This si being debated on a lot of threads, so I pinged people from them here.
People need to look closely at what Newt said, and follow his directions - especially his supporters, who seem to be unaware of what exactly he was saying. Newt is trying to send a message to his people without falling afoul of campaign finance laws, so he can’t say what he is doing outright.
I think Newt was trying to say his plan now is to use all of his money to hammer Romney relentlessly, while not actively seeking support himself. If he does this successfully, and his voters support Santorum in Winner-take-all states, he might still help Santorum beat Romney in those states enough to trigger a brokered convention.
Quite a few later states tend towards winner take all delegates. So if Romney gets 37% in one, but everybody else gets less, Romney might as well have won with 100% - he gets all the delegates. Romney could get 45% in all of those states, and still walk away as if he had gotten 100% in that state - well above the 46% average of delegates he needs to avoid a brokered convention. That is what Newt is trying to stop – if his supporters can get on board with his plan.
That is why Newt could help Romney here though, if his supporters don’t get his message. If it’s 37% Romney and 36% Santorum in a winner take all state or district, Newt’s voters could do damage by voting for Newt (even damage to Newt’s chances of winning at a brokered convention). Fracturing the anti-Romney vote only hurts Newt’s chances at a brokered convention.
Newt cannot win this outright, in any form and he knows it. Santorum cannot win this outright either at this point, and is just hanging in with hopes of the unforseen. The only question is will there be a brokered convention, or will we just have Romney stuffed down our throats. The only chance of a brokered convention is for Rick to take the Winner-take-all states and districts he can in large numbers, and deny them to Romney. If Newt can deny Romney in other winner take all votes, then that is good too, and Santorum voters need to switch sides and make that happen. Ideally we could get the Ron Paul types on board as well, but that’s probably not going to happen.
This is why Newt was emphasizing in his statement that all he wants to do is keep Romney below 1100 delegates, and why he was saying it was his only goal now. He wasn’t saying he want’s more delegates, or more votes. That is a coded message to his supporters to do what they have to to keep Romney below 1100. That means, in a winner-take-all vote, if Santorum is ahead, or well above Newt, he needs Newt’s voters to jump in and push him over the top. In truth, that is probably the only way Newt has a shadow’s chance at this point in the process. Even more ironic, Santorum is probably not likely at all, as I can’t see him taking a brokered convention, where anyone could be the candidate, and that is likely his only chance.
Newt could also use more money, to keep his operation alive, as it is the only hope at this point to avoid spending the general watching the media run one bizarre clip after another of Romney squashing bugs and laughing, or otherwise embarrassing himself. Dan Quale is a smart, funny, witty guy, yet the media made him look really silly at times. Romney will make the media’s portrayal of Quale look like Einstein crossed with Patton. I’m pretty sure they are drooling at the prospect.
The big problem is, campaign laws won’t let Newt say, “Everyone vote for Rick in the winner take all contests, while I continue to hammer Romney.” He can only use his money to advance himself and his candidacy. If he becomes a Rick supporter, his money will be looked at as something other than a simple campaign fund for Newt for President.
Newt’s supporters need to see his strategy, and come to the conclusion themselves that in some states, voting for Rick is actually their best move for their candidate. Likewise it would help if Rick supporters would vote for Newt, if it looks like Newt can deny Romney some delegates elsewhere. We just need a brokered convention.
At this point, we all need to accept that our candidates are toast when it comes to an outright win and our only other chance, a brokered convention, is rapidly evaporating as an option. Our only hope is to unite together, right now, organize, and take Mitt down through superior tactical maneuvering through the nomination process - together as a team.
I could be wrong, but I think this is what Newt is trying to say, and it makes sense, from a strategic standpoint.
Be funny if a primary brought us together for a change.
NO, that is not Newt’s message. He still wants to win and gather as many delegates as he can for leverage in a possible brokered convention. Vote for Newt, and pray he wins. He is my obi-wan-konbi. Our only hope.
Are you for real?
LOL
Pull the other one.
These are the remaining winner-take-alls:
| Missouri | 52 | March 17 |
| The District of Columbia | 19 | April 3 |
| Connecticut | 28 | April 24 |
| Delaware | 17 | April 24 |
| New York | 95 | April 24 |
| Montana | 26 | June 5 |
| New Jersey | 50 | June 5 |
| Utah | 40 | June 26 |
Some are write-offs, but others could be close.
Your analysis about the race and the delegate map is spot on. People need to realize the primary strategy shifts dramatically now. There were rules against winner-take-all allocation up to a certain date. TWO-THIRDS of the remaining delegates will now in effect be awarded that way, either at the state or district level.
The Newt supporters need to avoid being emotional about their candidate and look at the cold, hard facts. The only way Newt can win is NOT TO PLAY, because Romney will probably reach 1,144 if this 4-man-race continues and Rick and Newt split votes in the winner-take-all contests. That means no floor fight at the convention, just a coronation for Romney.
If the current polling holds in Illinois next week, Newt will be acting as Ross Perot, taking enough votes away from Santorum to hand Romney the win in "direct delegate elections" which are in essence winner-take-all by district. Romney could end up with all the Illinois delegates if that same ratio of votes occurs in every district. Note that Newt won 92% of the South Carolina delegates with 40% of the vote. Winner-take-all by district can get very close to winner-take-all by state, since it's not likely different sections of most states will vote that differently.
I'm not sure I agree with you about Newt's strategy. I definitely don't agree that it can work. The only way to stop everyone from voting for Newt is for Newt to drop out and endorse Rick. I'm not sure there are any states left where Newt is polling above Rick that would make it worthwhile for him to continue. The only instances where his presence might help is in a state like New York, where Romney could get over 50% of the vote, triggering more delegates for him, and where we therefore might need help keeping him under that total. But it looks like we have a lot more to gain in other states in a 2-man race (plus or minus 1 fruitcake, i.e. Paul).
Below are the remaining states that are winner-take-all in some form according to the list on Real Clear Politics. I haven't investigated every nuance of thresholds and exceptions for these. 850 delegates come from these, with 439 coming from the rest of the remaining states which are the proportional ones:
Illinois (direct delegate election by district)
Pennsylvania (direct delegate election by district)
West Virginia (direct delegate election by district)
California (WTA by district or a mix?)
New York (WTA by district or a mix?)
Texas (WTA by district or a mix?)
Connecticut (WTA by district or a mix?)
Maryland (WTA by district or a mix?)
Wisconsin (WTA by district or a mix?)
New Jersey (WTA by district or a mix?)
Puerto Rico (pure WTA statewide)
Washington D.C. (pure WTA statewide)
Delaware (pure WTA statewide)
Utah (pure WTA statewide)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_delegate_count.html