Skip to comments.Romney’s Delegate Lead Grows
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 Samoas 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 Tuesdays contests, compared to 35 for Santorum, thereby expanding Romneys delegate lead. (Gingrich is projected to have won 24 delegates.)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
You are right. People fail to realize that just as a person who drives the car for a robber is as guilty as a robber, voters are responsible for the votes cast by the politicians they elect.
Romney needs to get 1190 delegates. The reason is that if Romney is close to 1144, other campaigns can then challenge Florida, Virgina, and Arizona’s delegations. If successful, Romney loses about 50 delegates.
Last night proved that conservatives will not vote for Romney if there are more conservative alternatives (Santorum and Gingrich) on the ballot. It says nothing about whom (if anyone) conservatives will vote for if the alternative is Obama.
Exactly who is this mystery person that will rise up out of the pumpkin patch to snatch the nomination? And where will their delegates come from?
If you label what you wrote as fantasy, I would gladly welcome and accept it, but there is no reality to your comment.
Bravo...the only coherent post I have read so far today. You are completely correct.
I was referring to those who vote the party line regardless if a candidates supports issues that go against their faith.
I am not going to support a candidate (Romney)who has an anti-family record as Governor. If he is the nominee, I pray there will be a third party option on the November ballot.
many of those winner take all states you have listed are not winner take all. They are winner take all by district, which favors Santorum since he gets most of his support from the more numerous rural areas.
Yeah, it's all Newt's fault Romney's winning. /s
The only shot left is for all of the not-Romney to stay in and take delegates from Romney. None of them can outright beat him head-on at this point. It's too late and we learned this week Santorum's camp admits it. Newt's camp knows it and Ron Paul's strategy depends on it.
If a not-Romney gets out, Romney benefits because a sizable pool will flock to him rather than Newt or Santorum.
That's doable but not if any of the not-Romney's exit.
Wow! I've had it so wrong for years.
I always thought it went like this:
As goes American Samoa, so goes American Samoa...
Santorum should contest MD, as it is a closed primary, and the liberals there are mostly Democrats. He might outsmart the liberal GOP in MD, but maybe not either.
It may be that Newt will have to sell Perry in TX, not vice versa.
Just what state(s) is Newt supposed to win if there were no Santorum candidacy?
California was WTA by congressional district?
OK so Willie Mitty should get same-sex marriage San Francisco Bay area..
and Obamas rich friends in Hollywood...
and the liberal parts of Sacramento..
Central Valley is full of his illegal alien buddies..
San Diego has the US Navy...They wont go for him...
What other parts of CA are liberal ???
Gosh Jeff it sounds like its just too hard and confusing for your boy Willard...
Maybe he needs to go on home now before he bends a hair...
That would be too bad. If Obozo and Obomney (Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber) are the major party candidates, and (God forbid!) either is actually elected, then that winner will get four years or possibly eight years, if Obamney, to further Obozo's and the GOP-Es quest to destroy America and appoint one or two more commie Supreme Court justices (maybe more if Obamney).
Romney, once the trust funds are protected, regards everything else as quite negotiable and quite disposable. He has no backbone and no soul and no principles. His idjit son Matt was quoted today as saying that Obozo is a pretty good guy. Anything named Romney is the very definition of spoiled, rich and utterly out of touch. Mittwit is part of the problem and NEVER any part of the solution. If this is the best that conservatism can produce, we should have gone quietly to submit to tyranny rather than wasting all that time on politics for so many years.
I have never voted third party for POTUS but if the choice is those two, I will certainly refuse to vote for either of those anti-American, anti-Western Civilization, pro-abort, pro-lavender, anti-military, gun grabbing, tax hiking, spendaholic phonies. If there is a worthwhile third party candidate, only that candidate will get my POTUS vote. Neither Obozo nor Obamney have the slightest shred of conservative principle. We have a better chance of stopping Obozo's commie nominees than Obamney's commie nominees.
McConnell, LAMAR!, Corker, Cornyn, Hatch, Moocowski, Nancyboy Kirk, Lugar (God forbid his renomination), Brown, Collins, Isakson, Chambliss, McShame, and others of their ilk just MIGHT be united against Obozo's commie nominees but they will justify voting for Obamney's commie nominees because, well gosh, Obamney's a "Republican" and they just have to ratify his nominees. See Herod Blackmun, Swish Souter, Sandra Day O'Connor, Sandra Day O'Kennedy, Earl Warren, William Brennan and many other despicable "GOP" nominees.
Have the common sense to realize that, by repeating the age old "leftist posing as GOP mantra" (not your own but that of generations of Eastern elitist candidates and managers who substitute money for principle) makes you Charlie Brown in football season trusting Lucy to hold that football so you can kick it. Year after year, the sky looks very much the same when you wind up on your back after the football is removed. Coincidence? Not likely.
"Our guy is a smidgeon better (maybe) than their guy" is not a war worth fighting. Nor is the fight to substitute polo playing and a bracing contest of tiddlywinks for basketball and football.
California is a Congressional District WTA, which in effect means it is proportional as well.
Romney cant win the nomination.
Hes dead in the water.
Duncan Hunter was in CD 50 something so theres a large group of them...
When Romney does his attack ads etc hes going to have to treat each one like a separate state...
He cant reach them all to fool them
some of those districts will go to the others
and heres something else
Ron Paul won one of the Hawaiian islands yesterday
and came within about 10-20 votes of winning another
so dont count him out from winning a couple of those districts...
Theres a good chance that Romney wont do that great in CA
Im sure his neighbors arent too fond of him where he is tearing down that big house so I dont think he can count on them...
I think Rick has a good chance to get PA and maybe TX
Pray he doesnt get many more delegates.
Ron Paul should do well in TX his state
and in Kentucky his sons state...
We need him to pick up the votes and delegates that Newt and Rick cant get...
The idea is to stop the rabid liberal Romnry for now...
Some people are trying very hard to deny reality. A lot of the current delegate math includes unbound delegates who will be chosen at state conventions, where anything can happen. Ia, Co, and Mn are all unbound, and Romney could easily walk away with 25 from those states. Plus, he has been campaigning in territories and racking up delegates there, as well as campaigning in primary states with bound delegates. He just has a better campaign strategy of winning the nomination than the rest.