Skip to comments.How John McCain may still lose the nomination (Huckabee's delegate math)
Posted on 02/22/2008 11:27:13 PM PST by Kurt Evans
The John McCain camp informed us yesterday that it is mathematically impossible for Mike Huckabee to win the nomination. What they won't say is that McCain stands a good chance of losing the nomination as long as Huckabee stays in the race.
Huckabee only has to win half of the remaining delegates to block McCain from the nomination. And even if he falls a few short of that, many of the delegates in McCain's column will be unbound delegates who may in fact vote for anyone they choose on the first ballot...
The McCain camp thinks the "mathematically impossible" rhetorical ploy will hide a few obvious facts from the voting public, who tend to believe the media pundits rather than research how the nomination process actually works...
McCain will not be the nominee until he has 1,191 bound delegates pledged to him...
There are 774 delegates left to win. If John McCain has exactly 804 delegates (and 18 of these are unbound delegates who are still able to change their mind), then he needs an additional 387 to clinch the nomination with 1,191.
Ironically half of 774 is exactly 387... Huckabee only needs to get 51 percent of the remaining delegates to block McCain...
McCain currently has 796 bound delegates and 18 unbound delegates. McCain needs 395 bound delegates to reach 1,191 in the remaining states.
Now here's the math ...
Wisconsin - 37 bound and 3 unbound
Puerto Rico - 20 bound and 3 unbound
Texas - 137 bound and 3 unbound
Ohio - 0 bound and 88 unbound!
Rhode Island - 17 bound and 3 unbound
Vermont - 17 bound
Mississippi - 36 bound and 3 unbound
Pennsylvania - 0 bound and 74 unbound!
North Carolina - 69 bound
Indiana - 27 bound and 30 unbound
Nebraska - 30 bound and 3 unbound
Hawaii - 20 bound
Kentucky - 45 bound
Oregon - 27 bound and 3 unbound
Idaho - 26 bound and 6 unbound
New Mexico - 29 bound and 3 unbound
South Dakota - 24 bound and 3 unbound
There are 561 bound delegates left. If we are speaking of the number of bound delegates that John McCain must win, then he needs 71% of the remaining 561 to reach 1,191 bound delegates.
Huckabee will probably win Mississippi, Nebraska, Kentucky, and South Dakota. If this happens, then McCain would have to win just about every remaining delegate to be guaranteed enough bound delegates to win the nomination, and that is not likely to happen...
The media pundits lump both bound and unbound delegates in their totals. This is very misleading. Huckabee may block McCain in the first round delegate vote at the convention and then win on a second, third or fourth ballot. Until someone has a majority, the candidates keep striking deals and the delegates keep voting.
Abraham Lincoln won the nomination on the fourth ballot in the Republican convention in 1860 although William Seward was the pre-convention favorite.
So while unlikely, if there is enough dissent in the GOP come summer, McCain could be denied the nomination if he doesn't have enough bound delegates. But more likely, if he falls short of 1191 in both bound and unbound delegates, then a conservative coalition could arise that would nominate Huckabee or another conservative as the Republican candidate ...
Give it up. For all of McCain’s flaws, he is the nominee. And compared to Obama he is George Washington. Huckabee is a man that I did greatly respect, but he is just embarrassing himself at this point, and he only is in the race for his own inflated ego.
I had a hard time spotting him at first. Looks like a lot of meat there.
Thanks for the photo.
One thing that is important in this analysis is states that are winner take all - if Huckabee wins those he gets all the delegates. But the rest of the states even if Huck wins McCain still gets significant delegates.
The analysis I saw on Fox said that even Huck won every remaining state with 60% of the vote that McCain still locks up the nomination before the convention.
Yes...quit a Presidential bid to run for a Senate seat would prove he is a man of conviction...not.
Huckabee Math - doesn’t include Romney’s delegates. You know, the ones he asked to be transferred to McCain the same day this article was written...8 days ago.
“The analysis I saw on Fox said that even Huck won every remaining state with 60% of the vote that McCain still locks up the nomination before the convention.”
The analysis probably included unbound delegates in McCain’s current total. That’s basically just a poll. Any number of circumstances could cause those delegates to change their minds by September.
“Huckabee Math - doesnt include Romneys delegates.”
Once Romney’s delegates are released, they become officially unbound. Any number of circumstances could cause those delegates—and maybe even Romney himself—to change their minds by September.
That's why I said, "...asked to be transferred..."
That just might change things...
In fact, it would change this posters mind immediately.
Duncan Hunter should be the Republican nominee!
That would get my vote. My first choice was Duncan Hunter.
Are you asking for their webpage?
No. It means Anybody But McCain. Jim Robinson coined the phrase a couple of weeks ago.
“If Huckabee held a press conference this weekend, and stated for all to hear, that Duncan Hunter would be his running mate. That just might change things...”
That would probably play well in Texas.
I concur. Roll the dice.
“It means Anybody But McCain. Jim Robinson coined the phrase a couple of weeks ago.”
Oh yeah. I remember that now. Thanks for the clarification. Hopefully my humor didn’t offend you.
Hunter wouldn’t bring enough to the ticket since California would be out of play. Besides, McCain pretty much has the nomination in the bag.
You said it well. It’s like rooting between two drowning cockroaches that fell into a punchbowl.
More importantly, we DEMAND that Huck stay in the race until the end! we demand it :)... By many's opions here in FR, you are worse than Hitler and you should be hung like Sadam was! It makes you wonder where does this people really come from, but they are there! :)... We Social-Conservatives need to you to stay in the fight until the end, if nothing else so no one can say "Macaca is the ONLY choice," No he isin't...As long as you are there buddy :)
We Social-Conservatives KNOW that this is not about Huck or even winning the nomination or even the general election, very unlikely although not impossible Huck just happens to be the best candidate that represents our values at the moment. This is the ONLY candidate who made it through coming from nowhere and he is still alive!.. What I hoped it would happen with Duncan A true grass roots choice who made it big and that is GREAT beyond words.
For one, it shows, the Evangelicals who care about 'values' have not lost their focus their eyes ARE ON THE BALL! and I congratulate them and support them. Just think, if the Evangelicals have been able to accomplish this much by themselves THINK of what we could do if ALL OF US UNITE in the fight!.. Heck let's learn from the homos themselves!... Look what the have accomplished with such a tiny percentage and all because they have been united in purpose Look at the Blacks You see them all over the place on TV now :) ... probably electing the first Black president in this country I would say that IS success.
So, if they can do it Why not us?... After all, we are on the side of God and that should count for something, or not? :)
I have decided that I will vote for Huck now that our turn is coming here in VA. I also sent him a small contribution. I encourage all Social-Conservatives of ALL kinds, from ALL religions, and non-religious people who care for the same 'values' to join our Evangelical friends in their fight.
America is not Europe!... And that is why this movement will grow stronger For the simple reason that social-conservatives have NO OTHER CHOICE than to band together if we are going to have a fair fight against this monster of a Goliath that is the MSM, ACLU/Homosexual-agenda, Hollywood, The Teacher's National Association :), Liberal Universities Faculties and all the others, all working together to turn this country into a cesspool of immorality. We must fight to protect the unborn, the boys-scouts and such, even the MILITARY - The homosexual's last frontier so to speak - who dream to convert it into a laboratory for social engineering. Someone who is ready to sacrifice their very own lives for this country should not have to worry about these people if you get my meaning. If we let that happen, shame on all of us Social-conservatives!
I purposely use the Social-Conservatives label, to differentiate us from the 'other' conservatives who seem to care about every 'conservative' cause, except social values! .We on the other hand care about those values a lot, otherwise we'll end up with a very 'rich', very 'free' but a very ugly country. In other words, although important, it's more than just about money or philosophies or guns for us.
Okay, I'll interject here that I grew up in the GOP in a rock-ribbed conservative Texas family: my late father founded our county Republican party, my brother worked at the RNC in Washington for years, and I work in the media. I know Mike Huckabee personally, have known him for about eight years, and have even had dinner sitting next to him at the head table of the Governor's Mansion in Little Rock. I know him well enough that when I attended his rally in Plano, Texas, last week, his daughter saw me in the crowd and personally escorted me backstage to visit. And I can tell you that virtually everything that gets said on FR about his beliefs, his character and his record is 100% slanderous bilge.
Posters on this board have no problem with calling people vicious names and attributing the worst possible motives to them when they've never met them and know nothing about them other than some nasty, one-sided election year hit pieces they haven't bothered to research. And they never see their own contradictions: they can go straight from condemning Huckabee because "he's only in the race to help McCain" to condemning Huckabee because "he's only staying in the race to be McCain's VP" to condemning Huckabee because "his staying in the race is hurting McCain," and each of these ever-shifting, contradictory statements is made with an arrogant and absolute certainty, despite them not having the slightest clue about the man and his motives.
I supported Huckabee from day one, when other Freepers were flitting from one fantasy "perfect conservative" to another, from the messiah Fred Thompson, whom I warned them would be a disappointment before he ever got into the race and was told I was "WRONG!" (I wasn't) to Mitt Romney, who would get crushed in a general election in the current public mood (don't bother telling me I'm "WRONG," because I'm not). And I'm glad I still get the chance to vote for him in Texas, whether it does any good or not. I'll hold my nose and vote McCain in November if I have to, but there's no way the New York Times is telling me that the GOP candidate has already been chosen by New Hampshire and DC before Texans even get a say in the matter.
BTW, I'm not an evangelical, I'm an agnostic; and I disagree with Huckabee on several key issues. But he's still the most electable and most qualified candidate, the only one left with real executive experience, and the only one with the wit, crossover outsider appeal and oratorical skills to compete with Obama. If it's McCain vs. Obama, we're looking at Bob Dole II.
One thing you have to look at with those remaining primaries are how many are “winner take all” and how many split the delegates. Also let’s not forget, there is still all those released Romney delegates out there, who know’s how they’ll vote. If I was a betting man, at least half will back McCain.