| Free Republic 3rd Qtr 2024 Fundraising Target: $81,000 | Receipts & Pledges to-date: $5,375 | |||
| ||||
| Woo hoo!! And we're now over 6%!! Thank you all very much!! God bless. | ||||
Posted on 01/21/2012 7:14:39 PM PST by Jim Robinson
As I understood it as it was explained early this morning on C-spam, out of the 25 delegates 11 go to the winner. Then the remainder are divided up, 2 per district and alloted to the winners of each district.
Thank you very much, Abbeville Conservative!!
Thank you very much, upchuck!!
Yep. I heard Brit Hume mention that phony poll too.
Thank you very much, harpu!!
Thank you very much, DCBryan1!!
Thank you very much, Shelayne!! Go, Newt!!
I’m understanding from his debates and his website that Newt wants to:
... totally dismantle the Marxist/socialist welfare state,.. fire the czars,.. repeal ObamaCare,.. repeal Dodd-Frank,... repeal Sarbanes Oxley, ...privatize social security and medicare,... return all federal socialist welfare programs to the states and the people to be controlled locally or shuttered,... audit and neuter the Fed,... fire Bernanke,... fire the EPA, ...shutter the federal departments of Health.., Education,.. Energy,... Housing,.. Commerce,.. Labor,..Welfare etc, etc,... drastically cut the government,... cut the bureaucracy,... cut the regulations, ...cut the taxes,... cut the deficit,... reduce unemployment,... restore jobs,... restore manufacturing,.. industry,..energy production,.. restore the constitutional balance of powers between the branches ..and between the feds and the states and the people,... rein in the liberal activist judiciary,.. restore states rights ..and restore our God-given unalienable individual rights... and stop the slaughter of the innocent unborn!!
In short, to set our people free to produce, prosper and enjoy the fruits of their own labor, ie, restore our constitution and God-given unalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the PURSUIT of Happiness!!
Thanks for the list Mr. Jim....great seeing it all together and I for one am 100% behind it.
As a practical matter, I’d support Newt. Anyone’s better than O-bamba. But recalling the last ‘revolution’ that Newt headed, I’d say don’t be surprised if he gives everyone a few unpleasant surprises and disappointments, especially the latter.
Thank you very much, F15Eagle!!
Romney is a moron. He’s whining about being attacked by Newt as if “from the left”. Well Mitt, you would know since you ARE from the left.
Any jerk like him that pretends to be conservative is insulting my intelligence. He actually defends his liberalism by proving he’s a pandering piece of crap that has no principles by saying, “well, I was running in Mass”.
So he wants power so bad he lies to voters to get it. But now I’m supposed to believe he truly is conservative when history shows he takes every side of every issue to just win?
Drop dead Romney.
Thank you very much, JamesA!! All the same, it’s a shot across their bows. Damn the torpedoes, damn the RINOs!! Full steam ahead to Florida!!
The rebellion has begun in dead earnest!!
(poor Ernie)
Thank you very much, rockinqsranch!!
Newt! Newt! Newt!
What concerns me most now, the more closely I look at it, is the nature of, and inherent bias in, this nomination process.
If we presume that this is now likely to be a lengthy battle, then the larger states with huge delegate hauls (California, Texas & NY alone have 422 between them) will clearly be crucial. However, states such as Texas - indeed all the Southern states, with the exception of Arkansas and N Carolina - are awarding their delegates proportionally. Many more liberal states, however, including California, New York, Oregon and Connecticut, award theirs on a winner-take-all basis.
Realistically (while we can all hope, work and pray for it to be otherwise) one has to admit that Romney will be the more favoured candidate in blue states such as California and NY, whereas Newt will be favoured in the red states and across the south.
However, the nature of this process (quite deliberately, I’m sure) is such than even if Newt defeats Romney by 25-30% all across the south, but loses California and NY to Mitt, he’ll likely come out of it with a huge net loss in overall number of delegates. An example: Newt beats Romney in Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Georgia (=total 326 delegates) by 65-35, but loses 60-40 to him in California, Connecticut, Oregon and NY (=total 323 delegates). The approximate combined net delegate awards from these eight states would then be: Gingrich 211, Romney 438: advantage +227 to Mitt. This general pattern appears to be repeated across the board.
To be a fair process, all states should of course be operating in the same way: either awarding their delegates proportionally, or all on a winner-take-all basis. But ‘should and would build no bridges’, as my mother used to say. It’s clear, at least, that we’ll be fighting an uphill battle on what is very far from being a level playing-field.
Woooooooooooooooooow... And he can do it, too.
Reagan made one tactical mistake as president, that I remember. He tended to back off when the media would portray him as the anti-Christ, when he would propose a reduction in the rate of increase of gov't spending. No matter what a Republican does, the media will portray him this way, so why not actually do something? The LSM can only cry wolf so many times.
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.
