Posted on 03/15/2012 4:44:42 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Newt Gingrich seems to be making decent sense, in terms of apparent logic, in saying that by staying in the race he can help rack up enough delegates to keep Mitt Romney from winning on the first ballot at the GOP national convention. Sometimes, though, that which seems to make sense does not actually work in practice. Nomination arithmetic is different from normal arithmetic. And no, I am not talking about how he alters the "impressions game" by splitting the conservative vote and thus either handing pluralities to Romney or narrowing the margins of victory for Santorum. That is a very good argument, but that's not at issue here. What I'm talking about here is exactly the sort of "delegate math" to which Gingrich claims to be appealing.
[SNIP]
(Granted, the risk is that if Romney comes out ahead in a certain state, this math would work in reverse, in his favor -- but since he's already ahead anyway, the only way to stop him is to at least have the chance to make up the gap in larger chunks.)
In short, for all those states with rules like Alabama's, a Gingrich candidacy enables Romney to move inexorably closer to a first-ballot nomination victory. Only a Gingrich withdrawal can stop that march.
Now this is not to say whether Romney ought to be stopped or not. This is just to say that if Gingrich's goal is stopping Romney, Gingrich's continuation in the race is directly counterproductive.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Before you jump on the Santorum bandwagon there are several issues you should be aware of..
Senators Propose Redundant Media Research Study
(Washington, D.C.) - Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today criticized Senators Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), and Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) for reintroducing the Children and Media Research Advancement Act (CAMRA), which will set up a $90 million program to research what countless other studies have already documented the effects of television viewing and other media on children. CAGW named Sen. Lieberman Porker of the Month when he introduced the same legislation in August, 2004.
“This proposal is just one expensive rerun,” CAGW President Tom Schatz said. “For decades this issue has been studied to death, always yielding the same results. Calling for yet another taxpayer-funded study belittles the ability of parents to use common sense in deciding what shows are appropriate for their children.”
1. Santorum joined Sen Hillary Clinton, Sen Lieberman, Sam Brownback in introducing the CHILDREN AND MEDIA REASEARCH ADVANCEMENT ACT which allocated a 90 MILLION dollar program to research the effects that watching tv has on children. This was a call for ANOTHER taxpayer funded study the thinks the govt knows better than parents on what is appropriate for their children to view.
http://www.cagw.org/newsroom/releases/2005/senators-propose-redundant.html
2. Santorum voted to raise the minimum wage and to have the govt be allowed to set wage regulations.
3. Santorum spent more than 1 billion on earmarks including..., Pennsylvania in 2005 received $483 million in earmarks for 872 projects, including $5.4 million for an igloo upgrade for an Army Depot and $5 million for a new visitor center at Gettysburg.
Read more on Newsmax.com: Santorum Pro-Labor Votes, Earmarks Ripe for Attacks
4. Santorum voted to raise the debt ceiling 8 times!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This article is correct. Unless voters volunteer on their own to give either Santorum or Newt 0 votes from now on, then having both of them stay in the race helps Romney.
There are too many states that are effectively winner-take-all by state or district coming up which are swing states where anyone can win. That means the margins will be close enough that Mitt can win with a plurality and take ALL the delegates. Even though Newt and Rick’s votes added together would be higher, they will get ZERO delegates in these contests. Illinois is a case in point.
Almost all the states the conservatives are guaranteed to win are proportional, so Mitt will get delegates from those. Meanwhile the pure statewide winner-take-all states are all guaranteed Mitt wins (like Utah) so he’s got a couple 100 delegates coming from those.
It’s those winner-take-all by district states where we NEED to win BIG in order to stop him from hitting 1,144. We are bound to shoot ourselves in the foot by having two conservatives splitting the vote in Bush/Perot fashion. We could get lucky, but essentially we have everything to lose by having two conservatives splitting the vote now and NOTHING to gain.
My full analysis is here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2858929/posts?page=124#130
That's not a guarantee. What is virtually a guarantee is that if both Rick and Newt stay in the race and split the vote in states with winner-take-all by district rules, mainly Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Illinois, Wisconsin, Texas and California, then Romney will collect enough delegates from those states to put him over 1,144. Unless they come up with some magic trick to make sure Romney never gets over 30% of the vote in any district in any of those states.
There are no guarantees.
Iowa, Kansas, Tennessee, Minnesota, Missouri, Alabama, Mississsippi, Colorado ... oooh, I forgot Oklahoma and North Dakota
Now, on to Louisiana maybe yet another “free pass” that has absolutely no reflection on Santorums appeal to average grass roots voters
Mo votes this month. I live here so I know..the earlier contest had NO delegates awarded.
Too bad little vesty chickened out of debating Newt in Oregan..guess he doesnt want to face anymore vetting.
BTW...heard a union in Ohio is going for Santorum because they want him to face Obama..LOL...those demo robo calls by RS must be working for him. Dems coming out into the primaries and voting for the weakest candidate
Lay off the nonsense a lot of people endorsed Romney he was the no McCain choice.
If ever Newt voter did not go to Santorum, then they are hypocrits.
Little vesty chickened out? Smartest move ever. Voters are tired of endless debates which move NO ONE closer to defeating Obama. Don’t forget, Douglas beat Lincoln in the debates. Was he a better man?
Why would Santorum want to legitimize Little Figgy, who has no chance, NO CHANCE at the nomination, and why do Newtie-newt noot supporters think it helps their candidate to make up cutesy little names for Rick?
The GOP will not nominate for President anyone ANYONE whose only elective experience is in the House.
I hate to hit Gingrich, don’t really believe in the marginalization. He’s a fine man but won’t be nominated. Santorum at least has a chance.
A debate would grant him the opportunity TO EXPAND on his plan to crack down on porn; after all he needs to justify the 90 million dollar study he co sponsored with Hillary and Lieberman; would also give the candidates the opportunity to discuss the horrendous events in Afghanistan; UN on voter id and other urgent issues the voters across the country want to know about...guess RS is scared he may stumble over his words against Newt. Let me be clear on something..RS has a hell of a loooong way to go to secure 1,000 delegates. Newt will stay in to shake it up. GO NEWT!
According to Rasmussen, half the 'grass roots' still blame Bush for the current economic mess. An abiding hall mark of the incompetent is that they do not realize they are incompetent.
This is one of those no-brainers that frequently gets overlooked, only to yield a "duh" response after reality plays out--if those Newt votes were at all interested in voting for Santorum, they'd already be Santorum votes. There are good reasons why they are not, and why many won't ever be.
Reagan spoke of the transcendant elevation of the human spirit through American exceptionalism-- and Santorum talks about cracking down on porn and how contraceptives are bad for you.He's surely no Reagan but he wouldn't be bad, if he was running to replace Ed Meese.
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.