Posted on 03/14/2012 8:40:27 AM PDT by Iron Munro
Despite his losses in the Alabama and Mississippi primaries, Mitt Romney appears to have expanded his delegate lead on Tuesday.
The most recent projections from AP show Rick Santorum took 31 delegates from Alabama and Mississippi, while Newt Gingrich took 24 delegates and Romney got 23
But this morning, Romney was projected to win all nine delegates from American Samoa’s caucuses, and he also won the Hawaii caucuses by a large margin.
AP projections show Romney beat Santorum 18 delegates to four in those jurisdictions.
So, as of this morning, Romney has won 41 delegates from Tuesday’s contests, compared to 35 for Santorum, thereby expanding Romney’s delegate lead. (Gingrich is projected to have won 24 delegates.)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Losing Alabama and Mississippi is going to hurt his fundraising even more than it already is.
He will have to learn to campaign like Santorum, on a shoestring. Funny how everyone says that Santorum is not a fiscal conservative but yet is spending the least amount of money of all the candidates combined. I say is would make a great fiscal President if he see how you don’t have to spend money to find success.
As posted earlier, Romney - as bad as he is, as one of my least favorite candidates - is not even close to as bad or as threatening to our country or way of life as Obama.
I’d vote for Romney in a heartbeat over Obama. Heck, I’d vote for Donald Duck over Obama.
Maybe you have the best handle on this hodgepodge. Put it all together and whaddyagot? Is Romney the most likely at this point and if not then who?
Nana, why would you call him, “My boy?”
I have made no secret, and in fact on my tracker site state clearly that I support Sanorum...I voted that way here in the Idaho primary.
You might want to ask in advance before you make such an assertion and claim.
I have tried to inform as many people as I can how I believe Newt and Santorum can come together...and IMHO, must come togehter to avoid our nominee being Romney. I hope they will.
I have also stated , like many others, that in the end I will support whomever is the Reoublican nominee against Obama...which I will.
The question is how many of those districts is Rick or Newt going to lose because they split the vote in Bush/Perot fashion against Romney? It will be more than they would if one of them got out of the race and endorsed the other guy.
Georgia was winner-take-all by district. Newt won 92% of the delegates with 40% of the vote. If you win every district with a plurality, you can pretty much sweep the whole state despite not having a majority. There’s no guarantee that those states will end up with more proportional results. It depends if the district is politically like the rest of the state, or happens to be more conservative or liberal than the state as a whole.
Noted.
Romney is getting closer to inevitable every single day. I don’t think anything but a major shakeup or shift in the campaigns will deny him the nomination.
If Mitt gets just a third of the remaining proportional state delegates (as he did in Colorado), he gets 150 more delegates. The pure, statewide winner-take-all states are incredibly favorable to Mitt, except for Wisconsin. If he wins all the others, he gets 186 more delegates. Then he’s up to 832 delegates out of 1,144 needed.
Newt just said on Greta that if Mitt ends up only 30-50 delegates short of 1,144, he’ll get the nomination. But if he ends up 150-200 short, then there can be a contest. So there’s a benchmark to look for.
That means Romney only needs to get to about 1,100 to secure a win. He needs to get no more than 1,000 to be “insecure” by Newt’s standard. The seven remaining “mixed rules” states are the key contests now. They have 622 delegates and are listed below.
Illinois
Pennsylvania
West Virginia
California
New York
Texas
Connecticut (a mix)
Romney would need less than half of these delegates, only 268, to get to the 1,100 “safe zone” for the nomination. To make him a truly insecure nominee, he’d need to win only 168 out of those 622 (about 27%). That means he has to do exactly as bad in these states as he did in Georgia. It will be hard to beat him in New York and Connecticut, I would think, where he can get 123 delegates.
Which leaves only one path to knocking Romney out, and that is making a huge 90% sweep of the district contests in Illinois, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, California and Texas. Rick and/or Newt would have to repeat Newt’s South Carolina performance in those 5 states, where Newt won 92% of the delegates with 40% of the vote thanks to winner-take-all districts. The only way that could happen is if there is a massive coalescing around one conservative in each state, which would certainly be aided by either Newt or Rick dropping out now and endorsing the other guy.
Illinois is on Tuesday, and Romney is currently polling ahead of the pack with 35% to Rick’s 31% and Newt’s 12%. Which means it looks more like ROMNEY is going to sweep that state in South Carolina fashion, not our guys. We probably can’t afford that result if we’re going to win. MAYBE that could be made up if we drive Romney’s numbers REALLY down in the proportional states, so he gets less than a third of the delegates from them.
To sum up, if both Newt and Rick stay in the race and the voters don’t completely abandon one of them, Mitt will be the nominee. We have an OUTSIDE CHANCE of stopping Mitt only if one of them drops out or is abandoned by voters. In short, if you can get Mitt for less than 90% on Intrade, this is a good time to buy in.
The other upcoming states I mentioned are below.
Statewide, pure winner-take-all (228 delegates):
Puerto Rico
Maryland
Washington D.C.
Wisconsin
Delaware
New Jersey
Utah
Proportional (439 delegates):
Louisiana
Rhode Island
North Carolina
Oregon
Arkansas
Kentucky
New Mexico
South Dakota
Nebraska
Indiana
Montana
Missouri
Even the most liberal Governor in the history of the United States.
Sad.
Note that I should have listed Maryland, New Jersey and Wisconsin as the conditional winner-take-all states, not as pure statewide races. That would move 129 delegates from statewide winner-take-all to the conditional realm. That won’t change the analysis much though, since any advantage in getting delegates in Maryland would be countered by Mitt being able to get some in Wisconsin. If we could peel off any of New Jersey’s district delegates it would probably be just a handful of the 50.
Do you have some kind of spread sheet? How do you keep track of all this stuff?
It’s up to us to prevent that, and I am not sure that with people like Carter and Clinton and others who have gone before that the statement is necessarily true in any case.
However, if the people choose him (and I have outlined over and over again how we can prevent that) and it’s him vs. Obama...then yes, I will support that GOP nominee against the Marxist who is currently destroyiong the country in every way imagineable...most of which Romney, despite his past, has vowed to turn around.
...and if we deliver a solid House and Senate, which we must do in any case even for Newt or Rick, then I believe he would do it.
It;s a shame that this is what we are faced with...and sad...but it is not sad if those are the alternatives to work hard against Obama,..as will tens of other feloow Americans.
America at the Crossroads of History
http://www.jeffhead.com/crossroads.htm
If I were President, Here’s what I’d do
http://www.jeffhead.com/aspres.htm
...and for the lighter side, when I have time to sort of lay back and engage in a hobby of mine:
My Review and Build of the 1/350 Scale Chinese Aircraft Carrier
http://www.jeffhead.com/modelbuilds/PRC-CV-01.htm
hehehe. LOL! That’s tens of millions of other Americans. I’m sure you’ll enjoy and make hay out of that one.
It’s that sort of thinking that got us into the mess we’re in. Wake up.
I disagree, TN. Ron Paul will release his delegates to Romney and put Romney over the top if there is an open convention.
I would prefer Paul received zero additional delegates.
most of which Romney, despite his past, has vowed to turn around.
_______________________________________________
So regardless of the fact that you just stated Romney has a past
you still trust him ???
Can you see Jeff how your statements dont add up ???
You cant have it both ways...
Mormon bishop and high priest Willard Mitt Romney is not fit to be president of the United States period...
I will not be voting for him, ever...
He does not represent me...
I am not a liberal
or pro-abortion
or a gun grabber
or a draft dodger
or for big government
or for global warming
or cap N trade
or same-sex marriage
Willard Mitt Romney is those things
and I wont lower my standards
and throw away my Christian conscience
or my Conservative principles
to vote for that low class trashy jerk..
as I said previously
Willie Mitty is your boy...
but hes not mine...
I dont intend to hire him ...
Oh...I see. it’s the Mormon thing. Fine. You have your choice.
He was not my 1st, 2nd, or 3rd pick (Palin, Cain, and Santorum were). I did not vote for him here in Idaho, I voted for Santorum.
But, should he be the nominee I will support him over Obama.
The entire list you came up with he says he does not support. And, as a LDS myself, I know as a person in the positions you mentioned he could not have openly supported them. His statments on what he was and what he now is are out there for everyone to read. it was all about politics and veiled statements to get elected and govern in a state that was 85% lib and wanted it that way.
They would have more and worse liberal health care and everything else had he not been there is my guess. They over road numerous of his vetoes that youi should check out as well to find what his positions were as opposed to the legislature.
Be that as it may, I still am not comfortable with him over the other candidates as I have stated. It is precisley because of those former political decisions he made to be and act as governor of Mass that he was not my 1st, 2nd or 3rd choices.
But he is a pol, and he has made very clear statements about what he will do and if we have the House and Senate in place, I believe he will do them.
Because I honestly believe that, if he is the nominee (which mean he would be the choice of millions of people, more than the others, with the delegates to reflect it) under that condition alone, I will support him against Obama the marxist who is activley destroying the country in all of the areas listed and more.
Everyone has to make their own decision and I hope Rick and Newt can come together so we do not have to face that choice...but I will do all in my power to keep Obama from anpother four years. That would be the saddest of all, to have someone we know without a shadow of a doubt to be the worst president in our history, to be anti-American to the core, to be re-elected.
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.
