What is the Actual Delegate Count? (Vanity)

This is my first Vanity post in over 16 years as a Freeper, so cut me some slack.

Google, Bloomberg, Washington Post, Fox News and USA Today all say that Trump now has 736 delegates and Cruz has 463.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=republican+primaries+results

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/presidential-primary-caucus-results

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html

Here on FreeRepublic, I have seen posts with delegate counts all over the board.

Can anyone point me to a definitive site with the actual delegate counts (and not sites that you like best or that show what you want the count to be)?

Please enlighten me but why does 42 delegates from Wisconsin become such a big deal?

Because Trump has to get 53 to 54% of the remaining delegates (depending on what current count of delegates you want to believe) in order to get the nomination. So far, Trump has received 48% of the delegates with 37% of the vote, so it is an uphill climb. If Cruz gets Wisconsin's 42 delegates, then Trump will have to get 55 to 56% of the then remaining delegates.

Eventually, Trump will either win enough delegates to get the nomination or it will become mathematically impossible for Trump to do so. If Trump does not win enough delegates to get the nomination, then it becomes a question of whether Cruz will win enough delegates to get the nomination or whether it will become mathematically impossible for him to do so.

The most likely scenario at this point is that neither will win enough delegates to get the nomination before the convention and it will simply be a question of who is in the lead going into the convention and who can win over the most delegates from other candidates after the first vote at the convention.

Of course, if Trump has a plurality lead going into the convention (regardless of how small that lead may be), Trump supporters will insist that Trump is automatically entitled to the nomination and that it will be stealing the nomination from him if the delegates pledged to all of the other candidates to not immediately pledge their fealty to Trump.

On the other hand, if Cruz has a plurality lead going into the convention (regardless of how large that lead may be), Trump supporters will still insist that Trump is entitled to the nomination and that it will be stealing the nomination from him if the delegates pledged to all of the other candidates to not immediately pledge their fealty to Trump.

I provided two sources so that you can evaluate for yourself. Do you think I would provide something that was unreliable?

The Wikipedia site has been quite accurate all year. Why shouldn’t I use an accurate source.

Right now it shows Cruz with one delegate different than the Green Papers source. That’s hardly an example of propaganda or a wildly off accounting.

I noticed earlier this year that different sites had different numbers. That’s why I don’t provide just one report. I provide more than you, and people can look at them and get a ball park figure.

If you wish to discount the Wikipedia information, it’s no loss to me. It’s just one less source for you, and that would provide information that could very well would be misleading.

Real delegates won, or by the ones that Cruz and the Establishment is stealing?
***********************************
Reince Priebus stated that in his meeting with Trump that was discussed. In States, like LA, that are not winner-take-all, the candidates’ campaigns have to attend the State conventions where delegates are selected and try to convince them to commit to their candidate. ....Cruz’ folks did that and Trump’s didn’t. Thus, Cruz won more delegates; he didn’t “steal” delegates, but followed the rules.

The majority of delegates (1237 in 2016) has been in place, I believe, since 1860 and is not temporary. Several convention ballots were done before Lincoln finally got the majority.

The rule of winning eight States is temporary, but both Trump and Cruz have done so. That rule was put in place in 2012 as a change to the previous five State rule, just to keep Ron Paul from being a possible nominee. .....Since K-Sick and Rubio have only won one State each, I don’t see either of them being in the running.

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.