You must have an endless supply of Pollyanna articles trying to turn third place into a win.
*They've been posting this cheese all day. Here is another one: "Ted Cruz Might Be The Real Winner In New Hampshire" (VandeKoik, post #24)
* Were number 3, were number 3, were number 3! (JoSixChip, post #27)
Just posted this thread:
Republican Delegate Allocation Rules by State (2016)
My initial comment on that thread was:
What I've noticed thus far on FR is "poster-gunners" gunnin' for highlighting the "splash" of the given state primary victory.
Yet, delegate-wise, 'tis only a handful of state primaries where "winner-takes-all"...
...states like Delaware, Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Arizona, Ohio, Florida, & NJ (+ Virgin Islands & one other territory).
While, yes, each primary sends signals as to...
...who has momentum;
who is stagnating;
who isn't resonating at all;
who may be more likely to squeeze few $ out of donors;
and who may seriously consider ending their campaign right now (or after next primary)...
...if you notice from the charts provided at the link [provided in above-mentioned thread], a state "win" isn't as significant as many posters attempt to make it out to be.
Except in those winner-take-all states, delegates are proportionally assigned...tho another dozen states have a "winner takes all" should a given candidate secure a majority of votes.
Hence, Trump's NH win isn't all that "trump-worthy" over the other candidates...& neither was Cruz' in IA.
'Tis a marathon, folks! There's no "win-loss" primary record kept like football & other major sports; indeed, tho, if you're gonna come out as the eventual nominee, you're gonna have to take some states sometime.