Why the 2016 Republican nominee is likely to be chosen by the blue states

blogs.reuters.com ^ | 2/17/15 | Bill Schneider

[RKBA Democrat]

Yeah, it’s nice to know the mechanics. Ultimately it doesn’t change the result: the uniparty has this rigged fiteen ways to Tuesday. The more important thing is how do we react as the remainder of a free people?

I know what I plan to do in November 2016: stay home and encourage others to do the same.

[Georgia Girl 2]

“Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush says he won’t pander to the conservative base to win the Republican nomination.”

Yeh one reason he will not win.

[x]

Last time, all the more conservative states were proportional, while the more liberal were winner take all.

I'm not so sure. NJ and DE were winner take all, so were UT and AZ, and of course FL. CT and NY were "modified winner take all", so were AL and OK. LA, MS and TX were proportional. So were MA, RI, HI, and NH. Source

Romney did get more delegates nationwide than he would have with strict proportionality, but that may be because he won states where fewer voters were Republicans. So he'd get delegates from VT or ME when not so many Republican votes were cast in primaries in those states. Proportional representation can make results proportional within a state, but so long as we vote by states and allocate delegates by populations there are limits to how proportional one can make the process.