Posted on 01/10/2012 1:00:04 PM PST by Maceman
ROMNEY: 37%
PAUL: 26%
HUNTSMAN: 21%
GINGRICH: 11%
PERRY: 9%
BACHMAN: 0%
SANTORUM: 0%
With Ron Paul picking up ~20% of the elected delegates, be careful what you wish for.
You are correct, very similar to Obama going after the Chamber of Commerce.
newt is damaging conservative’s not helping us.
I can hardly believe that the philosophy of Reagan has come to this,....very sad.
Last time I checked the calendar it was 2012.
I do not see Ron Paul as an appeaser. Quite the opposite in fact, but he is not a warmonger either. He has been pretty clear that he would be an non-interventionist but would tolerant no hostel acts towards the USA.
I think he/she meant before February
Question, if we got to a brokered convention based on a delegate count of the following:
Romney: 967
Newt: 856
Paul: 421
I’d bet you $20 (Not $10,000) that Romney would offer VP to Paul or his son Rand for the delegates support if he needed it to secure the nomination. I would not put it past him.
Be weary of a brokered convention. Things may not go as you would like.
Romney 6
Paul 2
Huntsman 2
Gingrich 1
Santorum 1
Perry 0
Based on 8.5% per delegate threshold, 1st place finisher wins the remainders.
2,192 delegates yet to be selected.
94%
Mitt Romney 93,760 39.4%
Ron Paul 54,204 22.8%
Jon Huntsman 39,991 16.8%
Newt Gingrich 22,377 9.4%
Rick Santorum 22,196 9.3%
Others 2,617 1.1%
Rick Perry 1,648 0.7%
Buddy Roemer 893 0.4%
Since your a Paulbot, please look at my comment #726.
I would like to know if you were a delegate and Romney offerred Paul or his son Rand the VP slot in exchange for delegate support in a brokered convention, would that be enough for you as a delegate to support him?
If so, then I believe this supports the view that Paul is a stalking horse for Romney, utilizing his numbers to force his way onto the ticket.
Cheshire county has been solid Santorum territory (+50 pct) vs Newt all night. 1200 votes vs 800.
With 30 percent outstanding, I estimated another 400 for Newt and 600 for Santorum for +200 on his margin vs Newt. That, didn’t happen unfortunately.
From 70-100 the votes didn’t cut Newt’s lead any, meaning they split votes where Santorum had been getting 50 percent more. With Newt leading by 200 votes over about 8 pct or so, with no favourable break to Santorum area, the gap is probably going to end up about 200 votes in favor of Newt.
I thougt it was:
Romney 7
Paul 3
Huntsman 2
Unfortunately, one has to top 10% without the help of rounding to get anything—consequently Romney will end up with at least 7, and probably 8.
95%
Mitt Romney 94,252 39.4%
Ron Paul 54,511 22.8%
Jon Huntsman 40,388 16.9%
Newt Gingrich 22,518 9.4%
Rick Santorum 22,361 9.3%
Others 2,645 1.1%
Rick Perry 1,668 0.7%
Buddy Roemer 898 0.4%
Yes, I think I am....
Huntsman slipping below the 17% threshold needed to get 2 (two) delegates. So that would throw one more remainder to Mitt for 7 in all (big deal, that sure is a lot of drama for so few delegates).
Unfortunately they split delegates at 10 percent minimum threshold. *sigh*.
I do not think Paul would go for that deal. You have to understand a view things about Paul. First Paul does not think he can win the nomination so that is not his motivation. He is trying to move the GOP and the country towards small honest constitutional government. His campaign gives him a bull horn to talk to the country about all the problems that the “stutus quo” is perpetuating. This is Paul last campaign and he just wants to get his message out. But more than a few of us are kinda hoping he wins. :)
a few things
Am I the only one sick of all this media hyped ‘momentum’ in support of Romney?
FACT: In order to win the Republican nomination for President the nominee has to win a minimum of 1,144 delegates.
FACT: After winning both Iowa and New Hampshire(and spending the better part of the last decade campaigning/spending in those states) Romney now currently has a total of.... 20 delegates give or take 2.
So what does winning Iowa and New Hampshire REALLY mean? To me it means VERY little.
What troubles me is this ‘momentum’ MANUFACTURED by the MSM that ends up inflating Romney’s support in the remaining primary states.
I mean if you buy into the contrived hype and let the outcomes of Iowa and New Hampshire affect your support for a particular candidate then conservative candidates will never have a shot.
For the record despite living in New Hampshire(summer home?) and campaigning there for the better part of the last decade Romney is going to end up with a smaller percentage of support there than McCain had in 2000 and SLIGHTLY more support than McCain had in 2008(when he went on to get routed by Red Ears).
So again, why back down from attacking Romney now? This thing has barely started. NOW is the time to hammer him more than ever. Keep attacking his damn Massachusetts healthcare system and the fiscal cluster-F it’s turning out to be. Keep attacking his flip-flopping on social issues. Keep attacking his milquetoast tone and seemingly agnostic view toward the fact Obama is destroying this country.
And then ping me after Florida for an update. Maybe he’ll still be winning by then.. but maybe not.
Sorry.. Rant mode off. ;)
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.