a large margin.
AP projections show Romney beat Santorum 18 delegates to four in those jurisdictions.
So, as of this morning, Romney has won 41 delegates from Tuesday’s contests, compared to 35 for Santorum, thereby expanding Romney’s delegate lead. (Gingrich is projected to have won 24 delegates.)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Romney - 494
Santorum - 251
Gingrich - 131
Paul - 48
But of course the Not-Romney delegate count is going up faster than the Romney delegate count. That’s the key. That’s why there will be a brokered convention.
Romney needs to win about 46% of the outstanding delegates to win the nomination outright.
Santorum needs about 64%.
Newt, 72%.
Those delegates are not going to translate into votes for Romney if he gets the nomination. I believe a conservative 3rd party candidate will rise up.
Carrying on, the not-Romneys must win 52% of the remaining delegates to stop Romney from taking the homination outright.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2857771/posts?page=4#4
Looking at states yet to hold primaries, such as IL, PA, NY, CA, DC, MD, CT, DE, RI, OR, UT etc 46% is not impossible.
My guess is Newt will be forced to drop out or just limp along till end. You know the old adage, candidates do not quit, they just run out of money.
I don't believe that. I hope it's true, but I believe that the party leadership would rather offend the conservative base and guarantee an insider wins (even if that insider is more likely to be Obama) than risk having a nominee who will genuinely cut government and risk cutting their power.
Romney is toast!
He can’t win the nomination outright before the end of the Primaries.
As the perception of his weakness as a candidate and his inability to win outright grows through the rest of the primaries in spite of the support of his undeclare Super-PAC FauxNews, he will continue to lose delegates to both Santorum and Gingrich.
This is sweet!
Last night was proof that Conservatives will NOT vote for Romney, and he is dead in the General without their support.
He can win the Nomination, but he has no shot in the General.
Did Romney take Outer Mongolia too?
You are wrong about that, Santorum needs 67% where your 3% error is actually significant, comparing the demographics of the remaining states.
Romney will be the nominee if both Newt and Rick stay in the race. There is no avoiding it. The only way to beat him is for a single conservative to remain in the race and to outperform Romney in the MANY winner-take-all states and districts coming up. That is the only way Newt and Rick can accumulate enough delegates together that they will outnumber Romney’s and Paul’s.
If they both stay in, Romney has a chance to just limp over the 1,144 threshold, or will almost definitely be close enough that Paul’s delegates can put him over the top.
Newt and Rick have handed him delegates he could have been denied by vote-splitting in Alabama, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Ohio, and Michigan. Almost THREE TIMES that many upcoming states have similar winner-take-all rules. The primaries were set up that early states would be mostly proportional, but later states are the opposite.
Romney will amass more delegates in the following states in a 3-man race while he could be virtually shut out of many in a 2-man race. A 2-man race denies him 100-200 more delegates by making sure he never gets a plurality when Newt and Rick’s combined votes could have beaten him and by sometimes beating him by 50%. THIS WILL MAKE THE DIFFERENCE in denying him the nomination. It’s that close.
Illinois
Wisconsin
Maryland
New York
Pennsylvania
Connecticut
Delaware
West Virginia
Texas
California
New Jersey
All depends on how much money Santorum can muster. My best guess is we will have a nominee by the UT primary.
I don’t think that a third party is the answer. I think that this race has taught the Tea Party that if we want our views represented, we need our own national organization, including funding and volunteers. Just think where either Santorum or Gingrich would be with such an organization-and only a fraction of Mitten’s money.
It’s ironic!
Romney does better with Democrats and Moderates than he does against Conservatives. His hard “sell” that his is conservative, has wound up on deaf ears. I was watching him claim that he, is the only candidate who knows how to “work with both sides, to come to a mutual solution.” This is an indication of what to expect with Romney. (Especially, heavy for the “other” side.)
Only thing certain is death & taxes. So obviously it is not 100% certain who will be the nominee. There are some very large and expensive states coming up. Grassroots won’t cut it. Must have millions of $$ to put ads on TV & radio. CA & NY are prohibitively expensive and not any where as conservative as MS & AL. Santorum has one large donor to fund his super pack. If that donor shells out more millions, we could go into brokered convention. If not, Romney has a good chance to get 1144 after Utah.
Wrong, Romney had about 53% of the delegates as of last week even with only 39% of the vote. It gets easier for him to accumulate more in an imbalanced fashion since many more states will now be winner-take-all, including Puerto Rico, D.C., Utah, Delaware, etc. No predictions can now be made without an extremely careful state-by-state analysis analyzing every single rule in detail. The delegates needed to deny him the nomination are too close now. Nothing but a game-changer like Newt or Rick dropping out or Mitt getting indicted for something can ensure a Romney loss.
Exit polls in Michigan (open primary) show that Santorum received many more democrat votes than any other candidate.
Futhermore, he needs 46% of the remaining vote to win the nomination outright, he won’t get 46% of the remaining vote and each primary he does not get 46% of the vote, that percentage only goes higher.
It is not a static percentage as times goes on.
So after he loses Texas and a number of other states, and wins several in the 30% range, the percentage of votes he needs to win in the remaining states will be above 55% and probably closer to 60%.
Like I said, he can’t win outright.
Too bad he only can get about 1/3 of the vote.
Go Newt!
Did the calc again and I come up with Santorum needing to win 65% of remaining delegates to win the nomination. Please explain your take on “demographics of the remaining states.”
I’m not pushing a candidate here, just trying to understand the logistics of the battle. It looks like the big question revolves around the ability of Newt and/or Santorum to stay in the race. Money in other words.
“the not-Romneys must win 52% of the remaining delegates to stop Romney from taking the homination outright.”
Right. And if that happens, you can take it to the bank that Santorum will trade his delegates for the VP spot on Romney’s ticket.
That’s the game he’s playing. He knows he doesn’t stand a chance of winning the nomination in a contested convention.
That’s bad news about American Samoa, because you know the old saying: “As goes American Samoa, so goes the nation...”
...
So, as of this morning, Romney has won 41 delegates from Tuesday’s contests, compared to 35 for Santorum, thereby expanding Romney’s delegate lead. (Gingrich is projected to have won 24 delegates.)Interesting that Wapo can't do the basic math:
41 Romney delegates vs. (35+24)=59 non-Romney delegates
The endgame at this point is to keep Romney from 1,144 delegates and force a contested, if not brokered, convention.
"And as a result, Obama will get 4 more years in his quest to destroy American, and appoint one or possibly two more commie Supreme Court justices."
The "war" is coming either way. If the American people are still so stupid to vote barry or mittens, perhaps we deserve to be destroyed, as is, so we can rebuild.
I'm still not sure if we are beyond a "point of no return". Time will tell.
Are you sure Jedi? There are still big states to come that are not winner take all. For instance, how can Rick or Newt singlehandedly prevent Romney from getting any delegates in California? That’s kind of naive IMO.
“So after he loses Texas and a number of other states, and wins several in the 30% range”
Most of the remaining races are winner-take-all and there are still 1,358 delegates to be won.
If you just look at California, New York and New Jersey, there are 317 delegates available and they will not be awarded proportionally.
Your math just doesn’t add up.
hey willardbots...nah,nah,nah,nah,nah..nah..[sticks out tongue]
See post #37.
Your math does not add up.
I’m sure obummer thinks it’s sweet too. We can’t even get a candidate strong enough to win? I doubt he’s too worried about his sucky poll numbers. We needed a strong candidate. The Communists and Marxists didn’t come this close only to lose it all in 2012 and us having no strong candidate is not a good thing.
The total delegate count for the remaining 8 primaries that are Winner-Take-All is 388.
Romney can’t win.
Both Newt and Rick need to stay in the race, primarily, to keep Rick honest and in the game to the end.
Romney thus far has won 52% of the delegates. If he continues on that track, he will win the nomination.
And, unless the splitting of the vote and thereby, because of the rules, the delegates, stop, he will do so.
As a reult of splitting the conservative vote into two smaller factions, Romney is able, with very disciplined campaigning where he gets the most delegate for his popular votes, to gain delegates at a greater proportion to his popular vote.
And that is exactly what he has been doing. He has 38.5% of the popular vote (12 point ahead of Santorum, but well behind Santorum and Newt combined). But, with that 38.5% of the popular vote, he has been able to win 52% of the delegates and thus is on the path to getting nominated.
See the following site for all the details and my resulting analysis:
The GOP Primary Tracker Site
http://www.jeffhead.com/GOPTracker.htm
I think SoCon has it right Jedi. I’m not an expert, but it looks as though there’s only 8 WTA states, and they seem relatively small with respect to delegates. If Newt or Rick were to drop out Romney will get a good number of delegates in big states like California.
dfwgator wrote:
<<
Last night was proof that Conservatives will NOT vote for Romney, and he is dead in the General without their support.
He can win the Nomination, but he has no shot in the General.
>>
**************************************************************
Exactly! The GOP establishment has taken its conservative base for granted for WAY too long and we’re simply not going to accept being told to support their hand-picked squishy milquetoast moderate candidates any longer.
Thank you.
“I believe that the party leadership would rather offend the conservative base and guarantee an insider wins (even if that insider is more likely to be Obama) than risk having a nominee who will genuinely cut government and risk cutting their power.”
I agree. The institutional GOP’s efforts for the past year and a half have been aimed towards neutralizing the Tea Party rather than the defeating Democrats or Democrat policy.
“Romney thus far has won 52% of the delegates. If he continues on that track, he will win the nomination.”
Take out Virginia, where Newt and Rick weren’t even on the ballot and he went head-to-head with Uncle Nutso, and what percentage has Mittens won? I think about 10% of Mittens’ total delegates are from that farce.
I thought California was WTA by congressional district? Maybe I don’t understand what that means. What does that mean?
“Exactly! The GOP establishment has taken its conservative base for granted for WAY too long and we’re simply not going to accept being told to support their hand-picked squishy milquetoast moderate candidates any longer.”
I disagree only in that Bishop Willard is not a moderate. His record is leftist. He governed further to the left than Bill Clinton. Incredible, but true.
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.