Skip to comments.THE REAL PICTURE OF REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTION BASED ON BOUND DELEGATES
Posted on 03/13/2012 12:28:25 PM PDT by God-fear-republican
THE REAL PICTURE OF REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTION BASED ON BOUND DELEGATES.
The winner of the first ballot casting at the National Republican Convention will be declared the Partys nominee to face Obama in November of 2012.
So Romney can declare himself an eventual winner of the primary election process ONLY WHEN he can count 1,144 BOUND delegates. However, many states have complicated systems when it comes to allocate their delegates at the National Convention.
For example, most Illinoiss 66 delegates, Ohios 66, and Penns 72 are unbound. We dont know how many will be bound to which candidates until the national convention.
Florida and Arizona total of almost 100 delegates might be challenged to change from WTA to proportional.
Anyway, it is interesting to do the following math:
Total delegates: 2,286 Needed: 1,144 or 50% of total delegates or 71% bound delegates (1,606 bound).
Super-delegates: 126 Unbound, chosen at national convention: 84 Unbound, chosen at caucus: 188 Unbound, loophole primary: 204 Bound by party state convention: 115 Bound by caucus but not by popular vote: 89 Bound (legally): 1,606 or 70% of total delegates.
Total of 660 bound delegates were allocated so far, 393 Romney, 133 Santorum, 110 Newt, and 24 Paul.
Bound delegates left: 1,606 660 = 946
Romney still needs: 1,144 393 = 751 bound delegates to declare himself a winner before the first voting at the national convention.
That amounts to 751/ 946 = 79%, THAT IS MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE!!!
Romney candidacy is so damaged, so weakened already, so I suspect the national leaders who make up of super-delegates and those at convention committees and caucuses will vote against him.
WE WILL HAVE A BROKERED CONVENTION IN TAMPA AND NEWT WILL BE THE EVENTUAL WINNER!!
You seem to have missed the Chat forum:
Or maybe Bloggers & Personal:
Either way, your opinion IS NOT NEWS.
Just because Romney has never received 79% of any vote is not the same as 79% of the remaining delegates.
It would be possible to win the required delegates with his usual 30% showing.
Or, have I missed your point?
Thanks for the opinion. I like it.
I apologize, inexperience!
I have been trying to make this point for days. These delegate counts are pure fantasy. No one has any idea how the caucus state delegates are going to vote until the vote is counted at the convention. They are completely free agents.
I’m not sure how many winner-take-all states there are left but, in these states, all any candidate would have to do to get all of the delegates would be to win a plurality of the vote.
We aqppreciate the info and explaining how the delegates tnhingy works..
In short its complicated and strange...
Few states run their delegate proportion system the same...
some are WTA, some are shared among the candidates, some require 50% of the vote to get a bigger portion...
and some are not allocated until just before the convention...
Lets hope we have a rerun of the 1964 convention when the “entitled” liberal Romney of that year, George the father, only got 40 votes to the 800 of Barry Goldwater...
Id like to see the arrogant Romneys stomp out POed again ..
Thank you so much for posting this thread! I have been wanting to see the more accurate information on delegate totals for each candidate.
Poser backstabber at work:
"Yall!!!! Did I tell you I love grits.
They are the perfect size.
Thank me! Look what I found for attention!
Put this thingy on the roof
of my wifes second Cadillac."
I might mention the contested states FL and AZ regarding the “Winner Takes All”.
Gingrich clearly won Florida based on proportional delegates and he won most of the counties there.
Romney won the more populous area in the “Golden Coast”, a place filled with New Yorkers and such with the WTA rule.
AZ is more unclear.
So any count of delegates can be based on pure fantasy!
If Sarah Palin, Rick Perry and John Huntsman join Newt on the stage at the convention supporting him you just might have something there. If it remains splintered look for games with the rules, exemptions and switching support orchestrated by the go-pees to put Willard on the ticket.
How do you know this info is accurate?
It's just something "written" by a n00b.
Where is the data? The poll citations? The official numbers? Where?
Some clown wrote it and that makes it so? I think not.
What may be news is that Rush Limbaugh mentioned Michael Steele’s statement that he was the one who designed the primary rules so the GOP would have a brokered convention. IOW, Steele is saying this was all planned out, and he’s claiming credit for it.
“No one has any idea how the caucus state delegates are going to vote until the vote is counted at the convention.”
Right. And by convention I assume you mean state conventions.
Many people are getting the state conventions confused with the national convention in Tampa.
All the delegates will be bound at the state conventions and the RNC will appoint the super delegates. Even in the worst case scenario this thing will be decided no later than June.
Threads have been posted about it here, but they seem to keep getting shifted to the “bloggers” forum. It seems though that no one talking or writing about it has done the delegate math but me. I redid the math changing all Mitt’s states to winner-take-all, and he only goes from about 500 to 550 delegates. This race is the way it is because Romney is a weak frontrunner, not because of a rules change. He wouldn’t be wrapping this thing up until near the very last state either way. If I project the rest of this race out by winner-take-all, he wouldn’t hit 1,144 until June 5th, after all but 1 state had voted, Utah (the icing on the cake).
It is true that putting back winner-take-all everywhere would make it almost impossible to go to a brokered convention. But it wouldn’t shorten the length of this particular race.
I’ve gotten a few emails from the RNC stating the same thing.