Primary Results

CitizenUSA

[Matchett-PI]

"I could run the numbers to see if independents are distorting the results."

They are definitely distorting the results, but I don't think it's possible to accurately run the numbers.

In Florida, we are supposed to have a closed primary where only those who are registered in one party or another can vote. Never-the-less, as they did in the primaries of other states, Independents (from here and elsewhere) were able to request a "provisional ballot" and vote. Like these so-called "Independents", DemocRATS also voted for the Republican opponent of McCain and Huckabee that they feared to run against the most.

The 'RATS don't care which of their two front-running candidates wins the general because they figure those two will be a ticket either way.

Independents and 'RATS working together with the media have already picked our candidate FOR us.

We no longer have two parties; 'RAT or RINO = no difference.

Oily leftists pushing for a "big-tent" have infiltrated Reagan's "New" Republican Party and have undermined it.

Since oil and water don't mix, we must push them out.

We need to gain control of both Houses of Congress as soon as possible!

[Girlene]

Interesting analysis, CitizenUSA. There's been very little review of results and the process to this point. One thing that was interesting to me was the big divide between number of delegates and popular vote. I saw numbers yesterday of 4.2 Mil, McCain, 3.5 Mil, Romney, and 2.2 Mil Huckabee. And yet delegates were split something like 700+/280+/190+, for the three candidates.

How many delegates were awarded based on caucus votes as opposed to direct vote primaries?

That's a good question, Beagle8U. I wasn't familiar with cauceses prior to this primary season. (And I still don't really understand it.) After what happened in W. Virginia, this process stinks. I'd be ticked if I cast a vote that put my guy in the lead, then have two other voters combine their choices to override my vote, and the winner. Sounds like smoky, backroom, dirty politics versus a legitimate vote tally.

Add to that the fact that a caucus isn’t a secret vote and you can see how things might be skewed as to how a real election might turn out. Would you want to caucus for who you really wanted if you knew that choice might get you booted from your church or even fired from your job?

Another excellent point. A caller into Rush yesterday admitted he'd voted for Romney on Super Tuesday, but said he'd never admit to it in church. That wouldn't have happened in a caucus. We need more analysis of the various states processes. It's disheartening to realize a few states can weed out decent candidates before even a majority of people get a chance to voice their opinion.

[JaneNC]

Dream on. McCain is going to pick Crist....the guy who handed him Florida.

[Beagle8U]

If I ran the RNC the only delegates that would be awarded in determining the nominee would be in closed primaries.

The states could do whatever they wanted but anything less than a closed primary would carry no more weight than a straw poll.

[Girlene]

If I ran the RNC the only delegates that would be awarded in determining the nominee would be in closed primaries.

After this year's primary elections, the RNC should do something different. Most people haven't paid much attention to the primary process before this year (myself included). For the Republicans, it appears the current system isn't reflective of the peoples' true choice. Open primaries, or closed primaries with independents, allow Democrats to have a big voice in the Republican's choice. Maybe the RNC likes it the way it is?

[Beagle8U]

“Maybe the RNC likes it the way it is?”

The RNC leaves most everything but the dates up to the state party.

[Girlene]

The RNC leaves most everything but the dates up to the state party.

Thanks.

[gusopol3]

he’s flying solo now

[Kurt Evans]

“Huckabee ... earned 45 (100%) of Georgia delegates despite only winning 35.5% of the vote (the second most distorted race).”

I’m not sure of Georgia’s delegate rules, but I’m pretty sure it has 72 total delegates. The last count I saw had Governor Huckabee with 48 and Senator McCain with 21.

[CitizenUSA]

I used the primary data available approximately one day after Super Tuesday. According to CNN Election Center (updated recently), Georgia has 72 total delegates, 69 of which are assigned based on the 5 Feb primary. Huckabee has 45 and McCain has three delegates
According to Georgia’s own site, McCain presently has 302,582 (31.6%) and Huckabee has 324,978 (33.9%) votes, but it doesn’t show how the delegates are assigned.

The NY Times shows the following results:

Huckabee 326,029 (34.0%) - 48 delegates
McCain 303,639 (31.6%) - 9 delegates
Romney 289,737 (30.2%) - 3 delegates

That totals only 60 delegates with 99% of the votes reported. Romney did very well in Atlanta, Huckabee did well in rural areas, and McCain did well everywhere else (Savannah, Augusta, Columbus and surrounding counties). McCain received his strongest support from moderates, while Huckabee earned his from (self identified) Christians.

According to the NY Times: “...39 (delegates) are allocated based on primary results in the 13 Congressional districts. The winner in each district receives three delegates, who are chosen at Congressional-district conventions April 19. Thirty at-large delegates are allocated to the presidential candidate receiving the most votes statewide. Three additional delegates are selected from party leaders.”

Link here:
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/states/GA.html

The 30 “at-large delegates” heavily distort the results of the popular vote by giving the front runner a bonus of about 40% of the state’s delegates. The top three candidates split the vote nearly evenly with over 30% each.

Giving bonuses to the popular vote winner helps the party quickly select and unite behind a front runner. On the downside, it distorts the results of the popular vote, giving one state greater power over others at the convention.

“Winner Takes All” states are even worse.

For example, let’s compare two states with 1 million votes and 10 delegates each. State One gives all its delegates to the popular vote winner. State Two apportions its delegates by percent. Candidate A gets 500,001 votes in State One and 100,000 votes in State Two to win 11 delegates with only 30% of the total popular vote (WINNER). Candidate B gets NO delegates from State One and nine from State Two in spite of earning 70% of the total popular vote. Essentially, Candidate B would have had to win 100% of the popular vote in State Two to balance out the distorted results in State One.

Early primaries can distort elections even more. Let’s say State One holds its election two weeks before State Two. The winner of State One would get two weeks of free PR before State Two’s primary. Voters in State Two might look at Candidate A’s “commanding” delegate count and decide not to vote or switch their vote to the candidate perceived to have the most “electability.” Candidate B, unable to afford the necessary PR to reverse this unfortunate tide of events, chooses to leave the race, thereby denying State Two voters a chance to vote for the candidate they originally liked best. Sound familiar?

My original article on primary results is here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1966320/posts

[Yosemitest]

It'd be a lot better if you could graph this info.

We need one page of these that are fronts and, one page of these for the backs, that we can print and cut, to fill the prepaid envelopes from the RNC and the ACU.

There will be a price to pay for supporting McCain.

We can vote conservative on Senate and House primary seats, and vote for anyone other than McCain on the Presidential seat, including a democrat in the general election.

[CitizenUSA]

Yosemitest: “It’d be a lot better if you could graph this info.”

True. I’m sorry to write I don’t know how to post graphics to Free Republic.

I think I’m getting JPEG envy at your ability to post that McCain buck. I especially like the new seal in the center.

[JaneNC]

Well, McCain’s strength is in blue states. We know democrats will take blue states.
Obama has strength nationwide...in red and blue states.

Result: landslide victory

[CitizenUSA]

A landslide for Obama (or Hillary) is certainly a distinct possibility. Don’t ask me what people see in either one of them. Obama? We might as well pick someone at random off the street and make them president. Hillary? A former first lady (and strident, anti-military socialist) who carpetbagged their way into senator of one of the largest states and now wants to be commander in chief? It’s just so bizarre. Seriously, I cannot comprehend what people are thinking these days. She’s not even likable. At least Obama has that going for him.

[JaneNC]

Well, if McCain is up against Hillary, he will win.
The HATE HILLARY factor is huge...among both dems and Repubs