Posted on 03/04/2012 2:31:23 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Take a pill, huh!
Its so obvious that all Santorum is doing is trying to imporve his own fortunes. He hasn’t a clue what is ailing the country, nor what to do about it. He’s always been a high tax, big government, pro union mush head.
Rick is in freefall and supporters glum on all blogs.
After this week Newt will have 75 delegates just out of Georgia, is that correct? And Newt numbers are no longer stagnant but up in other states, following that great performance on Huckabee’s Forum.
Rick Perry expects a Texas sweep for Newt and we’re talking contested convention as a VERY strong possibility!!
SPEECHES will be in vogue again at convention, and the two problem definers, Santorum and Romney, will fall again to the only problem solver of the three, Newt Gingrich.
Newt wins Georgia. Gets substantial numbers of delegates in Ohio/Tennessee/Oklahoma/Kansas. Wins Alabama and Mississippi.
Newt is surging! Stay positive!
Additionally it includes Independents and Democrats in small numbers who claim they are certain to vote in the GOP primary.
I would not be surprised to see Romney win this one narrowly with Gingrich and Santorum fighting for second.
In the midst of a surge or a collapse things move very rapidly and pollsters have a hard time keeping up.
Dems are going to vote for Romney in droves
Of course you’re right, IF those delegates will move to Newt. I think it may take Super Tuesday to show off Newt’s delegate count - that it looks pretty good for a guy who gave the field in several states to Buck Rogers Santorum.
Factor that in and it is outright amazing, I believe, what Newt has in his column. Think Texas. A sweep as Rick Perry predicts would blow a new wind side ways across the country.
I am very enthused, and see a shake up in the making, don’t you. We may well get a brokered/contested convention after all!
I’m thinking TEXAS for NEWT, and we have a ball game, with Santorum, I believe, in a permanent melt down, having lost Catholics and Tea Party in MI, after his lecture circuit blew a fuse.
After this week Newt will have 75 delegates just out of Georgia, is that correct?
For what it’s worth regarding the delegate allocation procedure in GA.
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/GA-R#0306
Tuesday 6 March 2012: All 76 of Georgia’s delegates to the Republican National Convention are bound to presidential contenders in today’s Presidential Primary.
42 district delegates bound to presidential contenders based on the primary results in each of the 14 congressional districts: each congressional district is assigned 3 National Convention delegates.
If a candidate receives a majority of the vote (more than 50%), that candidate is allocated all 3 of the district’s delegates.
If no candidate receives a majority of the vote, the candidate with the most votes (plurality) receives 2 delegates and the candidate receiving the next highest number of votes receives 1 delegate. [Rules of the Georgia Republican Party. 7.3(B)(3)]
31 at-large delegates (10 base at-large delegates, 21 bonus delegates) are proportionally bound to presidential contenders according to the statewide vote. A mandatory 20% threshold is required for a presidential contender to receive National Convention delegates. [Rules of the Georgia Republican Party. 7.3(B)(4)]
Step 1- Proportional allocation: For each candidate receiving 20% or more of the vote, delegates = [the number of votes received by that candidate] × [31 at-large delegates] ÷ [the total number of votes received by all candidates meeting the 20% threshold]. Each candidate receives the whole number of delegates (round down to the whole number). Example: If candidate A receives 7.6 delegates, candidate B receives 5.8 delegates, and candidate C recives 3.7 delegates— A gets 7, B gets 5, and C gets 3.
Step 2- Rounding: If delegates remain, sort the candidates by the their remainder. Beginning with the candidate with the largest remainder, assign 1 delegate to each candidate until all delegates are allocated. In the example above, candidate B’s remainder is .8, candidate C’s is .7, and candidate A’s is .6. If there were 2 delegates to be allocated, B and C would each receive 1. The final allocation would be A- 7, B- 6, C- 4.
The 3 RNC party leader delegates, the National Committeeman, National Committeewoman, and the chairman of the Georgia’s Republican Party are bound to the candidate receiving the most votes statewide. [Rules of the Georgia Republican Party. 7.3(B)(4)]
“While I put Newt ahead of Rick....and could strongly back either in the General Election (especially if the other was the VP partner). I WILL NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY.”
I am in complete agreement with you. I have issues with both Santorum and Gingrinch but believe that together they would beat Obama in a landslide. Romney however will lose worse than McCain did in 2008 no matter who he picks for VP. I did not realize until recently that Santorum actually endorsed Romney in 2008. I have suspected for a while that he has been promised the VP slot and is only staying in to draw primary voters away from Gingrinch. The ironic thing is that I think Ron Paul has been told that his son Rand will get the nod if he stays in as well......but Romney is enough of a snake that I think he’ll pick someone else anyway once he gets the nomination and then it will be too late!
He just can’t stop with the missteps and backtracking. I think people are getting a sense that he won’t be able to stand up to Obama and the Democrats.
THANK YOU, VERY MUCH!
You know, I think the Establishment and its media mouths have tried to rush us in the run-up to Super Tuesday, and failed.
While a few “names” fell in for Myth in the last few days, the majority are all seeing the same thing we’re seeing, a Santorum implosion, and several superb performances by Newt in the same time frame. A fresh collection of a meaningful number of delegates is a new game on.
Thank you.
Rita
Interesting post. What was a surprise to me was hearing George Stephanapolis predict that it would be a Romney/Santorum ticket.
He said it in a most matter of fact manner.
While I don’t care for the man at all, it seems more & more likely as time goes on & I think that the DC beltway boys are ready to back that ticket...
“Its so obvious that all Santorum is doing is trying to imporve his own fortunes. He hasn’t a clue what is ailing the country, nor what to do about it.”
Oh tosh again - Stop repeating your opinions as facts. IF you are of the opinion that he is “clueless”, well that is an opinion and even if true doesn’t denigrate his character. However, when you boldly state he “is trying to improve his own fortunes”....that is wrongly attacking his character. How do you know what is in his heart.
Look I don’t stand by while either Newt or Rick is denigrated. To disagree with their ideas is not a problem, but to attribute their actions to some nefarious purpose is over the top and counterproductive.
I think Newt would make the best person to run against Obama because I think he would eviscerate Obama in debates. He has a powerful intellect. However, in defense of Sanatorum, he has consistently been socially conservative. He was one of the first persons to advise President G.W. Bush to not call the mideastern problem a “war on terror” but a war on those that would set up an “Islamist” world with Sharia law. He was a pioneer on that.
Both Newt Gingrick and Rick Santorum, IMO, deserve respectfull treatment and serious consideration for the GOP pick. I deepest regret is that they have not formed a team.
We know him by his votes; is that ‘tosh?’
.
Mittens Romney is gaingin? ARG!!!!!!!
No, it’s the wisest scenario.
His own history shows why Santorum is not electable: he only got to the senate on Newt's 1994 Republican Revolution's coattails, he was only reelected on W's coattails (mirrored W's win with men)) and when it came to standing on his own Pennsylvania voters repudiated him with an 18 point loss (lost 61% of women), the largest for any incumbent senator in more than a quarter century. These are bare facts and the candidate deflects saying it was just "a bad year for Republicans..." that sounds an awful lot like "Bush's fault" to me.
He always deflects responsibility whether it's his 2006 loss or his failure to take Michigan or the Ohio delegate problem or the contortionist spin of the AZ debate. He cannot articulate an agenda, he cannot defend conservatism because he doesn't understand it. He's forever taking media bait. He's just another lawyer turned career politician.
His voting record is an embarrassment to real conservatives from his Circuit Court confirmation vote for Sonya Sotomayor, who became Obama's first Supreme Court nominee, to his exploding the budget for Amtrak by over a half-billion dollars, his love of Big Labor, he is a disaster... He's nothing more than another big government "compassionate conservative" at best. He could almost pass for a Blue Dog Democrat.
As the 3rd ranked senate Republican, his role in the establishment was to build ties between K Street lobbyists and the GOP.
On many levels he's a fake, a fraud like Romney and Pennsylvanians finally had enough of him. He is the best chance for a clean sweep reelection for Obama.
Any politician who hides behind his family story as much as Santorum needs a thorough vetting with a very fine tooth comb. You'd think voters would be more sophisticated and realize, at the end of the day, he's another failed lawyer-politician on an ego trip run for the White House.
His appeal to blue collar labor might be useful as a running mate but he should not be at the top of the stick. I won't be surprised if Romney's the nominee and Santorum's added.
“We know him by his votes; is that ‘tosh?’”
Santorum is solidy a Social Conservative with impeccable credentials in that area. Sounds to me like you just don’t like social conservatives - one of the three legs of conservatism. IF so, you aren’t conservative. Also, Santorum is a solid national defense conservative. He understood the Islamist problem long before others...and said so.
I seriously doubt he would run as VP to Romney anymore than I would except Newt to do so. IF either did, I would lose respect for them both and still would NEVER vote for Newt.
FRiend, you are NOT helping Newt, my first choice, by bashing Santorum. It is just creating animosity that will destroy both men.
“You’d think voters would be more sophisticated and realize, at the end of the day, he’s another failed lawyer-politician on an ego trip run for the White House.”
He is NOT on an ego trip. Both Rick and Newt have done some really bad things previously. However, both are preferably to Romney. My first support goes to Newt, but Santorum is my second choice. I see nothing to be gained by the bashing of him or Newt by persons on this forum.
By the way - Santorum IS NOT establishment. The “establishment” is embarrassed by true social conservatives like Santorum. For all errors in other areas....he is solidly the most socially conservative running. Newt is more balanced, a better debater, smarter....so I support him. But still think Santorum is OK and would rather have him, if Newt can’t get the nod, than Romney. If fact, I would rather Newt or Santorum be the nominee for the GOP EVEN IF it meant losing the general election. I don’t see a potential Romney victory as win for me and my values.
Here is a breakdown of the rules for the GA GOP Primary delegate allocation:
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.