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 ...
“Both Newt and Rick need to stay in the race, primarily, to keep Rick honest and in the game to the end.”
Interesting. I have very mixed feelings about Gingrich remaining in the race. This is the best rationale for doing so that I have seen.
I looked at your website.
Your math may or may not be right (i.e., Florida and others apportionment is not settled at this moment).
However, Your political acument is lacking: “With Gingrich’s “southern strategy” now in a shambles (He has won two (Georigia and South Carolina), Romney has won two (Florida and Virginia) and Santorum has won three (Tennessee, Mississippi and Alabama)), the pressure on Gingrich to unite behind Santorum is going to grow in both strength and urgency. Seven southern states votes and Santorum is leading the pack with three and Romney and Gingrich with two each in the south.”
No-indeedy. Romney’s Florida and Virginia have not been “Southern” for a long, long time. They may have been part of the Confederacy, but their demographics belie their geographic positions. Romney cannot win in “the South”. Period.
They just need to keep Romney under 1,000 delegates
Losing Alabama and Mississippi is going to hurt his fundraising even more than it already is.
Gotta love it anytime he comes in 3rd
I think the GOP bigwigs conceded 2012 before the primaries even started. I think Romney is the designated loser.
That’s why it is so important for Newt and Rick to stay in. Both staying in denies Romney a larger % of delegates in big states like California than he would get if it was one on one. IMO anyway. As I said I’m not an expert, but it appears to me that the proportional states to come are more significant than the WTA states.
But he did take Virginia and that’s what happened. It is about 10% (a little less ) of his total...but even then he would be far ahead.
Like last night, Alabama and Mississippi were wins for Santorun, but not by much and heavily split. He ended up with the wins and with 31 delegates to Romney’s 23. but then in Hawaii and Samoa, Romney added like 21 or 22 delegates more to Santorum’s 2-3 and so Romney added significantly more to his lead.
That’s they way it will continue to go IMHO unless Newt and Rick make a deal.
“Both Newt and Rick need to stay in the race”
If that happens it’s unlikely that either one of them will win any of the winner-take-all states you listed.
Your strategy can prolong the race but will not change the final outcome. The only way to change the final outcome is if the losing candidates begin to drop out.
Just looking at your scenario, if Romney takes the 8 winner-take-all states and wins only 30% of the vote in the proportional races that already puts him over the top with 1174 delegates.
Looking at how future primaries are structured, you will observe there are many states with WTA-CD & WTA-AL. Which means the winner in each congressional district takes all delegates. And the At Large delegates also win with a simple majority. With 4 candidates in the race one does not need 46% or even 40% to win all delegates, just 30% can win all delegates in a district if the other 3 candidates divide the other 70% with no one beating the 30%. Also observe the winner take all states of PR, DC & UT where one needs a simple majority to win all delegates.
And don’t be surprised if Florida’s -50 penalized delegates suddenly reappear in the Romney column...
most of the above states are NE Romney states, where he wins either a 2 or 3 man race. Rick might take his home state of PA, but remember he lost his re-election there by 18 points.
Rick could win in TX, WV and WI.
But, the math shows improbable path to Rick reaching 1144.
The goal must be to stop Mitt from getting to 1144 before the convention.
Yep, more proof that the fix was in all along
“Futhermore, he needs 46% of the remaining vote to win the nomination outright, he wont get 46% of the remaining vote and each primary he does not get 46% of the vote, that percentage only goes higher.”
Not correct. If Newt stays in the race we have 4 candidates dividing the votes since Dr. Paul will not drop out. There are a ton of states coming up where delegates are awarded by WTA-CD. Which means winner takes all by congressional district. Assume Paul gets 10%, Newt gets 25%. That leaves 65% divided between Santorum & Romney. Which means 33% wins ALL delegates in that district.
Just wait until Romney wins winner-take-all states like Puerto Rico (23), Maryland (37 delegates), DC (19), Delaware (17), California (172), New Jersey (50), and Utah (40). [Not sure if he’ll win winner-take-all Wisconsin (42).] Those wins add up to 358 more delegates. If he wins those and loses Wisconsin, Romney only need 33% of the remaining from the proportional states.
RCP has it listed incorrectly then.
Romney got about 40% of the delegates yesterday and that was one of his bad showings.
1. Puerto Rico
3. Washington D.C.
7. New Jersey
and Romney is ahead in all the above, winner take all states. Rick's best chance is WI with a slim chance at CA if he has the momentum at that time.
Romney must be denied reaching 1144 by being limited to gaining fewer delegates in the proportional states since Mitt has such an advantage in the winner take all states.
We just found out that California is a Congressional District WTA, which in effect means it is proportional as well.
Romney can win the nomination.
He’s dead in the water.
Sorry that should have read:
Romney CAN’T WIN the nomination.
Agreed, Romney is not the best candidate against Obama. That would be Newt. I do not feel comfortable with Santorum going in debates with Obama. Obama will suck him in a religious & contraception issues in debates and Santorum will jump in the trap.
However Santorum would make a better president than Romney.
I thought we were discussing probabilities of who might win nomination, NOT who we WANT & WISH to win.
It will be a controlled convention and the liberals of the GOP will not allow a conservative to obtain the nomination. We will have a liberal lackey shoved down our throats with a conservative VP slot bone tossed to us in hope of keeping conservatives on the reservation. The fix is in.
Rick needs to win his home state, Newt and Mitt won their home states by large margins. However, Romney will still end up with delegates from PA
Glad that CA is proportional. Romney has a lot of money to spend on negative ads in CA. He needs to be denied delegates.
Don’t count Paul. He will give his delegates to Romney in exchange for either VP or some other impt job.
Pray he doesn’t get many more delegates.
The winner-take-all states are the big concern. Plus, Romney will take Calif and NY.
Santorum will get Penn and maybe Gingrich will get Tx, but his 2nd & 3rd place performances won’t make it easy for Perry to sell him.
Gingrich would have been formidable had he represented a solid south. Instead, he looks weak.
I think that folks are looking at how candidates can be defeated and Gingrich took it on the chin in Florida. Folks are afraid that will be repeated.
That's true, if Romney gets shut out - as in, he loses all 53 congressional districts. He'll probably win the majority of the districts plus the 10 at large delegates awarded to the overall winner. Worst case he gets 90 district delegates + 10. J.M.O.
goes all the way and Col Allen West step in and run on our ticket..
well I can dream can’t I
You’re wrong on some of these and this is too important to be spreading misinformation. Almost no one seems to understand the PA, WV, IL system yet. It’s direct, plurality-takes-all by district. If Romney wins every district with a 26-25-25-24 split and he wins EVERY delegate.
I’m not looking at what gets “settled at a convention” either, I’m looking at the votes and delegates. Obviously the party or grass-roots maneuvering will favor Romney or Paul so we need to win those to have any chance.
We have upcoming 622 delegates from just 7 big states with partial winner-take-all where splitting the vote could make the difference between handing Romney hundreds of delegates or not...the first 3 groups below. These are the kind of mixed/moderate states/districts like Ohio and Michigan where vote-splitting WILL kill us.
We have upcoming 228 from pure winner-take-all, where I guess Romney might only lose in Wisconsin for 42. But that’s 42 we might not get with vote-splitting and EVERY DELEGATE COUNTS.
And we have 439 from proportional. If one conservative drops out, we lose nothing here, because all those votes and delegates go to the other conservative instead.
We have EVERYTHING to gain by one conservative dropping out and pretty much nothing to lose.
Direct delegate election by district. If Romney wins every district in the state with 26-25-25-24 or more, he gets ALL the delegates. The nature of these states shows there is very serious vote-splitting potential to help Romney in these:
Winner-take-all by district:
Election becomes winner-take-all if a candidate meets a certain threshold (usually 50%):
Connecticut (a mix)
So if he does win the nomination, and IF a third party would immerge, WOULD the third party have a crack at winning? Just wondering........
No, the opposite is naive. The Illinois polls show Romney winning with 35% and Newt and Rick split lower. But combined, Newt and Rick are 43%. With a 35-25-15 split in any given California district, Romney wins all its delegates. Combine our vote and we beat him 40-35, and we win all the delegates. Look no further than Ross Perot to see how a conservative split awards a win to a single liberal.
That's a bad misreading of district winner-take-all. Just see South Carolina. Newt won 92% of the delegates but only got 40% of the vote. District winner-take-all are likely to give someone the vast majority of delegates even with a small plurality of the vote. It all depends if each district votes about the same as the whole state did or not. Every district is its own mini winner-take-all state. It all depends how many districts are liberal enough to give Romney over 50% regardless of who else runs, and which would split more like 40-30-20, Mitt-Rick-Newt. Nevertheless, we lose nothing in either district if we move to just one candidate. Advantage is for one of our guys to drop out. New York is probably the only state out of them all where it might help Mitt if one of our guys drops out. Because it shuts out the opponents from delegates if the winner gets over 50%. But looking at the map, we can pull the same move on Mitt in Texas with even more delegates at stake, and we get big advantages in all the district winner-take-all and direct delegate election states with one candidate and no splitting.
It is a Congressional District Winner-Take-All primary, effectively making it a proportional state.
That's a bad misreading of district winner-take-all. Just see South Carolina. Newt won 92% of the delegates but only got 40% of the vote. District winner-take-all are likely to give someone the vast majority of delegates even with a small plurality of the vote. It all depends if each district votes about the same as the whole state did or not.
Every district is its own mini winner-take-all state. It all depends how many districts are liberal enough to give Romney over 50% regardless of who else runs, and which would split more like 40-30-20, Mitt-Rick-Newt. Nevertheless, we lose nothing in either district if we move to just one candidate. Advantage is for one of our guys to drop out.
New York is probably the only state out of them all where it might help Mitt if one of our guys drops out. Because it shuts out the opponents from delegates if the winner gets over 50%. But looking at the map, we can pull the same move on Mitt in Texas with even more delegates at stake, and we get big advantages in all the district winner-take-all and direct delegate election states with one candidate and no splitting.
He doesn't need 46% of the vote. He needs 46% of the delegates. That could take as little as 30% of the vote depending on how many other candidates are running and how he does in winner take all states.
I just heard this from the mouth of Mitt Romney on FOX. "This election is about the soul of America."
This election is about ONE NATION UNDER GOD. The question every voter will have to answer is WHAT GOD WILL AMERICA BE UNDER?
As Joshua said, "Choose this day whom you will serve, but for me and my house we will serve the LORD.
Vote your faith, not the party line.
Do you think all Newt’s support goes to Santorum, or vice versa? I don’t.
I wanted Palin, thought about Perry, then jumped on the Cain train, when that fizzled I went with Newt who is still the only candidate I like.
I’m not going to spend time on FR bashing any of the candidates because in Nov. I’m going to vote for whoever has an R beside their name and I hope it’s Newt.
Were MS and AL open primary states? Is it possible the Dems voted for the weakest link against Obummer, the one least likely to beat him? How do you think Rick will do with the independent vote? I think we all know the answer to that. We need someone that can get the conservative and independent votes, and if they have to choose one at the convention, so be it.
But, the math shows improbable path to Rick reaching 1144.
It's all but impossible for Rick to get there, but unless we stop vote-splitting, it's improbable that we stop Romney from getting there. Vote-splitting in the below helps Romney for sure and we can't afford to let him have ANY extra delegates. He's gotta be a couple hundred south of 1,144 to stop Ron Paul or the unbound party members putting him over the top. A single one-on-one race in the below states could mean moving maybe 100-250 delegates from Romney to us.
Bzzzt. See South Carolina, WTA by district. Newt got 92% of the delegates with 40% of the vote. Districts are not likely to vote all that differently from the rest of the state, so whoever wins the state is likely to win most or virtually all the districts.
2/3rds of the remaining or about 850 delegates are in WTA states, WTA districts or districts which conditionally turn WTA if the winner gets 50%. This back half of the primary is FAR more WTA than the first half. The states are not as favorable to Romney, but vote-splitting from two strong conservative candidates will hand him maybe 100s of free delegates in these contests.
Virtually all of it would I think, and in many cases he wouldn't need 100% of it to raise his numbers high enough to beat Romney. It's hard to imagine Newt dropping out flipping any contest Santorum is winning over to Romney. The reverse, though, is what we want and far more likely to occur.
I do vote my faith....and it isn’t mittens nor barry, one of a kind.
Didn’t Santorum fail to register in some counties in Illinois? not sure but read something
Even as his momentum and electability shrinks.
Even as his momentum and electability shrinks.
Well, I am going out on a limb here and predicting that Ron Paul will come in 4th:)
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.