Talk Elections

Election Archive => 2012 Elections => Topic started by: Erc on December 21, 2011, 03:12:05 PM



Title: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on December 21, 2011, 03:12:05 PM
In the manner of my similar 2008 topic (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=70003.0), I'll be keeping a tally of the delegates for each candidate as best as can be done, discussing upcoming contests, and making (conservative) projections for future contests when useful.

For entertainment purposes: Map with Delegate Counts (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3221139#msg3221139).

StateRomneySantorum*GingrichPaulUncommittedTotal
Iowa (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3141942#msg3141942)1010+1-5+1128
New Hampshire (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3142049#msg3142049)7--3212
South Carolina (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3150247#msg3150247)2-23--25
Florida (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3163587#msg3163587)50----50
Nevada (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3165882#msg3165882)14365-28
Colorado (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3165882#msg3165882)136-9836
Minnesota (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3165882#msg3165882)3230+111240
Maine (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3165882#msg3165882)11+23-7124
Arizona (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3178990#msg3178990)29----29
Michigan (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3178990#msg3178990)1614---30
Wyoming (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3209121#msg3209121)22+12-1329
Washington (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200344#msg3200344)346--343
Alaska (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215241#msg3215241)8826327
Georgia (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200421#msg3200421)21352--76
Idaho (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200421#msg3200421)32----32
Massachusetts (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200454#msg3200454)38+2---141
North Dakota (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200454#msg3200454)0+70+80+10+21028
Ohio (http://[url=https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200454#msg3200454)3821--766
Oklahoma (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200556#msg3200556)131413-343
Tennessee (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200556#msg3200556)17299-358
Virginia (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200556#msg3200556)43--3349
Vermont (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200556#msg3200556)94-4-17
Guam (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3209072#msg3209072)6+3----9
Northern Marianas (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3209072#msg3209072)6+3----9
Kansas (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3209072#msg3209072)733---40
Virgin Islands (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3209072#msg3209072)3+4--119
Alabama (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3212324#msg3212324)1222+113-250
Mississippi (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3212324#msg3212324)12+11312-240
Hawaii (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3212324#msg3212324)95-3320
American Samoa (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3212324#msg3212324)6+3----9
Puerto Rico (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823)20+3----23
Illinois (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823)42+212--1369
Louisiana (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823)510--3146
District of Columbia (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3225502#msg3225502)16+1---219
Maryland (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3225502#msg3225502)37----37
Wisconsin (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3225502#msg3225502)339---42
Total676260132611041233
Other Supers+9-+1--+10

Recent Updates:
4/15:  Minnesota, Colorado results updated.  (Final Main Page updates for the season)
4/6:  North Dakota results updated.
4/3:  Tennessee results updated.  DC/MD/WI results added.

* Santorum has suspended his campaign.  Discussion here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3259106#msg3259106).

The +1 or similar on delegate counts above represent unpledged delegates (RNC members, or delegates explicitly elected for Huntsman or as Uncommitted) who have endorsed that candidate.  As these are delegates who are free to change their minds and whose seats at the convention are not tied in any way to the will of the voters, I think it best to denote them separately.

The "Other Supers" row represents the RNC member endorsements in states yet to vote.  I'm taking my figures from Demconwatch (http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/4726/republican-superdelegate-endorsement-list), which is generally more conservative in counting endorsements than CNN or the AP.

Italicized States represent Caucus/Convention states that have not yet finished their processes.  As a result, their final delegate counts may be substantially different than those listed here, due to a variety of factors.  These include but are not limited to: winnowing of less popular candidates at the process continues; tactical voting; local 'superdelegates' in certain states; unknown particulars of the delegate selection process; and motivation gaps, including the "Stealth Paul Effect."  

Underlined States have been penalized by the RNC for having their contests too early in the season.  It is possible the RNC may eventually remove these sanctions (or, in the case of AZ/FL, add more).  Click on the state's link to find their delegate allocations in the absence of sanctions.

Other state-particular uncertainties include:

AL/GA/TN:  Different sources are reporting different results in these states.  In AL & TN, the RNC claims Gingrich has an extra delegate (at the expense of Romney); in GA, the results provided by the Secretary of State would seem to indicate Gingrich has two extra delegates (at the expense of Romney).
OH: 4 delegates in the 'Uncommitted' column will be assigned by a contest committee; it is likely they will be assigned to Santorum.
ND:  The delegation may choose to allocate itself based on the caucus results (7-11-2-8-0) or by their personal conscience (13-8-1-2-4).  Listed above is the worst case scenario for each candidate.

The Upcoming Calendar:  
May 5:  Minnesota State Convention ends.
May 6:  Maine State Convention.
May 8:  Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia Primaries.
May 15:  Oregon Primary, Nebraska Beauty Contest.
May 22:  Arkansas, Kentucky Primary.
May 29:  Texas Primary.
June 2:  Louisiana, Missouri, Washington State Conventions.
June 5:  California, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Dakota Primaries, Montana Beauty Contest.
June 9:  Indiana, Illinois State Conventions end.
June 10:  Nebraska County Conventions end.  Pennsylvania State Committee Summer Meeting.
June 16:  Iowa, Montana State Conventions end.
June 26:  Utah Primary.
July 14:  Nebraska State Convention.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: M on December 21, 2011, 04:32:29 PM
This should be stickied.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on December 21, 2011, 05:16:12 PM
Seconded.

Erc, what is your source for the number of delegates each state has?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on December 21, 2011, 06:03:08 PM
Erc, what is your source for the number of delegates each state has?

You can find it in a number of places, including here:

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/R-Alloc.phtml


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on December 21, 2011, 09:13:09 PM
The Green Papers is as always your best friend, though it helps to go back to the source since they aren't completely infallible.

Since the Republicans never had McGovern-Fraser, the delegate selection can often be a bit arcane for the Republicans and varies wildly from state to state, the delegate allocation is a lot less complicated---and, thank goodness, there are far fewer "superdelegates:"  there are only 168 of them (3 from each state / territory / DC), around 7% of the total.  While that could make a difference in a tight race, they'd need to break overwhelmingly one way of the other.

As for the 'regular' delegates, it's really quite simple:

--10 delegates At-Large [to wit, 5 for each Senator]
--3 for each Congressional District
Plus some "Bonus Delegates" At-Large for the more Republican states:
--If it voted for McCain in 2008, it gets a bonus (4.5 + 60% * Electoral Vote) delegates, rounded up.
--1 Bonus Delegate for a Republican Governor elected since January 1, 2008
--1 Bonus Delegate for an at least 50% of its House Representatives being Republican since January 1, 2008
--1 Bonus Delegate for one chamber of the state legislature having a majority of Republicans with a Republican presiding officer
--1 Bonus Delegate for both chambers
--1 Bonus Delegate for each Republican Senator elected since January 1, 2006 (max 2)  [Does Murkowski count as a Republican?]

Puerto Rico gets 20 delegates, DC 16, the other territories 6 each.

States that go "early" (before March for most states, before February for NH/IA/NV/SC) are penalized and lose half their delegates (rounded up), and the "superdelegates" can't be among the half that remain.  Iowa is not penalized, since the caucuses don't actually choose the delegates, the State Convention in June does.  New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, Arizona, and Michigan [and perhaps Puerto Rico and the Northern Marianas] will be penalized.

Iowa, which did not vote for McCain in 2008, has considerably fewer delegates than it did last time around, only getting 3 bonus delegates:  1 for Gov. Terry Branstad, 1 for Sen. Chuck Grassley, and 1 for a Republican majority in the Iowa House of Representatives.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on December 22, 2011, 12:41:01 AM
Although people often talk about how "this thing could be over by NH", Only a fraction of delegates are being decided in all the contests before Super Tuesday.

I think that January and February will winnow the field down to Romney, Paul and one conservative (probably Perry or Gingrich). And even if that conservative hasn't won any races until that point, they will still ahve a chance because there are still 80-90% of the delegates still up for grabs


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Gustaf on December 22, 2011, 04:04:05 AM
Although people often talk about how "this thing could be over by NH", Only a fraction of delegates are being decided in all the contests before Super Tuesday.

I think that January and February will winnow the field down to Romney, Paul and one conservative (probably Perry or Gingrich). And even if that conservative hasn't won any races until that point, they will still ahve a chance because there are still 80-90% of the delegates still up for grabs

Rudy, is that you?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: CARLHAYDEN on December 23, 2011, 08:32:03 AM
Although people often talk about how "this thing could be over by NH", Only a fraction of delegates are being decided in all the contests before Super Tuesday.

I think that January and February will winnow the field down to Romney, Paul and one conservative (probably Perry or Gingrich). And even if that conservative hasn't won any races until that point, they will still ahve a chance because there are still 80-90% of the delegates still up for grabs

Sorry, but, neither Perry nor Gingrich are conservatives.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on December 23, 2011, 05:11:42 PM
Well both Perry and Gingrich have (at different times) been the overwhelming favored choice of Self-described conservatives and tea party supporters according to the polls.

And Romney certainly isn't a conservative and Ron Paul is a libertarian/conservative.

I guess I find it hard to believe that conservatives in the post IA/NH states will just jump onto the Romney train just because the conservative vote was split, letting Romney and Paul perform well. Once people start dropping out there will be time for someone to consolidate that vote and with so few delegates chosen early on there is plenty of time to actually win delegates, especially in all the southern primaries.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on December 23, 2011, 11:22:22 PM
Certainly, even if Romney wins both IA & NH (or Paul IA, Romney NH), the race isn't over yet.  If Romney wins SC, though, does anyone honestly think that anyone else would have a real chance at the nomination at that point?  I could see Perry or Huntsman sticking it out past then if they did reasonably well, if only because they have the money to do so (and of course Paul will regardless).  But I'd say that a Romney win in SC would pretty much cement him as being at least acceptable to conservatives (especially since I doubt the field would be much divided at that point, unlike the 4-way race that was SC in 2008).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on December 24, 2011, 12:35:43 AM
The RNC has apparently just released this document (posted online by The Weekly Standard):

http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/docs/2012%20RNC%20Delegate%20Summary.pdf

which summarizes the delegate selection rules for every state and territory.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on December 25, 2011, 01:34:55 PM
FHQ has a table that summarizes the RNC document and compares to 2008 rules posted here:

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2011/12/republican-delegate-allocation-rules.html

Note that the largest change from 2008 is that a number of the states that used to be straight WTA are now using some kind of "conditional WTA" rule, which means that the delegate allocation is proportional, unless one candidate gets over 50% of the vote, in which case it reverts to WTA.  So if the race can narrow to a 2-person contest quickly, then you'll have a lot of WTA states, but if there are 3 or more candidates, then it'll be more a long slog for one candidate to reach a majority of delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Smash255 on December 26, 2011, 03:43:12 PM
As far as pledged party leader delegates go, does that generally go to the winner of the state or is that determined by state?

For example would I be correct in assuming that S.C which has 10 at large delegates, 16 bonus delegates, 3 party delegates and 21 CD delegates, the breakdown would go 29 delegates to the state winner and 3 delegates to each CD winner?  And then the 50% penalty on top of that?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: FSMovers121 on December 27, 2011, 01:48:24 PM
Yes it is really a delegate fight.
hope so good result in this fight, which help development of
US financial condition and prosperity of United states of america.

Thanks
full service movers


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: TheGlobalizer on December 27, 2011, 06:01:57 PM
Although people often talk about how "this thing could be over by NH", Only a fraction of delegates are being decided in all the contests before Super Tuesday.

I think that January and February will winnow the field down to Romney, Paul and one conservative (probably Perry or Gingrich). And even if that conservative hasn't won any races until that point, they will still ahve a chance because there are still 80-90% of the delegates still up for grabs

Rudy, is that you?

This, basically.  No one "wins" the primaries after the first few smallish states, but the field has been vetted and the lay of of the land is pretty clear at that point.  This is why I think it was a bad idea for Huntsman to skip IA, and why Romney should not have flip-flopped (oh, the irony) on campaigning in IA.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on December 27, 2011, 09:05:05 PM
I know that momentum in past years has been a big factor. However 2012 has been unusual. We have seen the conservative/tea party/evangelical vote go from one non-Romney to the other. Are all of these people going to suddenly all rally to Romney after he wins a couple of primaries (and after 2 or 3 non Romney's drop out)? 

I still think Someone will emerge as the conservative champion in addition to Paul and Romney, unless Santorum, Bachmann, Gingrich and Perry all hold on until Super Tuesday (which seems unlikely).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on December 29, 2011, 11:24:04 PM
Forgive me if this has been covered before, but the green papers website is confusing.  Do the Iowa Caucuses actually award delegates just like a normal primary?  I heard a CNN commentator saying the Caucuses are meaningless except for momentum, much like the Ames Straw Poll?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on December 30, 2011, 12:35:41 PM
They are semi-meaningless and semi-meaningful Bush.  The tally coming out of Iowa is essentially a straw poll, but it will mirror the composition of the caucus goers who will be selecting delegates to the county conventions in March.  Those delegates won't be bound to support in March those who they support now (which is why Iowa will not be penalized for going early) but likely will unless their candidate has dropped out by then.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on December 30, 2011, 12:53:17 PM
They are semi-meaningless and semi-meaningful Bush.  The tally coming out of Iowa is essentially a straw poll, but it will mirror the composition of the caucus goers who will be selecting delegates to the county conventions in March.  Those delegates won't be bound to support in March those who they support now (which is why Iowa will not be penalized for going early) but likely will unless their candidate has dropped out by then.

Almost like the General Election on November 6 chooses the Electors who will officially cast their vote for President a few weeks later, should be the same, but they are free to change their mind as in 2004 when one Minnesota Elector defected and voted for John Edwards.  Is that basically the same idea?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on December 30, 2011, 02:41:17 PM
They are semi-meaningless and semi-meaningful Bush.  The tally coming out of Iowa is essentially a straw poll, but it will mirror the composition of the caucus goers who will be selecting delegates to the county conventions in March.  Those delegates won't be bound to support in March those who they support now (which is why Iowa will not be penalized for going early) but likely will unless their candidate has dropped out by then.

Almost like the General Election on November 6 chooses the Electors who will officially cast their vote for President a few weeks later, should be the same, but they are free to change their mind as in 2004 when one Minnesota Elector defected and voted for John Edwards.  Is that basically the same idea?
Similar.  However, many states bind their electors to the popular vote, so they electoral college does not have nearly as much leeway as the Iowa delegates.  Also, the electors do not have to worry about their favored candidate not being around when the voting occurs (unless he dies, which would be a legal nightmare- this actually happened in 1872 when Greeley died in December, before the electoral college met, but because he lost in a landslide to Grant, it did not matter).  Paul could win Iowa, but be out by the convention.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 04, 2012, 01:32:56 AM
Erc's Unofficial Delegate Projection: Iowa

With the results mostly in (in fact, I could have called this hours ago), I can feel confident to make a delegate projection as per the method I stated before the caucuses:

Rick Santorum: 7
Mitt Romney: 7
Ron Paul: 7
Newt Gingrich: 2
Rick Perry: 1
Michelle Bachmann: 1

Each of the top three candidates get a delegate from each CD and 3 delegates statewide.  The remaining candidates that competed in Iowa got enough votes statewide to potentially earn a delegate or two out of the 13 At-Large delegates.  I really don't like giving Bachmann a delegate (and even if she had completely loyal supporters and she stayed in the race, it'd be incredibly unlikely she'd come up with a delegate here), but the alternative is giving it to the winner, and with the vote as close as it is, it would be disingenuous to give it to anyone.

Of course, it's very likely that the final delegate count will look nothing like this, even if the race is still competitive by the time of the State Convention in June.  Clearly, Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann's supporters at the County Conventions are likely to support other candidates after they've (presumably) dropped out.  Furthermore, the multiple layers of conventions are likely to favor the leading three candidates over the trailing three, if only by rounding errors.  And of course, any amount of tactical voting or collusion (to lock out Ron Paul from getting delegates, for example) we won't know about until the conventions themselves.


Going forward:

With Bachmann's 6% place finish and Perry going back to Texas, I'm going to consider them effectively out of the race until they show a sign of life elsewhere.  To save space, their 2 delegates in Iowa are going into the "Other/Uncommitted" column along with the 3 RNC members from Iowa.

Main post will be updated to reflect this and with New Hampshire info shortly!


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 04, 2012, 01:37:02 AM
Iowa: January 3, 2012

Overview
28 Delegates (1.22% of total)
Caucus, Conventions
13 At-Large
12 by Congressional District
3 Party Leaders

At the Caucus / What the Media Reports
Republican caucus-goers participate in a straw poll, and the results of this straw poll are reported to the media---unlike for the Democrats, it is an actual vote total being reported.  Caucus-goers in each precinct also choose delegates to the County Conventions.  

County Conventions
March 10: Delegates were chosen to the [Congressional] District Conventions and the State Convention.  Apart from the usual Paulista rumors, there are no reliable statewide reports of what occurred at each convention, so we will have to wait until the state convention in June to get a better idea of the final totals.

District Conventions
April 21: Each of the 4 districts reports its preferred presidential candidate.  This has no binding effect whatsoever on final delegate selection.

State Convention
June 16:  
First, the caucus of delegates from each CD choose their 3 delegates each.
Then, the Convention as a whole decides on the 13 At-Large delegates.

Caucus/Convention Caveat
The entire system is very informal, with no explicit method for tying the ultimate selection to the wishes of the initial caucus-goers.  The delegates themselves aren't chosen until June, at a convention whose delegates were chosen at other conventions whose delegates were chosen by the caucus-goers.  In general (especially if there's a strong Paul showing), expect the final delegate counts to differ greatly from the original caucus result, whether due to tactical voting or due to simple bandwagoning around a presumptive nominee.

Erc's Unofficial Delegate Count:  IA
Statewide and in Each CD:  'Alabama Method'--chosen as it gives a distinct advantage to the winner of the state, as we would expect, and we really have no good idea how the conventions will choose delegates in any event.  Nevertheless, this will still likely give too much support to minor candidates and too little to the frontrunner.  I would especially not expect this to work well if Paul has a good showing.

If a candidate receives a majority in a jurisdiction, give him all the delegates therefrom.
Multiply the total number of delegates in the jurisdiction (13 statewide, 3 in each CD) by the candidate's percentage of the popular vote in that jurisdiction.  Round to the nearest whole number for each candidate.  Should there be an excess of delegates, remove delegates from the least-popular candidate.  Should not enough delegates be assigned, assign the remainder to the winner of that jurisdiction.

As the polling is all over the place at the moment, and there are likely to be variations in the result across districts, I am not going to even bother making a preliminary projection for Iowa.

RNC Members
AJ Spiker - Paul (http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/02/11/a-j-spiker-elected-chairman-of-the-republican-party-of-iowa/)
Steve Scheffler
Kim Lehman - Santorum (http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/07/13/iowa-anti-abortion-leader-endorses-rick-santorum/)

Preliminary Delegate Allocation ( as of January 8 )
Romney - 10
Santorum - 10
Paul - 5

Details and justification for this breakdown found here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3146750#msg3146750) and here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3144260#msg3144260).  These results are subject to change given more data on the election of delegates to the county/state conventions, especially after the county conventions on March 10th.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 04, 2012, 02:04:02 AM
If I can find any good info on how many delegates each county (or heck, each precinct) sends to the State (or County) Conventions, I may do a more detailed projection for the Iowa delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 04, 2012, 02:14:58 AM
New Hampshire: January 10

Overview
12 Delegates (0.53% of total)
Primary
12 At-Large, P10%

Delegates are assigned proportionally to the statewide vote, with a 10% cutoff.  Rounding is done to the nearest whole number.  If any delegates remain, assign them to the winner.

New Hampshire violated RNC rules by holding its primary before the first Tuesday in February, and thus lost its half its delegate (including the RNC member seats).  It is possible these may may be restored later by the RNC, in which case the New Hampshire Primary would be assigning 20 delegates.

RNC Members

Note:  Due to RNC sanctions, no RNC members from New Hampshire have voting privileges at the convention unless the sanctions are removed.

Wayne MacDonald
Steve Duprey
Phyllis Woods

Pledged Delegate Allocation (as of January 10)
Romney - 7
Paul - 3
Huntsman - 2

There is some uncertainty in this allocation due to the sanctions imposed by the RNC.  In the absence of sanctions, the allocation would be Romney - 12, Paul - 5, Huntsman - 3, and the campaigns have since chosen their delegates (http://www.sos.nh.gov/presprim2012/Delegates/2012%20Delegates%20&%20Alternates.pdf) based on the unsanctioned numbers.

This leaves it unclear as to which of these 20 delegates will be seated.  A 7-3-2 split still makes the most sense, but there is some room for rounding ambiguities (most likely in favor of Romney at the expense of Huntsman; as Huntsman delegates are likely in the Romney camp at this point anyway, the issue is likely moot).

Huntsman's Delegates

Huntsman has since dropped out of the race, leaving his two delegates effectively as unpledged 'superdelegates.'  In particular, they do not need to pay any attention to Jon Huntsman's endorsement of Romney.

Due to sanctions, there is some ambiguity over who Huntsman's two delegates to Tampa are, precisely.  However, we do know they will be two out of three of the following:

Paul J. Collins, Jr. - Romney
Renee Plummer
Sarah Stewart

Plummer and Stewart remain Uncommitted; Plummer has stated she will remain uncommitted until the convention.  Stewart was in the Pawlenty camp until he dropped out.

Note that Huntsman's delegates do differ from ordinary superdelegates in one respect; they have pre-determined alternates!  Their names can be found in the link above.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on January 04, 2012, 01:17:20 PM
According to CNNPolitics.com, the delegate breakdown from Iowa are as follows - Romney, Santorum, and Paul each get 7 delegates while Gingrich and Perry get 2 apiece for a total of 25 pledged delegates plus there are 3 more unpledged.

Romney currently has 18 delegates (7 from Iowa, 11 unpledged).
Santorum currently has 11 delegates (7 from Iowa, 4 unpledged).

EDIT:  According to CNN Politics, Santorum only has 8 delegates (7 from Iowa, 1 unpledged)

Ron Paul currently has 7 delegates (all from Iowa)
Rick Perry has 4 delegates (2 from Iowa, 2 unpledged)
Newt Gingrich has 2 delegates (both from Iowa)
Michelle Bachmann did not have any delegates at time of drop out
Jon Huntsman has 0 delegates so far.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on January 04, 2012, 02:25:33 PM
According to CNNPolitics.com, the delegate breakdown from Iowa are as follows - Romney, Santorum, and Paul each get 7 delegates while Gingrich and Perry get 2 apiece for a total of 25 pledged delegates plus there are 3 more unpledged.

Romney currently has 18 delegates (7 from Iowa, 11 unpledged).
Santorum currently has 11 delegates (7 from Iowa, 4 unpledged).

No delegates were selected last night. CNN and other media outlets are projecting the delegate distribution based off last nights results but the fact is no delegates will be selected until June and even then they will be unpledged. All that happened last night was a non binding straw poll of caucus goers and that delegates selected the people who will select the people who will pick the delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on January 04, 2012, 02:40:27 PM
According to CNNPolitics.com, the delegate breakdown from Iowa are as follows - Romney, Santorum, and Paul each get 7 delegates while Gingrich and Perry get 2 apiece for a total of 25 pledged delegates plus there are 3 more unpledged.

Romney currently has 18 delegates (7 from Iowa, 11 unpledged).
Santorum currently has 11 delegates (7 from Iowa, 4 unpledged).

No delegates were selected last night. CNN and other media outlets are projecting the delegate distribution based off last nights results but the fact is no delegates will be selected until June and even then they will be unpledged. All that happened last night was a non binding straw poll of caucus goers and that delegates selected the people who will select the people who will pick the delegates.

That may be true, but last night was more than a meaningless-save-for-momentum straw poll.  CNN knows that the Iowa Caucuses didn't actually award delegates, but they are projecting what the most likely delegate count will be when the convention meets this summer.  The convention voters could very well change their minds, but why would they give the finger to their own state party's voters and silence their voices?  I'm still counting based on the total delegates including Iowa, which is why I distinguished in parentheses how many delegates were from Iowa, and which were already committed before the Caucuses.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: © tweed on January 04, 2012, 03:36:42 PM
are there any issues with allocating delegates by congressional districts in primaries in states where the districts have yet to be drawn/finalized?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Bacon King on January 04, 2012, 05:02:26 PM
are there any issues with allocating delegates by congressional districts in primaries in states where the districts have yet to be drawn/finalized?

I assume the state GOP would make accommodations before the vote. Probably using old CD's (with a different than standard delegate formula if the state won/lost districts after the census), or maybe just picking a specific plan even if it isn't completely adopted yet (e.g., the Texas GOP would probably just pick the legislature's plan over the court's plan, if things somehow still weren't finalized by their primary).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on January 04, 2012, 05:11:03 PM
Where are Romney, Santorum, and Perry's 'unpledged' delegates in your count coming from, Bushie?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 04, 2012, 06:20:45 PM
Where are Romney, Santorum, and Perry's 'unpledged' delegates in your count coming from, Bushie?

I assume from the Republicans' version of 'superdelegates'---the 3 RNC members from each non-penalized state, who attend the convention as unpledged delegates by virtue of their position.

Some of them have apparently already endorsed candidates, and are thus counted by CNN in their delegate totals.

In keeping with my practices last time around, I will not include such RNC members in candidates' delegate totals until after the state has voted.  CNN seems to believe one of the RNC members from Iowa has already endorsed Santorum---once I verify this, I will include it in my totals.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on January 04, 2012, 06:47:24 PM
CNN seems to believe one of the RNC members from Iowa has already endorsed Santorum---once I verify this, I will include it in my totals.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58874.html


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 04, 2012, 06:56:11 PM
With Perry apparently still in the race, I've given him his own column of delegates once again on the front page.  I've also decided to give him the delegate I had originally, in foolishness, awarded to Bachmann.  This is not in line with my original prescription for assigning delegates, which would have given the extra delegate to the overall winner---but since Romney won by only 8 votes, it's not a fair reflection of reality to give him an extra delegate than Santorum on that basis alone.  Perry was the closest to getting an additional delegate before rounding, and as such I'm giving him that extra delegate.

If I can find any information whatsoever about the Iowa Republican Convention in June (even the total number of delegates would allow me to say something), I may refine my prediction further, but this is as good of an estimate as any for now.  Giving the delegate to Perry has the added benefit of bringing my count in line with CNN's, for now.

Santorum receives an additional delegate in Iowa beyond what he won last night due to the endorsement (http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/07/13/iowa-anti-abortion-leader-endorses-rick-santorum/) (made last summer, as a matter of fact), of Iowa National Committeewoman Kim Lehman.  (EDIT: thanks also to Lief for a separate link, above)

Iowa's other two RNC Members, Matt Strawn (Chairman), and Steve Scheffler (who heads the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition), did not endorse a candidate prior to the caucuses, and have not done so since.

Note that New Hampshire's RNC Members do not have voting privileges at the convention due to RNC penalties for going too early, unless the penalties are later removed by the RNC.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on January 05, 2012, 05:52:36 PM
AP are now saying that it's Romney 13, Santorum 12.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: California8429 on January 05, 2012, 06:32:43 PM
AP are now saying that it's Romney 13, Santorum 12.

CNN has that too but I have no idea where they are getting from.

Greenpapers have it very differently set up.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on January 05, 2012, 06:43:29 PM
AP are now saying that it's Romney 13, Santorum 12.

CNN has that too but I have no idea where they are getting from.

Greenpapers have it very differently set up.

Actually, CNN has Romney at 18, Santorum at 8, Paul at 7, Perry 4, and Gingrich 2 including the tentative Iowa delegates.

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries.html


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: California8429 on January 05, 2012, 09:02:25 PM
AP are now saying that it's Romney 13, Santorum 12.

CNN has that too but I have no idea where they are getting from.

Greenpapers have it very differently set up.

I saw a different page where they gave all the delegates to only Romney and Santorum. Either way, where are these people getting their numbers from? The delegates haven't been chosen.
Actually, CNN has Romney at 18, Santorum at 8, Paul at 7, Perry 4, and Gingrich 2 including the tentative Iowa delegates.

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries.html


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on January 05, 2012, 09:43:31 PM
We won't get that many delegates added to the total from New Hampshire as it only has 12 delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 06, 2012, 02:16:08 AM
Different delegate counts you may see elsewhere:

CNN is including unpledged delegates (the RNC members) from states other than Iowa.  While these are delegates the candidates can presumably count on (unless they change their minds), I prefer not to include these in the totals until their states vote, for a variety of reasons.

MSNBC has used a different method to allocate Iowa's delegates, giving Romney 11, Santorum 11, Paul 3, and the others nothing.  Presumably, this is based on some sort of modeling of the results of the later county and state conventions.  While this result is probably closer to reality than CNN's (and mine), I have no idea how they did their modeling---and I don't see how Paul would do so terribly without tactical voting against Paul (which, while probable, shouldn't be counted on at this point).

The Associated Press did a similar sort of modelling, and somehow came up with 13 for Romney, 12 for Santorum, and 0 for Paul.  They've provided some details of the modeling, which I'll get into in another post.  Suffice it to say, unless I am greatly misunderstanding the process that occurs in Iowa, they've got it very wrong.

The Green Papers, knowing that the multiple conventions between now and the selection of the delegates will make it impossible to predict the final delegate numbers accurately, simply threw up their hands and allocated all 25 delegates based on the statewide vote.  While I appreciate their agnosticism in some sense, we know that certain delegates (12 out of the 25) will be chosen on a CD basis, and there is no way Gingrich or Perry will win any of those.  Those who finish below 3rd will be at least somewhat winnowed out, and the Green Papers' numbers don't reflect that.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 06, 2012, 03:29:25 AM
Delegate Selection in Iowa

IA GOP Constitution / The Green Papers

The source to go to, of course, is the GOP itself---The Constitution of the Republican Party of Iowa (http://iowagop.org/constitution.php).  This agrees entirely with the Green Papers (http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/IA-R) description, which I outlined earlier (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3141942#msg3141942).  The Green Papers has the advantage of concision and actually including dates, while the Constitution has some more details if they are deemed necessary.

The IA GOP Constitution is unfortunately lacking in saying how many delegates each precinct/county is awarded to the next layer of convention (saying only the counties will be "advised" as to how many delegates they will elect, and I do not know how they have been "advised").  There are reasons to believe it may be proportional to population, and there are reasons to believe it may be proportional to the vote for Terry Branstad in 2010.

The Associated Press

The AP gives an entirely different description of the process, given e.g. here (http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/ap/news/nation/elections/presidential/20120104_ap_romneyedgessantoruminraceforiowadelegates.html?c=r).

Quote
...An Associated Press analysis showed Romney would win 13 and Santorum would win 12, if there were no changes in their support as the campaign wears on.

Twenty-five delegates were at stake in the caucuses. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas came in third in the voting but was shut out of delegates because he didn't win any of Iowa's four congressional districts.

Romney and Santorum each won two congressional districts, and Romney was the statewide winner by a mere eight votes, according to final results announced early Wednesday by the Iowa GOP.

That's an interesting analysis.  Why do they place such a premium on winning CD's?

Quote
On Tuesday, caucus-goers elected delegates to county conventions, who in turn will elect delegates to congressional district conventions and the state party convention in June. These are the conventions where delegates to the GOP national convention in Tampa, Fla., are selected.

Each of the four congressional districts will elect three delegates to the national convention. They will also appoint two members to a slate committee, which will choose 13 additional delegates. The slate is voted on at the party's state convention in June.

The system puts a premium on getting the most votes in individual congressional districts. If a candidate's supporters can control a congressional district convention, they can choose national delegates and slate committee members who support their candidate.

This "slate committee" / "nominating committee" is interesting, but I can't quite find an official source for it (though it of course makes sense that a mechanism like this would exist).  There is some more anecdotal evidence---see some information as to how to become an RNC delegate in Iowa (http://www.p2012.org/chrniowa/iowagopdelegatesel.html) and some comments from the same process in 2008 (http://theconservativereader.com/2008/07/20/reforming-the-process-in-iowa-for-republicans/).

The fact that there are only 2 members per CD, if true, is crucial.  If you come in third in a district, it's far less likely you get a member on the nominating committee.  However, this is something that is going to come down entirely to tactical voting with the vote split as much as it is.  And don't assume automatically that tactical voting means that Paul loses---if the race really is down to the wire between Romney and Santorum (or Romney and some other anti-Romney), it's at least half plausible to imagine a Paul supporter and a Santorum supporter winning seats on the nominating committee in an effort to stop Romney from winning on the first ballot, say.

Regardless, the CD delegates, and there are 3 of them per CD, are chosen by the Congressional District Caucuses in toto, so there's more of a possibility Paul picks up the third here.

What I think the AP did:

Romney and Santorum each won a CD, so they get all 3 delegates and both Nominating Committee members in their respective districts.  The Nominating Committee (split evenly, and knowing it will have to get its slate approved by the convention as a whole), splits the 13 At-Large Delegates 7-6 for Romney (Romney by the strength of his 8-vote win, apparently).

This is very wrong, because although Romney and Santorum did win 2 CD's a piece, they didn't win majorities in them, and can't force through a slate on their own.  In a 3+ way race like this one, there's going to be some compromising or tactical voting to pick the CD Delegates and Nominating Committee members.

A more sensible method:

The apportionment of the 3 delegates per CD happens as before:  1 each for Romney, Santorum, and Paul.  Of course, if there is tactical voting against Paul for the Nominating Committee, there's likely to be tactical voting here as well, though of course who gets that third slot?  I stick with Paul here to be as agnostic as possible.

The Nominating Committee members go to supporters of the top 2 in each CD (which are I assume Romney and Santorum in all cases?  I'll check tomorrow).  The nominating committee (split evenly) chooses 6 Romney and 6 Romney delegates.  The 13th At-Large delegate is a mystery, and probably goes to some technically unpledged compromise candidate.

Final result:
Santorum 10
Romney 10
Paul 4
Unpledged 1

Again, this isn't free of assumptions about tactical voting / likely coalitions, but what isn't?

I may switch to this delegate assignment for the front page at some point, though I'll have to think about it.

If Paul did as well as he claims at electing his supporters as delegates to the county conventions, of course, this is all out the window.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on January 06, 2012, 11:28:54 AM
Today is the filing deadline in Illinois and it looks like Santorum and Gingrich will not have full slates of delegates.

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/politics-and-government/2012-01-05/santorum-backers-still-plan-file-slate-gingrich-camp-said-be

Looks like Romney and Paul are the only ones with a big league operation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 08, 2012, 01:59:08 PM
Paul did place second in CD 1, behind Romney.  I am going to choose to remain completely agnostic about tactical voting, which, while completely unrealistic, is the only unbiased way to move forward until I hear a clear intention of doing so.

As a result:
Romney, Santorum, and Paul each receive a delegate from all 4 Congressional Districts.

The Nominating Committee for the At-Large delegation is comprised of 4 Romney, 3 Santorum, and 1 Paul supporter(s), and nominates a slate of 6 Romney, 6 Santorum, and 1 Paul delegate(s), which is approved by delegates at the State Convention (Paul/Gingrich/Perry supporters are presumed to vote against any slate which so underrepresents them, while Santorum supporters would vote against a 7-5-1 split).

Total:
Romney: 10
Santorum: 10
Paul: 5

Again, this is probably pretty far removed from reality, mainly in that it probably overstates Paul's final delegate total.  I'd assume that the Romney and Santorum camps would rather find their own compromise delegates who would be truly unpledged going into the convention rather than picking Paul supporters as a compromise.  That said, maybe things get so bitter between Romney and Santorum (or the Anti-Romney of the season), that a bargain with Paul is deemed preferable.

Or maybe Paul really has managed to stack the County Conventions and has much more bargaining power than any of us think (hah!).

I'm updating the main page with this new delegate allocation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on January 10, 2012, 05:49:10 AM
I have a question. Let's say that Democrats want to create mischief and enough of them vote into a primary for Obama so that he is awarded a delegate. What happens then?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 10, 2012, 10:12:45 AM
I have a question. Let's say that Democrats want to create mischief and enough of them vote into a primary for Obama so that he is awarded a delegate. What happens then?

I know there are provisions in the RNC rules to remove any RNC members who refuse to support the Republican for President, but I don't know of any to prevent pledged delegates from being assigned to a Democrat.

That said, if the Democrats, who are far more formal with the entire process post-McGovern-Fraser, were able to prevent the seating of the LaRouchies in '96, I'm sure the Republicans would be able to do the same if somehow Obama won a delegate somewhere.  Nobody wants to see a repeat of Mao Zedong for VP.

Obama came pretty close to beating Fred Thompson in NH last time, but nowhere near the threshold for winning a delegate.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on January 10, 2012, 09:41:08 PM
Current NH delegates are Romney 5, Paul 3, Hunstman 2 with 2 still on the table.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 10, 2012, 11:02:04 PM
As it currently stands (10:53 PM EST)

Romney has 38.3%, Paul has 23.2%, Huntsman has 17%.  All other candidates are below 10%.

This would yield a delegate allocation of 7 for Romney, 3 for Paul, and 2 for Huntsman.   How stable is this to changes?

Paul would need to break 29.2% to receive an additional delegate, or drop below 20.8% to lose a delegate.

Huntsman would need to break 20.8% to receive an additional delegate, or drop below 12.5% to lose a delegate.

The most likely changes are with Gingrich and Santorum, who, at 9.7% and 9.6% respectively, are just shy of the 10% cutoff to receive a single delegate.

All changes about would come at the expense of Romney, who gets as many delegates as he does by virtue of being a winner (his vote share would only entitle him to 5 out of the 12).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 10, 2012, 11:27:44 PM
South Carolina: January 21

Overview
25 Delegates (1.09% of total)
Primary
11 At-Large, WTA
14 CD, WTA

In each Congressional District, 2 delegates are assigned to the winner.  Statewide, 11 delegates are assigned to the winner.  This is completely winner-take-all in each jurisdiction.

South Carolina violated RNC rules by holding its primary before the first Tuesday in February, and thus lost half of its delegates (including the RNC member seats).  It is possible these may may be restored later by the RNC, in which case the South Carolina Primary would be assigning 47 delegates (21 by CD and 26 At-Large).

RNC Members

Note:  Due to RNC sanctions, no RNC members from South Carolina have voting privileges at the convention unless the sanctions are removed.

Chad Connelly
Glen McCall
Cindy Costa (was in the Romney camp in '08, does not appear to have offically endorsed this time)

Pledged Delegate Allocation (as of January 21st)

Gingrich - 23
Romney - 2

If the sanctions on South Carolina were removed, the total would be Gingrich - 44, Romney - 3.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: minionofmidas on January 11, 2012, 08:41:24 AM
New Hampshire: January 10

Overview
12 Delegates (0.53% of total)
Primary
12 At-Large, P10%

Delegates are assigned proportionally to the statewide vote, with a 10% cutoff.  Rounding is done to the nearest whole number.  If any delegates remain, assign them to the winner.
Proportional to the statewide total vote, despite a non-natural threshold? Whoever came up with that sick silly excuse for a pr allocation? (The net result is Romney nicks one delegate; whether from Huntsman or Paul depends on whether you like Largest Remainder - or Sainte Lague - or D'Hondt). Basically they're claiming anyone who voted for someone below 10% voted for Romney.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 11, 2012, 01:19:09 PM
New Hampshire: January 10

Overview
12 Delegates (0.53% of total)
Primary
12 At-Large, P10%

Delegates are assigned proportionally to the statewide vote, with a 10% cutoff.  Rounding is done to the nearest whole number.  If any delegates remain, assign them to the winner.
Proportional to the statewide total vote, despite a non-natural threshold? Whoever came up with that sick silly excuse for a pr allocation? (The net result is Romney nicks one delegate; whether from Huntsman or Paul depends on whether you like Largest Remainder - or Sainte Lague - or D'Hondt). Basically they're claiming anyone who voted for someone below 10% voted for Romney.

It's designed to be "proportional," but with a nice bonus to the winner.  Not representative at all, but helps speed up the process.  Similar systems are in place in most Republican states that don't just do WTA by jurisdiction.

The Democrats, with McGovern-Fraser and all that, allocate it proportionally based on the "qualified" vote (i.e. throwing out all votes for anyone below 15%), and then use largest remainder.  (Such a method, if used on the same 12-delegate slate, would, as you said, give Huntsman an extra delegate at the expense of Romney).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 11, 2012, 01:43:00 PM
Upcoming Primary rules (now to March 6):

SC: WTA by jurisdiction
FL: WTA
NV: Prop-4%
CO/MN/ME:  Iowa
AZ: WTA
MI: WTA by CD, Prop-15% at Large
WA: Iowa
AK: Prop
ID: Prop (top 2 only)
ND: Iowa
TN:  Prop-20% by jurisdiction (top 2 by CD), 14 chosen by Executive Committee
VA:  WTA by CD, WTA at-Large if majority, Prop-15% otherwise
VT:  WTA by CD, WTA at-Large if majority, Prop-15% otherwise
GA:  Prop-20% by jurisdiction (by CD, top 2, WTA if majority)
MA:  Prop-15%
OH:  WTA by CD, WTA at-Large if majority, Prop-20% otherwise
OK:  WTA by jurisdiction if majority, Prop-15% otherwise (top 2 by CD)

"Iowa" denotes an Iowa-style caucus, where most of the actual decision-making happens at State Conventions later.  What exactly is meant by "Proportional" varies a lot by state to state---some use a New Hampshire-esque method, others use a method more like the Democrats', while some have their own homebrewed variety.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Tender Branson on January 11, 2012, 02:34:58 PM
Question:

What happens to pledged or unpledged delegates for a candidate who drops out later ?

Does the drop-out candidate need to "free" these delegates or will they vote for the candidate who dropped out anyway or can they just choose at the convention for which candidate they vote for ?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 11, 2012, 06:45:24 PM
Question:

What happens to pledged or unpledged delegates for a candidate who drops out later ?

Does the drop-out candidate need to "free" these delegates or will they vote for the candidate who dropped out anyway or can they just choose at the convention for which candidate they vote for ?

The 'pledging' of delegates is completely left up to the states (whether state law or state Republican Party rules) by RNC rules, so be aware that policies may vary wildly from state to state.  Also unclear is how any such rules would (or could) be enforced at the RNC.

Often, they don't provide explicit rules for candidates dropping out of the race.  This is complicated by the fact that so few people actually 'drop out' officially (they 'suspend their campaign,' for FEC purposes).

Due to the lack of any real enforcement mechanisms (or a desire to enforce them, especially for dropped-out candidates), I imagine once a candidate has dropped out and expressed verbally that he's releasing his delegates, the delegates will be able to vote for whomsoever they wish.

Note that officially, any candidate for nomination at the convention must be able to call upon a plurality of delegates from 5 states in order to have his name put forward.  So a candidate who dropped out early couldn't be put forth in the first place (though of course Romney '08 or Huckabee '08 could have in theory).  In practice, this doesn't seem to actually mean much---Ron Paul got 21 votes at the 2008 convention despite obviously not meeting this standard.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 11, 2012, 06:50:45 PM
Also of interest in Iowa-style caucus states where the process has multiple steps over several months is what happens to supporters of dropped-out candidates in the meantime.

This was of some importance on the Democratic side in Iowa last time, where Edwards you will recall placed 2nd in the caucuses.  Clinton supporters should have made a better effort to make sure Edwards supporters continued to support Edwards (or remained unpledged), voting tactically when feasible and necessary.  Instead, a lot of support flaked off at the county conventions in favor of Obama.  They realized their mistake by the next round of conventions, but a lot of damage had been done already.

This may be of some importance in Iowa this time around, depending on who drops out.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 16, 2012, 12:56:58 AM
With Huntsman dropping out, I've moved his two delegates to the uncommitted column.  Hopefully this isn't too premature (a la Perry's "reassessing my campaign").

Even if Huntsman should endorse someone, he can't force his delegates to do so, so unless I hear from the delegates themselves, they're staying uncommitted.  That said, I don't even know who they are at the moment.  (I found an alphabetical list (http://nashua.patch.com/articles/nh-presidential-delegates) of all the delegate candidates, which is apparently what was filed with the NH SoS (http://www.sos.nh.gov/Delegate%20list.pdf), but I have no idea which 2 of those are going to the convention).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 20, 2012, 05:43:08 PM
Iowa and Perry's Endorsement of Gingrich

With Perry dropping out and endorsing Gingrich, it's entertaining to think about what might happen if Perry's supporters at the County Conventions took this to heart and supported Gingrich.  Note that a combined Perry + Gingrich takes 3rd place in Iowa, ahead of Paul.

Before I go forward, note that this 'analysis' doesn't take into account that each precinct only got an integral number of delegates to the county conventions, and so candidates further down the line (like Perry and Gingrich) are the most likely to get short shrift.  Thus, the following gives far too much credit to Gingrich, but can be viewed as somewhat of an upper bound (assuming Santorum stays in the race).

We note that Gingrich (+ Perry) placed 3rd in CD 1 (ahead of Santorum and just barely behind Paul), 4th in CD 2, 2nd in CD 3 (behind Romney but ahead of Santorum), and 2nd in CD 4 (behind Santorum but ahead of Romney).

Applying the recipe I used earlier, this means the winners of delegates by CD are:
Romney 4
Santorum 3
Gingrich 3
Paul 2

while the nomination committee has a breakdown of
Romney - 3
Santorum - 2
Gingrich - 2
Paul - 1

The committee nominates a slate of 5 Romney, 5 Santorum, and 3 Gingrich delegates, which is approved by the convention at large over the objections of the Paul delegates.

Total Delegates:
Romney - 9
Santorum - 8
Gingrich - 6
Paul - 2

Again, this is for entertainment purposes only, and I'm not changing the main page results for Iowa at the moment.  Perry's supporters at the caucuses are not guaranteed to all jump on the Newt Bandwagon, repeated rounding errors tend to disfavor Newt & Perry, and above all it's very unlikely that both Gingrich and Santorum will both be in the race in June.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on January 21, 2012, 01:22:13 AM
Here's an intriguing bit that might just matter. Florida's rules call for it to be statewide WTA only if they get sanctioned, so they'd revert to the statewide + CD rule if they are not.  If the winner gets 14 or fewer of the 27 CD's and the second place finisher gets the other 13 or more, then a reversion to being unsanctioned results in a net improvement in the delegate totals for the second place finisher.  Now unless the statewide winner has his vote concentrated in only a few CDs this likely won't matter much, but if every delegate counts, it could.

If Santorum drops out after a Newt win tonight, it looks like Florida will be a close battle.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: TheGlobalizer on January 21, 2012, 12:51:09 PM
Pretty sure FL has already been sanctioned for the early primary.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on January 21, 2012, 01:04:53 PM
Pretty sure FL has already been sanctioned for the early primary.

The Green Papers show they have 50 delegates remaining out of the original 99 for a penalty of 50%.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on January 21, 2012, 01:20:37 PM
But the RNC could presumably un-sanction them, as was done by the DNC with Florida and Michigan in 2008.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on January 21, 2012, 06:16:09 PM
But the RNC could presumably un-sanction them, as was done by the DNC with Florida and Michigan in 2008.

Exactly, and my point was that because of the difference in how the delegates are awarded in the two cases, the second place finisher could be the one to want Florida desanctioned.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: ○∙◄☻Ątπ[╪AV┼cVę└ on January 21, 2012, 06:20:06 PM
Here's an intriguing bit that might just matter. Florida's rules call for it to be statewide WTA only if they get sanctioned, so they'd revert to the statewide + CD rule if they are not.  If the winner gets 14 or fewer of the 27 CD's and the second place finisher gets the other 13 or more, then a reversion to being unsanctioned results in a net improvement in the delegate totals for the second place finisher.  Now unless the statewide winner has his vote concentrated in only a few CDs this likely won't matter much, but if every delegate counts, it could.

If Santorum drops out after a Newt win tonight, it looks like Florida will be a close battle.

Aren't they supposed to be proportional because they're an early state?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on January 21, 2012, 07:12:34 PM
Here's an intriguing bit that might just matter. Florida's rules call for it to be statewide WTA only if they get sanctioned, so they'd revert to the statewide + CD rule if they are not.  If the winner gets 14 or fewer of the 27 CD's and the second place finisher gets the other 13 or more, then a reversion to being unsanctioned results in a net improvement in the delegate totals for the second place finisher.  Now unless the statewide winner has his vote concentrated in only a few CDs this likely won't matter much, but if every delegate counts, it could.

If Santorum drops out after a Newt win tonight, it looks like Florida will be a close battle.

Aren't they supposed to be proportional because they're an early state?
I think the case is that if they had gone when they were supposed to, they would be sanctioned if they didn't apportion some of the delegates by CD, but since they are already being sanctioned for going early, they don't face a second sanction for assigning them by statewide WTA.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 21, 2012, 07:13:31 PM
There has been some movement to penalize them again, but I don't think anything has come of it.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 21, 2012, 07:30:39 PM
Florida: January 31

Overview
50 Delegates (2.18% of total)
Primary
Winner-Take-All

All 50 delegates in Florida are assigned to the statewide winner.

Florida violated RNC rules by holding its primary before the first Tuesday in February, and thus lost half of its delegates.  It is possible these may may be restored later by the RNC, in which case the Florida Primary would be assigning 99 delegates (2 per CD, for a total of 54, and 45 At-Large.  Both would be Winner-Take-All by jurisdiction).  

Since Florida is assigning its delegates as Winner-Take-All, it is also violating RNC rules forbidding such contests before April.  The RNC may choose to again penalize Florida, but this seems very unlikely.

RNC Members

In the event sanctions are lifted on Florida, its RNC members are bound to the winner of the primary, and are included in the 45 At-Large delegates noted above.

Results (as of 2/1)

Romney won the state and all 50 delegates.

In the event sanctions are removed, it appears Gingrich won no more than 5 CD's in the state (as an absolute maximum), which would correspond to a breakdown of 89 Romney - 10 Gingrich, as a best case scenario for Gingrich.  Note that this is a far worse relative result than the penalized case, so it will be Romney pushing for a removal of sanctions at the convention (while Gingrich would be pushing for further sanctions).

The exact breakdown in the absence of sanctions is further complicated by the fact that redistricting has not been finalized in Florida, so tabulating the vote according to whatever district lines are finalized may be very difficult, if not impossible if precincts are split.  It is telling that the 50 delegates that Florida gets with sanctions will be selected two per current (2000 census) CD.  If sanctions are removed, my bet is that the remaining 49 delegates will be chosen at-large.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 21, 2012, 07:36:28 PM
As Gingrich has been projected to win South Carolina, I've assigned him the 11 At-Large delegates from the state.  The 14 CD delegates are to come later pending results.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on January 21, 2012, 10:15:46 PM
Here's an intriguing bit that might just matter. Florida's rules call for it to be statewide WTA only if they get sanctioned, so they'd revert to the statewide + CD rule if they are not.  If the winner gets 14 or fewer of the 27 CD's and the second place finisher gets the other 13 or more, then a reversion to being unsanctioned results in a net improvement in the delegate totals for the second place finisher.  Now unless the statewide winner has his vote concentrated in only a few CDs this likely won't matter much, but if every delegate counts, it could.

If Santorum drops out after a Newt win tonight, it looks like Florida will be a close battle.

Aren't they supposed to be proportional because they're an early state?
I think the case is that if they had gone when they were supposed to, they would be sanctioned if they didn't apportion some of the delegates by CD, but since they are already being sanctioned for going early, they don't face a second sanction for assigning them by statewide WTA.

Yes, the RNC has no provision for sanctioning the states more than 50%.  So because they're already being sanctioned for going too early, they can't be sanctioned anymore for being WTA.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 21, 2012, 10:31:58 PM
With Beaufort County finally coming in, I'm feeling confident enough to call CD 1 for Romney, with the other 6 CD's, of course, for Gingrich.

Romney narrowly avoids getting shut out in SC, but Gingrich still makes off like a bandit, with 23 delegates to Romney's 2.  In fact, in the span of the last few hours, Gingrich has gone from having zero delegates to having the lead.

And to think I thought this thread would be coming to an early conclusion in a couple of weeks.  Looks like we're in for the long haul, folks.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on January 21, 2012, 10:32:49 PM
Beaufort County is actually in CD-2 now, isn't it? I don't know that anybody's calling CD-1 at the moment.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on January 21, 2012, 11:20:24 PM
With Beaufort County finally coming in, I'm feeling confident enough to call CD 1 for Romney, with the other 6 CD's, of course, for Gingrich.

Romney narrowly avoids getting shut out in SC, but Gingrich still makes off like a bandit, with 23 delegates to Romney's 2.  In fact, in the span of the last few hours, Gingrich has gone from having zero delegates to having the lead.

And to think I thought this thread would be coming to an early conclusion in a couple of weeks.  Looks like we're in for the long haul, folks.



Premature call  IMO. By my math CD 01 is within a few hundred votes one way or another. Probably a slight lean to Romney but definitely  to close to call.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on January 22, 2012, 12:07:42 AM
Beaufort County is actually in CD-2 now, isn't it? I don't know that anybody's calling CD-1 at the moment.

No, Beaufort was in the 2nd.  It's now split between the 1st and 6th.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: World politics is up Schmitt creek on January 22, 2012, 07:11:48 PM
Beaufort County is actually in CD-2 now, isn't it? I don't know that anybody's calling CD-1 at the moment.

No, Beaufort was in the 2nd.  It's now split between the 1st and 6th.

Ah. Thank you.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 23, 2012, 01:37:04 PM
Early February Caucuses

Note that, since Nevada is allowed to go early by RNC rules, and none of the other contests actually award delegates, none of the states below suffer delegate penalties.

Missouri holds a Primary on February 7.  As it assigns no delegates (the delegate-selection process does not begin until the March 17 caucuses), it is not discussed below.

Nevada: February 4

Overview
28 Delegates (1.22% of total)
Caucus
At-Large Proportional (3.57% cutoff)

Nevada is holding a caucus---however, unlike in previous years, the final slate of delegates elected by the State Convention in May must reflect the results of the Presidential Preference Straw Poll taken at the caucus.  As this is a relatively new development, the exact details of how it must be proportional (i.e. rounding) have yet to be decided (and may be fought over at the convention)---however, it does appear that the cutoff to receive any delegates is 1/28th of the total vote, or 3.57%.  

RNC Members
The 3 RNC Member delegates are bound by this process as well, and are not free to vote their conscience, at least on the first ballot.

Preliminary Results (as of 2/5)
Romney - 14
Gingrich - 6
Paul - 5
Santorum - 3

The Nevada GOP says that delegate allocations will be rounded to the nearest whole number; as, in this case, this results in a total of 28 delegates, there are no rounding ambiguities here.

It would appear that Paulistas have hijacked the Clark County convention, and will likely control the State Convention (May 5-6).  Although they can handpick the delegation, they will still be bound as above on the first ballot.  They may attempt to change the rules, but the RNC does not generally recognize rules changes made after October 1, 2011.

Colorado:  February 7, 2012

Overview
36 Delegates (1.57% of total)
Caucus / Convention
12 At-Large
22 by CD
3 RNC Members

Colorado has a typical Caucus/Convention setup, in the same vein as Iowa.  Precinct caucuses elect delegates to County Assemblies, as well as hold a Presidential Preference Straw Poll.  It is the former that actually matter; they, in turn, elect delegates to the District Conventions and the State Convention.  The District Conventions (March 29 - April 13) choose the 21 CD delegates, while the State Convention (April 14) chooses the 12 At-Large Delegates.

RNC Members
Ryan Call
Mark Hillman
Lilly Nunez

Preliminary Results (as of 2/9)
Santorum - 17
Romney - 12
Gingrich - 2
Paul - 2

This does not account for the usual host of Iowa-style caucus caveats.  Additionally, the Colorado GOP has not released results by precinct, so the CD allocations are sheer guesswork, especially in the counties surrounding Denver.

Minnesota:  February 7, 2012

Overview
40 Delegates (1.75% of total)
Caucus / Convention
13 At-Large
24 by CD
3 RNC Members

Minnesota has a typical Caucus/Convention setup, in the same vein as Iowa.  Precinct Caucuses elect delegates to BPOU Conventions, as well as hold a Presidential Preference Straw Poll.  It is the former that actually matter; these BPOU (Basic Political Organization Unit---a County, State House District, or State Senate District) Conventions (to be held by March 31) in turn elect delegates to the District Conventions and the State Convention.   The District Conventions (March 31 - April 21) choose the 24 CD delegates, while the State Convention (May 4 - 5) chooses the 13 At-Large delegates.

RNC Members
Tony Sutton
Jeff Johnson - Gingrich (https://twitter.com/#!/Jeff_Johnson_MN/status/165548729485635584)
Pat Anderson

Preliminary Results (as of 3/31)
Santorum - 28
Paul - 5
Romney - 4

Discussion can be found here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3190437#msg3190437) and in preceding posts.  Basically, Santorum won majorities in enough precincts so that by the time of the state convention he has a majority statewide and in 4 of the 8 congressional districts.  In the 4 other districts, Romney, Paul, and Santorum all did well enough to pick up a delegate apiece.  This does not account for other rounding errors, possible domination of BPOU conventions by a single candidate, the exact distribution of BPOU delegates per precinct, or any Paul 'stealth' support.  It does reflect the new CD boundaries, issued on 2/21.

CD 7 has held its convention, electing the first delegates to Tampa from MN (apart from RNC members).  2 Santorum delegates and 1 Paul delegate were elected; I had projected Santorum to win all three.

Maine:  January 28-February 11, 2012

Overview
24 Delegates (1.05% of total)
Caucus / Convention
15 At-Large
6 by CD
3 RNC Members

Maine has a traditional Caucus/Convention setup, though with one fewer tier than most other states.  Municipal Caucuses, held throughout the week, elect delegates to the State Convention directly.  Each municipality is entitled to a number of delegates in proportion to its vote for Paul LePage in 2010.  A Presidential Preference Straw Poll is also held, with the results announced on February 11, but this is non-binding.  

Maine is announcing the results of the straw poll on February 11th---however, not all towns in Maine will have caucused by that point.  This is especially true of many locations in Hancock County, as well as in Rome in Kennebec County.  There may be additional stragglers who have been late to organize.  The last announced caucus is in Castine on March 3rd; all caucuses must take place by March 20th.

The State Convention (May 5 - 6) elects the 15 At-Large delegates, while the delegates at the State Convention from each CD separately caucus and choose their 3 delegates each.

RNC Members
Charlie Webster
Rick Bennett - Romney
Jan Staples - Romney

Preliminary Results (as of 2/11)
Romney - 11
Paul - 7
Santorum - 3

Discussion can be found here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=post;msg=3193674;topic=145763.120;sesc=8d7b199fced67bb70572c561b426c49a).  Romney did very well downstate, and I project him to get a majority at the CD1 caucus.  As usual, this does not account for rounding errors or "Stealth Paul" effects.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 24, 2012, 01:24:41 PM
Here's an intriguing bit that might just matter. Florida's rules call for it to be statewide WTA only if they get sanctioned, so they'd revert to the statewide + CD rule if they are not.  If the winner gets 14 or fewer of the 27 CD's and the second place finisher gets the other 13 or more, then a reversion to being unsanctioned results in a net improvement in the delegate totals for the second place finisher.  Now unless the statewide winner has his vote concentrated in only a few CDs this likely won't matter much, but if every delegate counts, it could.

If Santorum drops out after a Newt win tonight, it looks like Florida will be a close battle.

Aren't they supposed to be proportional because they're an early state?
I think the case is that if they had gone when they were supposed to, they would be sanctioned if they didn't apportion some of the delegates by CD, but since they are already being sanctioned for going early, they don't face a second sanction for assigning them by statewide WTA.

Tinfoil hat speculation now...what if the RNC decides in the upcoming week to strip FL of all delegates?  I don't think such a thing is logistically possible, but as a last-ditch alternative to a Gingrich knockout punch there?   Of course, it would probably play worse than an embarassing loss anyway.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on January 24, 2012, 03:55:22 PM
Here's an intriguing bit that might just matter. Florida's rules call for it to be statewide WTA only if they get sanctioned, so they'd revert to the statewide + CD rule if they are not.  If the winner gets 14 or fewer of the 27 CD's and the second place finisher gets the other 13 or more, then a reversion to being unsanctioned results in a net improvement in the delegate totals for the second place finisher.  Now unless the statewide winner has his vote concentrated in only a few CDs this likely won't matter much, but if every delegate counts, it could.

If Santorum drops out after a Newt win tonight, it looks like Florida will be a close battle.

Aren't they supposed to be proportional because they're an early state?
I think the case is that if they had gone when they were supposed to, they would be sanctioned if they didn't apportion some of the delegates by CD, but since they are already being sanctioned for going early, they don't face a second sanction for assigning them by statewide WTA.

Tinfoil hat speculation now...what if the RNC decides in the upcoming week to strip FL of all delegates?  I don't think such a thing is logistically possible, but as a last-ditch alternative to a Gingrich knockout punch there?   Of course, it would probably play worse than an embarassing loss anyway.

There's no mechanism for that to happen.  I don't think the relevant committee meets again until the national convention, so they can't revisit the penalties until then.  And, in any case, the RNC itself approved Florida's WTA delegate allocation rule, figuring that they were already being punished for going early anyway:

http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/politics/12005724241767/florida-primary-will-be-a-winner-take-all-contest/

Quote
The Republican National Committee has signed off on a plan to award 50 delegates to the GOP presidential contender who comes in first during the Jan. 31 primary.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on January 24, 2012, 04:45:44 PM
I am confused by the whole committed vs. uncommitted delegates thing. Is this like Democratic super-delagates. The WSJ has Romney ahead when factoring in uncommitted.

Could we end up in a situation like Obama v Hillary when at one point it looked like Super Delegate party insiders could give the win to Hillary


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 25, 2012, 10:50:02 AM
The 'Uncommitted' delegates are indeed very much like the Democratic superdelegates, except there are far fewer of them, fewer than 150 in total (there's only 3 per state and many states, like Nevada, do pledge them to the winner of their state's primary).  While they certainly might make a difference if this actually goes to the convention, they aren't nearly as large of a factor as they could have been on the Democratic side in 2008.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on January 25, 2012, 12:17:38 PM
A lot of these "super-delegates" have to pledge themselves to the winner of the state primary/caucus, though if there is indeed a brokered convention, they're presumably allowed to vote for whoever they want on the second ballot.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 25, 2012, 01:24:47 PM
A lot of these "super-delegates" have to pledge themselves to the winner of the state primary/caucus, though if there is indeed a brokered convention, they're presumably allowed to vote for whoever they want on the second ballot.

None of the "superdelegates" from NH, SC, FL, AZ, and MI will have voting privileges due to RNC sanctions.

The "superdelegates" from DE, GA, KS, NJ, and NV are bound by the vote in their state, effectively acting like regular pledged delegates. (Demconwatch says the same about VT & MO, but I think this is outdated information from 2008).

This means that there are 46 states and jurisdictions (remembering the insular territories & DC) with 3 "superdelegates" a piece, plus Huntsman's two delegates from NH, for a total of 140 "superdelegates," or 6.12% of the total number of delegates.

This is a sizeable chunk (comparable to Texas' 152 delegates), but it's unlikely that they'll break so overwhelmingly for one candidate or another to make a difference.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on January 25, 2012, 05:35:31 PM
well these GOP superdelegates are enough to give the current delegate lead to Romney
http://projects.wsj.com/campaign2012/delegates

Lets face it, the superdelegates will go overwhelmingly for Romney given a choice. If this thing is close, they could make the difference


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on January 26, 2012, 02:18:28 AM
Even though the RNC seemed to sign off on Florida's WTA rule, there could still be a legal challenge:

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/if-gop-fight-drags-on-so-could-argument-over-floridas-delegates/1212342

This would presumably apply to Arizona as well, which is in exactly the same situation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on January 26, 2012, 09:36:46 AM
well these GOP superdelegates are enough to give the current delegate lead to Romney
http://projects.wsj.com/campaign2012/delegates

Lets face it, the superdelegates will go overwhelmingly for Romney given a choice. If this thing is close, they could make the difference

In general, I will not be counting superdelegates until their states actually vote (sometimes they do something crazy and decide to respect the will of the people).  If I did include them, you are correct, Romney would have the lead right now, as he has 16 endorsements to 1 apiece for Santorum and Gingrich.  Of course, there are still 122 who haven't endorsed anyone.

Information about Maine's caucuses has been updated, many thanks to CARLHAYDEN for the clarifications.  Apparently, some towns caucus as soon as this Saturday, while some caucus as late as March 2nd!  The results of the straw poll will not wait for these stragglers, and will be announced regardless on February 11.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on February 01, 2012, 01:31:48 AM
According to CNN through last night's Florida contest, the delegate count stands at Mitt Romney 84, Newt Gingrich 27, Ron Paul 10, Rick Santorum 8.  If these numbers are correct, Mitt Romney is roughly 7.5% of the way to the required 1,144 delegates.  Can you confirm these numbers, Erc, or do you show something different?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 01, 2012, 04:01:31 AM
Mitt Romney wins all 50 of Florida's delegates with his win in the state.

As was pointed out earlier, if Florida's full delegations is seated, it won't be WTA statewide, but WTA by jurisdiction (by CD and statewide), so Gingrich would receive some delegates.  Note that the new 2012 Florida map doesn't appear to be done yet, which would immensely complicate the process.

At some point, I'll try to see what the exact counts would be without penalty, but it seems that Gingrich couldn't have possibly won more than 5 CD's (all in or near the Panhandle), which would result in a breakdown of 89 Romney - 10 Gingrich.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 01, 2012, 04:11:46 AM
According to CNN through last night's Florida contest, the delegate count stands at Mitt Romney 84, Newt Gingrich 27, Ron Paul 10, Rick Santorum 8.  If these numbers are correct, Mitt Romney is roughly 7.5% of the way to the required 1,144 delegates.  Can you confirm these numbers, Erc, or do you show something different?

My current count is Romney 69, Gingrich 23, Santorum 11, Paul 8.

Why the discrepancies?

1)  Superdelegates.  As stated before, I don't like to include these guys in my count before their state has voted, but it's perfectly legit to do so if you want.  CNN has 19 superdelegates for Romney and 2 for Gingrich which I do not currently have in my count.

2) Iowa.  Iowa doesn't actually select any delegates until June, after a long round of conventions.  My estimates and CNN's estimates differ, as explained earlier in the thread.  They have a 7 Romney - 7 Santorum - 7 Paul - 2 Gingrich - 2 Uncommitted (ex-Perry) split, whereas I think a 10 Romney - 10 Santorum - 5 Paul split is slightly closer to reality.

Taking into account both of these, you recover the CNN count (up to a single Romney delegate, I probably lost a superdelegate in CNN's count someplace)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 01, 2012, 04:38:51 AM
Finally decided to cave and am now including a count of all the other superdelegate endorsements (apart from Kim Lehman's, who is already there) on the front page, below the Totals.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 01, 2012, 02:56:04 PM
Arizona: February 28

Overview
29 Delegates (1.27% of total)
Primary
Winner-Take-All

All 29 delegates in Arizona are assigned to the statewide winner.

Arizona violated RNC rules by holding its primary before the first Tuesday in March, and thus lost half of its delegates.  It is possible these may may be restored later by the RNC, in which case the Arizona Primary would be assigning 58 delegates (all still At-Large WTA).  

Since Arizona is assigning its delegates as Winner-Take-All, it is also violating RNC rules forbidding such contests before April.  The RNC may choose to again penalize Arizona, but this seems very unlikely.

RNC Members

In the event sanctions are lifted on Arizona, its RNC members are bound to the winner of the primary, and are included in the 58 At-Large delegates noted above.

Preliminary Results (as of 2/28)

Romney won the state and all 29 delegates.  If sanctions were removed, he would get 55 delegates.

Michigan: February 28

Overview
30 Delegates (1.31% of total)
Primary
28 by CD (WTA)
2 At-Large

Michigan, by holding its primary before the first Tuesday in March, is violating RNC rules and has been penalized half its delegation.  Although Michigan has been through this song and dance before, they have (at long last) adopted plans to allocate delegates given these penalties.

The winner of each CD will receive 2 delegates.  There are 14 CD's in Michigan, for a total of 28 delegates by CD.

The remaining 2 delegates will be awarded based on the statewide vote.  It has been clarified (http://www.freep.com/article/20120301/NEWS15/120301038/Mitt-Romney-gets-Michigan-s-large-delegates) that these 2 delegates are assigned WTA.

RNC Penalties

In the event RNC penalties are removed, the original delegate allocation plans will presumably be followed.  For reference, they are:

42 of these 56 delegates will be chosen by Congressional District, WTA.  14 delegates will be chosen on a statewide basis, proportionally, with a 15% cutoff.  After rounding to the nearest whole delegate, any additional delegates needed will be given to the statewide winner; if there is a surplus of delegates, they will be removed from the candidate with the fewest votes.  In addition, 3 RNC members will be unpledged.

RNC Members

Due to RNC penalties, the 3 RNC members from Michigan will not have voting privileges at the convention.  If the sanctions are removed, they will act as unpledged delegates.

Bobby Schostak
Saul Anuzis - Romney
Holly June Hughes - Romney

Preliminary Results (as of 2/29)

Romney - 16
Santorum - 14

Romney won the state and wins the 2 WTA delegates.

Each candidate won 7 of the states 14 CDs, splitting the CD delegates 14-14.  Discussion here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3214902#msg3214902), breakdown from the AP (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2012/by_cd/MI_GOP_0228_VD.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) and the MI GOP (http://www.migopprimary.com/index.asp).

Should sanctions be removed, the delegate allocation would be:

Romney - 28
Santorum - 28


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 05, 2012, 08:27:05 AM
I had hoped that by this morning I'd be able to have something other than very preliminary results for Nevada....

As it currently stands, with 70.4% of precincts reporting:

Romney 13
Gingrich 6
Paul 5
Santorum 3

It's not clear how Nevada does the rounding...in accord with most other Republican processes, I'm choosing to round each to the nearest whole delegate for each and then giving the 28th delegate to the statewide winner, Romney.

Gingrich, currently at 22.6%, gains a delegate if he reaches 24.1% and loses a delegate if he drops to 20.3%.

Paul, currently at 18.6%, gains a delegate if he reaches 20.4%, and loses a delegate if he drops to 16.6%.

Santorum, currently at 11.1%, gains a delegate if he reaches 13.0% and loses a delegate if he drops to 9.2%.  He will also lose a delegate if there is a net gain of two delegates by other candidates, or if Romney reaches 50% without any other candidates losing delegates.

Romney, currently at 47.6%, gains a delegate if he reaches 50.0%.  If not, he can gain a delegate if the other candidates net lose one delegate.  He loses a delegate if there is a net gain of one delegate among the other candidates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 05, 2012, 10:05:27 PM
I can't count.  Romney wins 14 delegates out of Nevada, not 13.  (A 15th delegate would require him getting nigh on 54%, which he isn't going to manage at this point).

This means the count out of Nevada, barring major swings in the last 10% of the precincts, is
Romney - 14
Gingrich - 6
Paul - 5
Santorum - 3

Again, the rounding rules are not firmly established...but most reasonable rounding methods would come up with the same count.  Romney may have enough support at the convention to push through obscene rounding rules (all fractions rounded down, or something) which might net him another 0-2 delegates, but I doubt it'll come to that.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 07, 2012, 10:04:03 PM
With Santorum now projected to win in Missouri, I estimate he will receive 0 (out of a possible 0) delegates.  ;)

Delegate estimates from MN and CO will be forthcoming pending more results.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on February 07, 2012, 10:46:24 PM
Santorum is currently at 46% of the straw poll vote in MN. If he wins a majority of delegates to the state convention, could his delegates make it a winner-take-all state, by changing the delegate allocation rules by a majority vote?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 07, 2012, 11:16:06 PM
Santorum is currently at 46% of the straw poll vote in MN. If he wins a majority of delegates to the state convention, could his delegates make it a winner-take-all state, by changing the delegate allocation rules by a majority vote?

This isn't the Democratic Party, where proportionality is required even at conventions---or even Nevada, where the straw poll is binding on the delegate allocation.  If Santorum supporters do form a majority at the convention, they can elect a completely Santorum slate if they want to.

This is entirely plausible, especially since a lot of Gingrich/Romney support may be winnowed out by rounding errors at the precinct caucuses and the BPOU conventions.

If I can find any detailed data on how many delegates each precinct/BPOU elects, I may be able to find out how likely this is.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 07, 2012, 11:26:24 PM
Complicating the process in Minnesota is the fact that they have apparently not yet completed redistricting (and might not before the first BPOU conventions).  As Minnesota neither gained nor lost delegates with the census, they may just use the old boundaries.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: memphis on February 08, 2012, 12:11:41 AM
I'm not well versed in the nuts and bolts of how the delegates are selected for each state, but it's looking fairly likely that nobody is going to have enough delegates going into the convention. Which wouldn't be such a big deal except that all the modern convention is supposed to be is a giant televised, impeccably choreographed pep rally. With cameras rolling, is it really going to get down and dirty in Tampa this summer? Cause that would be hilarious.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 08, 2012, 12:18:39 AM
Complicating the process in Minnesota is the fact that they have apparently not yet completed redistricting (and might not before the first BPOU conventions).  As Minnesota neither gained nor lost delegates with the census, they may just use the old boundaries.

The Courts will release new redistricting maps two weeks from today. It will be a mess getting it organized but I do believe they will be using the new lines.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 08, 2012, 01:45:28 AM
Very, Very Preliminary Delegate Estimates:

Colorado: 
Santorum - 12
Romney - 11
Gingrich - 6
Paul - 4

Minnesota
Santorum - 18
Paul - 10
Romney - 8
Gingrich - 1

This is pure guesswork at the moment; I'll have a chance to do a more thorough analysis by CD tomorrow for something slightly closer to the truth.  For reasons discussed above, I am probably well underestimating Santorum's performance in Minnesota.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 08, 2012, 02:04:33 AM
Of note tonight:

Santorum appears to have passed Gingrich in delegates, at least after a first pass of tonight's results.  As a result, I've moved him back to the second column position he held before South Carolina.

Romney has probably lost his delegate majority (even including his declared supers), depending on the final fallout from CO/MN.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 08, 2012, 02:27:40 AM
I'm not well versed in the nuts and bolts of how the delegates are selected for each state, but it's looking fairly likely that nobody is going to have enough delegates going into the convention. Which wouldn't be such a big deal except that all the modern convention is supposed to be is a giant televised, impeccably choreographed pep rally. With cameras rolling, is it really going to get down and dirty in Tampa this summer? Cause that would be hilarious.

Even with the simply ridiculous nature of this race so far, I would be very surprised if this does end up going to the convention floor, for a variety of reasons.

You obviously need three (or more) candidates with a sizeable number of delegates in order to have a brokered convention, barring a knife-edge outcome.  I sincerely doubt that both Gingrich and Santorum will stay viable; even without dropping out, one or the other will likely fade into irrelevancy at some point in the coming weeks (at this juncture, presumably Gingrich).  If neither does, then you run the risk of Romney running away with a lot of delegates against a divided vote (remember, very few states really award delegates proportionately).  There's a slim possibility that Gingrich could maintain viability (and grab a bunch of delegates on Super Tuesday) as a purely regional candidate (playing well in the South while Santorum doesn't)...though this seems unlikely for a number of reasons.

Of course, there's also the Paulite fantasy where the Paul delegates hold the balance.  In primary states, Paul is likely to receive very few delegates (given his low ceiling, and given how few primary states actually award delegates proportionally).  He has a better chance in caucus states, and not only due to his vaunted 'caucus organization'---caucuses and their ensuing conventions are messy affairs, and if it really does come down to a long slog of a battle between Romney and Santorum (or Gingrich), Paul may pick up delegates in extremely divided conventions (rather than either side ceding any to the 'enemy').  However, unless Paul really does end up controlling any state conventions by entryism or by playing the caucus game really well, it's going to be a modest number of delegates that he wins overall.  And there's always the very likely possibility state conventions not controlled by Paul understandably decide to vote for a slate of delegates excluding Paul supporters.

And if it does come down to mainly a one-on-one slog in the later primaries, very few of the contests are truly proportional, and are likely to give far more delegates to the winner than to the loser.  This makes the sort of evenly-matched delegate-by-delegate Obama-Clinton fight extremely unrealistic.  Of course, it could in the end come out balanced close enough for a combination of Paul, Gingrich (or Santorum) remnants, and superdelegates to make a difference...and boy that would be interesting.

Or, this could be the equivalent of Huckabee's early-mid February successes (a vaguely similar reaction against the presumed nominee), and could fizzle out by the end of the month, with Romney running away with this thing.  Of course, this time around, Romney doesn't have that lovely Super Tuesday delegate lead McCain had, hadn't seen his biggest rival drop out, and didn't do nearly as well as McCain did in his losses.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 08, 2012, 06:31:09 PM
Very, Very Preliminary Delegate Estimates:

Colorado: 
Santorum - 12
Romney - 11
Gingrich - 6
Paul - 4

Minnesota
Santorum - 18
Paul - 10
Romney - 8
Gingrich - 1

This is pure guesswork at the moment; I'll have a chance to do a more thorough analysis by CD tomorrow for something slightly closer to the truth.  For reasons discussed above, I am probably well underestimating Santorum's performance in Minnesota.


If the race is still being actively contested I don't see how Romney gets more than 1 or 2 delegates from Minnesota, In fact I bet he gets shut out.  My very very rough guess would be Santorum 20, Paul 17



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on February 08, 2012, 06:32:04 PM
Could you do another count with Paul/Romney added up and Santorum/Newt added up, because I think it's clear that Paul would eventually support Romney and Newt would support Santorum.


Title: Erc, It's no dream my friend:
Post by: Rules for me, but not for thee on February 08, 2012, 06:46:47 PM
Example districts in Colorado:
()

This didn't happen everywhere, but Paul probably won Minnesota and is a lot stronger in Colorado than the straw poll shows.  Caucus states are great for Paul, primaries are black and white straight popular voting (MO didn't count - they have a caucus that actually matters in a month).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Beet on February 08, 2012, 08:18:28 PM
If the straw polls don't matter, why do candidates compete for them? They should just focus on getting their delegates elected at each step of the process, instead of courting voters. I believe that was how Barry Goldwater captured the 1964 Republican nomination.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mehmentum on February 08, 2012, 08:20:35 PM
If the straw polls don't matter, why do candidates compete for them? They should just focus on getting their delegates elected at each step of the process, instead of courting voters. I believe that was how Barry Goldwater captured the 1964 Republican nomination.
Didn't Obama focus on getting delegates elected as well?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: tpfkaw on February 08, 2012, 08:21:57 PM
If the straw polls don't matter, why do candidates compete for them? They should just focus on getting their delegates elected at each step of the process, instead of courting voters. I believe that was how Barry Goldwater captured the 1964 Republican nomination.

That was pre-reform, though.  He actually had amassed a majority of delegates before the first primary was even held, as it turns out (though they were all unpledged).


Title: Re: Erc, It's no dream my friend:
Post by: California8429 on February 08, 2012, 08:26:47 PM
Example districts in Colorado:
()

This didn't happen everywhere, but Paul probably won Minnesota and is a lot stronger in Colorado than the straw poll shows.  Caucus states are great for Paul, primaries are black and white straight popular voting (MO didn't count - they have a caucus that actually matters in a month).

Most precincts get 1-2 state delegates for anyone wondering about "100%". Romney got about half the vote but 100% of the delegates at my caucus.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on February 08, 2012, 09:54:32 PM
If the straw polls don't matter, why do candidates compete for them? They should just focus on getting their delegates elected at each step of the process, instead of courting voters. I believe that was how Barry Goldwater captured the 1964 Republican nomination.

Because delegates are completely meaningless except in the exceedingly unlikely situation that no candidate has a majority. It's all about perception; the candidate who is perceived to have the best chance of winning will win. Straw polls are part of said perception.


Title: Re: Erc, It's no dream my friend:
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 12:52:36 AM
Example districts in Colorado:
(Large image)

This didn't happen everywhere, but Paul probably won Minnesota and is a lot stronger in Colorado than the straw poll shows.  Caucus states are great for Paul, primaries are black and white straight popular voting (MO didn't count - they have a caucus that actually matters in a month).

Most precincts get 1-2 state delegates for anyone wondering about "100%". Romney got about half the vote but 100% of the delegates at my caucus.

While it's certainly probable that Paul got more delegates to the next level of conventions than his proportion in the straw poll indicates, you'll excuse me if I don't exactly trust the Paul camp's self-reported numbers.

If I can get reliable indications of what actually occurs at the next round of conventions (both in CO/MN and in IA), I will update my numbers accordingly.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 01:01:08 AM
Very, Very Preliminary Delegate Estimates:

Colorado: 
Santorum - 12
Romney - 11
Gingrich - 6
Paul - 4

Minnesota
Santorum - 18
Paul - 10
Romney - 8
Gingrich - 1

This is pure guesswork at the moment; I'll have a chance to do a more thorough analysis by CD tomorrow for something slightly closer to the truth.  For reasons discussed above, I am probably well underestimating Santorum's performance in Minnesota.


If the race is still being actively contested I don't see how Romney gets more than 1 or 2 delegates from Minnesota, In fact I bet he gets shut out.  My very very rough guess would be Santorum 20, Paul 17

After a second look at these numbers, these do indeed seem far too generous to the third (and fourth) place finishers in both cases.  Whether Romney will be completely shut out will, in the end, depend exactly on how the final slates of delegates are nominated at the convention.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on February 09, 2012, 01:07:55 AM
The conventions could turn out to be really fun. You could see weird things like Paul and Santorum delegates aligning to shut out Mitt Romney (or Newt + Rick in CO).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Beet on February 09, 2012, 01:34:58 AM
If the straw polls don't matter, why do candidates compete for them? They should just focus on getting their delegates elected at each step of the process, instead of courting voters. I believe that was how Barry Goldwater captured the 1964 Republican nomination.

Because delegates are completely meaningless except in the exceedingly unlikely situation that no candidate has a majority. It's all about perception; the candidate who is perceived to have the best chance of winning will win. Straw polls are part of said perception.

Except that's exactly how it's shaping up so far as I predicted it might just before Iowa (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=146361.0).

"Perception" is an amorphous thing; it can shatter in one day, as Mitt Romney found out. Not something to hang one's hopes on by any means.

I think there's somewhat of a myth out there that primaries are a form of democracy, when that's not necessarily true; especially for the GOP. It is really a battle for control of a private organization, the person who gets the most votes or is the most popular doesn't necessarily win.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 01:36:49 AM
The conventions could turn out to be really fun. You could see weird things like Paul and Santorum delegates aligning to shut out Mitt Romney (or Newt + Rick in CO).

Oh, they're going to be real fun.  All sorts of lovely tactical voting.

These projections try to stay as agnostic about tactical voting as possible, and assume that, in the lack of a majority for one candidate, delegates are assigned proportionally (or to the top 2/3 finishers in the case of small numbers being elected, as in Iowa or any CD).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 01:42:26 AM
More sensible Minnesota projection:

For the 13 At-Large delegates:
Santorum - 6
Paul - 4
Romney - 2
Gingrich - 1

In the 8 congressional districts, Santorum makes a clean sweep in CD's 7 and 8, gets 2 (to Paul's 1) in CD's 1 and 6, while Santorum, Paul, and Romney get 1 a piece in CD's 2,3,4, and 5.  

This yields a total of:

Santorum - 20
Paul - 10
Romney - 6
Gingrich - 1

These are very much subject to change!  Santorum is very close to getting a majority in CD 1 (and probably will), and is reasonably close in CD 6.  Furthermore, I'm doing these apportionments on the old CD lines, whereas the BPOU conventions are held after the final maps come down.  Not to mention tactical voting considerations, etc.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 02:12:32 AM
More sensible Colorado projection:

At-Large:
Santorum - 5
Romney - 4
Gingrich - 2
Paul - 1

Congressional Districts:
Santorum wins CD's 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 with 2 delegates to 1 for Romney.  Romney wins CD 6 by 2 delegates to 1 for Santorum, and Romney, Santorum, and Paul each get a delegate from CD 1.

Totals:
Santorum - 17
Romney - 12
Gingrich - 2
Paul - 2

Note that this was done by just eyeballing the congressional districts---effectively, I'm just guessing that Santorum won CD 7 (in fact, I would bet he didn't).  Plus, the other usual caveats.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on February 09, 2012, 02:19:25 AM
With the way conventions work in Minnesota, I wouldn't be surprised if Romney gets shut out at the CDs, his people will probably just focus all their resources on electing delegates to state since that's the big focused on thing. The CD delegate elections in my experience have always been a bit of an afterthought, though granted in 2010 it was really just a boring formality (Even in 2008 it was somewhat ignored despite the election of quite a few national delegates, but our straw poll was binding so the delegate numbers were already set in stone.) Paul probably won MN-5 actually.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 03:14:25 AM
Paul's Path Forward

Let's take the Paulites at their word and suppose that they are doing an extremely good job at electing delegates in caucuses---so much so that they actually get majorities at the state convention and elect a slate of Paul-supporting delegates to Tampa.  This is rather far-fetched, for a number of reasons (it's harder to pull this off in high-population precincts, it's unlikely to happen if you simply don't have that many supporters, and it's completely possible this entire narrative is BS), but let's run with it.

This is the sort of thing that only works in Iowa-style caucuses---the ones with multiple rounds of conventions, where the delegates to Tampa are picked months from now at later conventions.  In primaries, Paul doesn't generally have much of a chance (his 23% showing in NH is most likely his peak for the season)---and while he may have a slight turnout advantage in other sorts of caucuses, it's clear he's not going to walk away with those either.

So what's the best Paul can possibly hope for?  That is, what are the Iowa-style caucuses where Paul has a shot of abusing the system and walking away with a lot more delegates than one would expect?  [Ignoring territories]

In fact, there are only 7, and 4 will have occurred by the end of this week (IA/CO/MN/ME).  This only leaves Washington (March 3), Missouri (March 17), and Nebraska (early June) as states where Paul has a chance to abuse the system.

There are plenty of other caucus/convention states, mind you...but they're more like Nevada, in which the straw poll vote actually matters (NV/AK/ID/ND/KS/HI), or are completely smoke-filled rooms with no pretense of democracy and no chance of Paul infiltration (WY/MT).

Other than the 7 Iowa-style states, Paul may pick up a delegate here and there in states with true proportionality and no cutoff, but these are few and far between.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 09, 2012, 05:43:16 AM

Paul won 49% in the city of Minneapolis so he almost certainly won the 5th CD.

http://www.twincities.com/ci_19920382

FWIW in 2008 the Paulites managed to get 6 of the 12(?) delegate spots from the 4,th, 5th and 6th districts (I think it should be 6 of 9 but the article says 6 of 12).

http://www.minnpost.com/stories/2008/05/05/1603/beyond_mccain_ron_pauls_supporters_hope_to_reshape_the_gop



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 12:43:46 PM
If Paul got (nearly) a majority in CD 5, than means he must have done terribly in CD 3 (i.e. the rest of Hennepin county).  I'm going to start digging through the precinct results and see what I can turn up.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 01:40:30 PM
Minnesota Results by (Current) Congressional District:

CDGingrichPaulRomneySantorumWrite-InTotal
CD164216018852963146105
10.5%26.2%14.5%48.5%0.2%
CD 2894214615473402268015
11.2%26.8%19.3%42.4%0.3%
CD 379918041865291967393
10.8%24.4%25.2%39.5%0.1%
CD 434812167111307263608
9.6%33.7%19.7%36.2%0.7%
CD 535415257451246213891
9.1%39.2%19.1%32.0%0.5%
CD 6833236110433603117851
10.6%30.1%13.3%45.9%0.1%
CD 766612456523164275754
11.6%21.6%11.3%55.0%0.5%
CD 874013547833372126261
11.8%21.6%12.5%53.9%0.2%
Total52761325282312197614348878
10.8%27.1%16.8%45.0%0.3%

This does not change any of the analysis in the previous post; delegate counts remain the same.  Paul did indeed win CD 5, but Romney and Santorum have enough support to deprive him of making a clean sweep.

What this analysis does not account for:

1) The new CD borders.  Given the timing, it's unclear whether the BPOU conventions will use the new CD borders when electing delegates to the District Conventions, or how precise they're going to be with them.

2) Rounding errors.  Precincts only elect an integral number of delegates; if this number of delegates is small, this tends to disfavor small candidates.  If supporters of a particular candidate can manage a majority in a given precinct, they can likely elect a full slate of their supporters.  This would tend to favor Santorum (and perhaps Paul in certain places) at the expense of the other candidates.

3) The number of delegates each precinct / BPOU is entitled to is not determined by the turnout, but by the vote for Tom Emmer in the 2010 Gubernatorial Race.  As the two tend to be correlated, this isn't a huge effect.

4) Straw Poll results don't necessarily have anything to do with the delegates elected to the BPOU conventions (the Stealth Paul strategy).

Of these, 2) and 4) will probably have the largest effect.  I can't do anything about 4) without tracking down every delegate elected in the state of Minnesota (or taking the Paul campaign's word as gospel, which is inadvisable).  If I can find more information about how many delegates exactly each precinct caucus elected, I may be able to account for 2) in some fashion---but more likely there won't be any changes to the count until after the BPOU conventions, if even then.

Long story short...expect Santorum to do even better than these numbers in the end, Romney to do worse, and Paul to stay about the same (with an outside chance of doing much, much better if 4) is true).

The major question is, of course, whether Santorum can gain a majority at the statewide convention; this seems very likely, in fact.

A plausible final result (Santorum gains a majority statewide and in CD's 1 and 6):

Santorum - 29
Paul - 4
Romney - 4


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on February 09, 2012, 01:49:32 PM
It's times like these I wish the forum had a "like" button.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 02:03:40 PM
I sadly cannot do similar analysis for Colorado at the moment, as the Colorado GOP does not appear to provide precinct-level results, making the Denver environs (Adams/Arapahoe/Jefferson counties, specifically) complete guesswork.

For amusement value...the AP currently projects Santorum to win all 37 delegates out of Minnesota.  While this may end up being closer to the truth than my projection, at the very least one would expect Paul's win in CD 5 to screw up this projection.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 09, 2012, 02:45:07 PM
Redoing the analysis under the assumption that if a candidate has a majority of supporters in a given precinct caucus, they get to elect all the delegates in that precinct caucus.  (Basically, using the logic at the precinct level [but not the BPOU level] that I had used at the CD level to give Santorum CD's 7 and 8 ).

Santorum wins a majority statewide, and in CD's 1, 6, 7, and 8, receiving all delegates from those jurisdictions.

Santorum is just short of a majority in CD 2, and splits the delegates 2 - 1 with Paul.

In CD's 3 and 4, Santorum, Paul, and Romney each win a delegate.

In CD 5, Paul is still short of a majority, and wins 2 delegates to Santorum's 1.

Grand Total:
Santorum - 30
Paul - 5
Romney - 2

As usual, this is approximate, but it should be closer to the truth than my earlier projection.  I am updating the main page accordingly.

I could do the same thing taking the intermediate-level (BPOU) winnowing into account as well, but I think it's rather pointless until we get the new CD maps (and we figure out whether the MN GOP is using them).

I could do the same thing in Iowa at some point if I find good precinct-level results, but it likely won't make a major difference outside of Dutch Reformed country.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Landslide Lyndon on February 09, 2012, 03:43:21 PM
Great job Erc.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on February 09, 2012, 10:38:05 PM
Where are the Minnesota precinct results? I can only get results on the SoS site of what reported, not the actual results.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 10, 2012, 01:33:16 AM
Took me a while to find them.  Big old nasty set of files can be found here (http://caucusresults.sos.state.mn.us/media.asp).  You need to crosscheck a few of them to make any sense of the files.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on February 10, 2012, 02:55:11 AM
Bleh and we're usually pretty good at getting good and easy to use data out.

So Ron Paul won "only" 53.85% (14 votes lol) in my precinct. Of course Romney came in second with exactly half that, and Santorum had only 2 votes.

The Paul dominance of various college dorm precincts is pretty amusing. Here's something a little odd, Minneapolis 7-10, home to North Central University (Assembly of God), the most Republican precinct in Minneapolis (McCain actually broke a third of the vote) also gave a majority to Paul and second place to Romney, the latter being more surprising than the former. Santorum in fact received only one vote, to Romney's 7 and Paul's 11. In other words it didn't vote much different than most other Minneapolis precincts. People at NCU were really that uninterested?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 11, 2012, 05:38:37 PM
As noted elsewhere on this forum, AJ Spiker, not Bill Schickel, has replaced Matt Strawn as State Chairman in Iowa after winning a narrow vote.  He is a noted Paul supporter.

I believe this is the first State Chairman in any state to officially endorse a candidate (most seem to stay neutral).

County Conventions in Iowa take place on March 10th...we'll see if there's anything interesting to report out of them at the time.  I would not be surprised if Paul's estimated delegate numbers go up.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 11, 2012, 06:59:44 PM
Very preliminary Maine delegate allocation:

Romney - 8
Paul - 8
Santorum - 5

Results by town (and thus by CD) are not yet available.

Due to the usual caucus winnowing, this is likely too favorable to Santorum.  Though note, unlike the other Iowa-style caucuses, there's only two stages, not 3...the town caucuses here elected delegates directly to the State Convention, to be held May 5-6.  That means, if there is reliable data on the delegates elected to the convention, we may be able to know quite a deal more about the final delegate allocation.  Unfortunately, such information is unlikely to be available from unbiased sources.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 11, 2012, 07:36:23 PM
Town results available here

http://www.mainegop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/me_gop_caucus_results.pdf

I Should total it by County and CD but I am not that ambitious.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 11, 2012, 08:46:14 PM
Thanks for the link!

Maine, Results (so far) by CD:
CDRomneyPaulSantorumGingrichOtherTotal
CD 113851139527162273240
42.7%35.2%16.3%5.0%0.8%
CD 2805857462187342345
34.3%36.5%19.7%8.0%1.4%
Total21901996989349615585
39.2%35.7%17.7%6.2%1.1%

Note that Romney did quite well downstate.  He received majorities in many towns---enough so that in fact he should have a majority at the CD1 district caucus.  This effect also diminishes Santorum's support statewide enough that he bleeds an At-Large delegate to Romney.

Romney doesn't quite get a majority statewide, but it's possible he may do so eventually on rounding errors.

This entire analysis ignores stealth Paul effects, as usual; if someone can somehow get me confirmed State Convention delegate numbers, I will change these figures accordingly.

This also ignores the apportionment of delegates to each municipality; while I do not know the exact numbers, it is in general in proportion to the vote for Paul LePage in 2010.

Resultant delegate allocation:
Romney - 11
Paul - 7
Santorum - 3


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 11, 2012, 08:48:07 PM
Thanks Erc for doing the math.




Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on February 15, 2012, 04:13:02 AM
Erc, can you explain the situation in Tennessee?  Santorum's on the ballot, but doesn't actually have a delegate slate?  Yet they can still award him delegates depending on how he does in the primary?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 02:15:23 PM
Tennessee is a mess in general.  As best as I can understand it, on the ballot there are three separate votes.  A sample ballot from Sevier County can be found here (http://www.seviercountyelection.com/ballots/Sevier-Co-NP-Ad-march-6-2012.pdf); I assume other counties' procedures are almost identical.

The first is a straight-up Presidential Preference vote, where you can vote for any of the 9 candidates who qualified for the ballot (the usual 7 pre-Iowa candidates, plus Roemer and Johnson, but not including Cain), or for Uncommitted or a write-in.

The second is a vote for the 14 At-Large delegates; the names of the delegate candidates are listed, along with the candidate to which they are committed (or stating they are Uncommitted).  You vote for 14 of the listed candidates (http://tnsos.org/elections/2012Delegates.php).  Only Romney has a full slate (in fact he has 16!); Paul has 11, Gingrich and Perry have 10, and Huntsman has 2.  There are 4 Uncommitted Delegates.

The third is a vote for the 3 delegates particular to your CD, in exactly the same manner as the At-Large candidates.  There are a total of 27 of these statewide.  Only Romney has a full slate.  Paul has 22, Gingrich has 20, Perry has 17, and Huntsman has 1.  There are 7 Uncommitted Delegates.

How do these three separate votes weigh in to the actual selection of delegates?  The TN GOP Rules (http://www.tennesseerader.com/republican/bylaws/TRP%20Bylaws.pdf), when discussing the allocation of delegates, always makes reference to the 'vote received by a Presidential candidate'---i.e the straight-up simple preference vote.  The number of delegates a candidate is entitled to is based on that preference vote, and has no relation to the votes for the delegates in particular.

It would seem, though it is not explicitly stated, that the vote for delegates is mainly used to see which of a candidate's slate of delegates is chosen (in the event the full slate is not selected, or if the slate is larger than the number of delegates to be selected), and then to choose Alternates after the regular delegates have been chosen.

In particular, it is not a "beauty-contest" primary in the manner of Pennsylvania or Illinois; the vote you cast for the presidential candidate of your choice does matter, and it does affect the delegate allocation.

This, of course, leaves the question of how the delegates are actually selected if a candidate with blank/incomplete slates is actually entitled to delegates.  While this is not explicitly stated in the GOP rules, I'd say the usual procedures for delegate vacancies cover it:

Quote from: Bylaws of the Tennessee Republican Party
...If, more than thirty (30) days before the convention, a Delegate's position becomes vacant and is not filled by his Alternate or if an Alternate's position becomes vacant, the position shall be filled in accordance with Paragraph 3...

[Paragraph 3]

...If all of the positions for a candidate's Alternates are not filled from among such candidates for Delegate, the Presidential campaign shall then choose any bona fide Republican as such Alternate.

TL;DR:

The Santorum campaign will, after the primary, choose delegates for the seats to which it is entitled.  Its failure to have delegates listed on the ballot is embarrassing but in no way impedes its efforts to win a majority of delegates at the convention.  Tennessee is a regular primary (albeit with some weird allocation rules), not a "beauty contest."


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 02:48:19 PM
Washington: March 3

Overview
43 Delegates (1.88% of total)
Caucus/Convention
10 At-Large
30 by CD
3 RNC Members

Precinct Caucuses

Washington holds an Iowa-style primary; that is, the real point of the caucuses (as far as Tampa delegate allocation is concerned) is the election of precinct delegates to the County/Legislative District Caucuses.  The balloting for precinct delegates is in a runoff style; each person casts a number of votes equal to the number of delegate positions.  Any delegate candidate receiving a majority is elected; after the second ballot, the lowest-placing delegate candidate is eliminated.  This means that there will be a fair amount of recaucusing/tactical voting, even at this level, that will not be reflected in media reports.

A Presidential preference straw poll is also held at the caucuses; the final delegate allocation from Washington need not reflect the straw poll result at all, however.

County/LD Caucuses (March 17 - April 21)

Entitled to attend and vote are the delegates chosen at the precinct caucuses, plus a number of 'superdelegates' (precinct committee officers, plus all Republican officeholders residing in the jurisdiction).  These caucuses select delegates to the State Convention.

Rather uncharacteristically, the WSRP is very good about making public the exact allocation of State Convention delegates to each county (see Appendix D of this handy manual (http://youra.net/images/gop/2012caucusmanual.pdf); the apportionment is based on the Republican vote in the most recent Presidential, Gubernatorial, and Attorney General races).

The election of State Convention delegates is done by a runoff system, similarly to those at the Precinct caucuses, but with a few changes to prevent a multitude of ballots.  After the first ballot, all delegate candidates placing below 10% are eliminated.  After the second ballot, all delegates placing below 20% are eliminated.  After the third ballot, the lowest candidates are eliminated until there are only twice the number of delegate candidates as unfilled slots.  The highest finishers on the fourth ballot are elected.

State Convention (May 31 - June 2)

There are 1500 normal delegates in attendance in total, plus 122 'superdelegates' (almost identical in style and function to the ones at Tampa, essentially 3 per county plus a few extras from King).  Obviously, the voting intentions of these 'superdelegates' will be impossible to feasibly determine and may prove to be a major source of uncertainty in a tightly contested race.

The convention as a whole chooses 10 delegates, and the State Convention delegates from each congressional district caucus separately to choose 3 delegates each (for a total of 30 by CD).  I do not know exactly how these are chosen, though it stands to reason that it may be a similar runoff system as in the preceding tiers.

The delegates chosen at the State Convention will be committed to their preferred candidate for the first ballot (unless they are explicitly selected as an 'uncommitted' delegate).

RNC Members

Kirby Wilbur
Jeff Kent
Fredi Simpson

As Washington does not select any delegates until the end of May, it is not penalized for going before Super Tuesday.

Preliminary Results (as of 3/4)

Romney - 34
Santorum - 6

Due to the extreme amount of tactical voting that will necessarily happen at the county/LD conventions due to the runoff system, it is hard to make a definitive delegate projection.  Unless the Paulistas make a concerted effort to derail Romney, however (or Gingrich/Santorum rally around Paul), it seems very likely that Romney wins a majority of delegates at the State Convention as a whole and in most CDs.  The above figure assumes Gingrich supporters break entirely for Santorum; this is too optimistic, but provides a reasonable lower bound for Romney.  Santorum picks up CD 5 (almost guaranteed if there's any net preference for Santorum) and CD 6.

Of course, this does not account for Stealth Paul; nor does it account for individual LD results, which may make Romney's dominance less convincing (and allow Paul to pick up a delegate or two somewhere).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 03:41:08 PM
Super Tuesday: Part I

It's Super Tuesday, the large primary and caucus extravaganza on March 6!  This is the official beginning of the non-IA/NH/SC/NV primary calendar, according to the RNC; there are no more penalties for any contests held on or after this date.  The delegate allocation must still be "proportional" for the next month of contests, however.

Remember that Alaska (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215241#msg3215241) also votes on Super Tuesday.

Georgia

Overview
76 Delegates (3.32% of total)
Primary
34 At-Large, Proportional
42 by CD, Proportional

In each Congressional District (there are 14 in total), if a candidate receives a majority, they win all 3 delegates.  Otherwise, the top finisher receives 2 delegates and the second-place finisher 1 delegate.

At-Large, the 3 RNC Members are pledged to the statewide winner.  The remaining 31 are allocated proportionally among all candidates who meet a 20% threshold; rounding is done by largest remainder.

RNC Members

RNC Members are bound by the results of the primary.

Preliminary Results (as of 3/21)

Gingrich - 52
Romney - 21
Santorum - 3

This is the count from the GA GOP; the results from the state would imply a 54-19-3 split, instead, so this may be open to challenge unless the state results are wrong.

Idaho

Overview
32 Delegates (1.40% of total)
Caucus
32 At-Large, Proportional

Caucuses are held in each county, and delegates are assigned based on this vote; this is not an Iowa-style caucus by any measure.

What makes Idaho different from pretty much all (Republican) caucuses is the amount of official recaucusing that must take place; voting in each county continues through successive ballots until someone gets a majority or only two candidates remain (at which point a final ballot is taken).  Any candidates placing below 15%, plus the bottom remaining candidate are eliminated each round.

Each county is entitled to a fractional share of the delegates to Tampa (in a similar vein to Alaska, above).  If a candidate wins an outright majority on the first ballot (or any subsequent ballot with 3 or more candidates), they receive the entire share of that county's delegates.  In the event it comes to a two-candidate ballot, the county's share of delegates are split proportionally based on the final ballot.

After adding up the fractional shares of Tampa delegates entitled to each candidate from each county, if someone has a majority, they win all the delegates.  Otherwise, rounding is done to the nearest whole number.  In case of rounding errors, a delegate is added to (subtracted from) the top (bottom) finisher, as necessary.

RNC Members

RNC members are bound based on the results of the caucus vote.

Results (as of 3/7)

Romney won all 32 of Idaho's delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 04:11:03 PM
Super Tuesday: Part II

Massachusetts

Overview
41 Delegates (1.79% of total)
Primary
38 At-Large, Proportional
3 RNC Members

38 delegates are allocated amongst candidates who meet a 15% threshold statewide, proportional to their share of the vote amongst all threshold-meeting candidates.  The Allocation Committee determines any rounding, as well as the exact CD breakdown (sadly, I do not get the voting strength of 10 men living here in Cambridge).

RNC Members
Bob Maginn - Romney
Ron Kaufman - Romney
Judy Dow

Kerry Healey (a Romney supporter) was recently elected as the National Committeewoman; however, it is unclear whether her term starts now or after the National Convention.

Results (as of 3/7)

Romney won all 38 delegates, as no other candidate broke 15%.

North Dakota
28 Delegates (1.22% of total)
Caucus/Convention
28 At-Large

Updated ND GOP Rules (http://www.northdakotagop.org/rules-and-mode/) (different from The Green Papers!)

Caucuses are held in each Legislative District.  A secret ballot for Presidential Preference is taken (and reported to the media), and delegates to the State Convention are chosen.

The State Convention (March 30 - April 1) chooses the delegates to Tampa.  These delegates must caucus at some point either before or at Tampa, in order to discuss whether they want to distribute their votes in a manner proportional to the caucus vote.  The choice to do so is voluntary; for simplicity, I will assume for the purposes of my count that they choose to do so.

Selection of Delegates

The Committee on Permanent Organization (CPO) serves at the nominating committee for a slate of delegates to be voted on by the State Convention.  It has 10 members; two from each of North Dakota's 4 regions (selected by the appropriate Regional Chairman), plus the National Committeeman and Committeewoman (who also serve as superdelegates at the convention).

The CPO accepts applications for nominations before the convention.  Even without applying, any current Republican Senator/Governor/Congressman (i.e. Rep. Berg, Sen. Hoeven, and Gov. Dalrymple) are automatically placed on the slate.  Nominations may also be made from the floor of the convention, but only for those who applied to the CPO and did not make it onto the slate.  "In the event nominations are made from the floor, a nominee must receive a majority of the votes and finish in the top number needed for delegates to be elected."  (If anyone can decipher that, let me know).

RNC Members

If the delegation decides to voluntarily apportion itself proportionately to the caucus results, this includes the RNC members.  If not, they are listed below for reference.

Stan Stein
Curly Haugland
Sandy Boehler - Romney

Preliminary Results (as of 4/3)

According to the AP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVgzNxYS-qT3IkowPQp0VQDRLSvw?docId=159f0c652c88426d9fad7732603b3b67), these are the preferences of the 28 North Dakota delegates:

Romney - 13
Santorum - 8
Paul - 2
Gingrich - 1
Uncommitted - 4

A full list of the North Dakota delegation and their endorsements can be found here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3252143#msg3252143).  Also see Demconwatch (http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/5265/nd-selects-25-national-delegates).

If the delegation should assign itself proportionally:

Santorum - 11
Paul - 8
Romney - 7
Gingrich - 2

Ohio

Overview
66 Delegates (2.89% of total)
Primary
15 At-Large, Proportional
48 by CD, WTA
3 RNC Members

Ohio GOP Rules (http://mcfan.org/Documents/Ohio%20GOP%20Permanent%20Rules.pdf)

There are two separate ballot questions, the first for Delegates-at-Large and the second for District Delegates.  In both cases, voters vote for their preferred candidate; the delegates themselves are not listed.

48 delegates are elected on the basis of the vote for "District Delegates;" the winner in a CD receives all 3 delegates.

15 delegates are elected on the basis of the vote for "Delegates-at-Large".  If someone wins a majority, they receive all 15 delegates; otherwise, delegates are awarded proportionally among all candidates meeting a 20% threshold (rounding to the nearest whole number, rounding error handling unknown).

The delegates for each candidate have been pre-approved by their respective campaign; however, they are not legally bound (only "morally bound") to vote for them at Tampa.  I will assume, unless any delegate states otherwise, that they are voting for the candidate whose campaign vetted and approved them.

Ballot Access
All candidates are on the ballot in Ohio; however, Santorum failed to qualify for access for the "District Delegates" question in CD's 6, 9, and 13, and will thus not have a shot at the 9 delegates from those CDs.  He will still be on the ballot for the "Delegates-at-Large" question in those CDs.  For a sample ballot from an affected area, see this sample ballot (http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/ballot-search.aspx) (pick e.g. Lakewood/01/A for a precinct where Santorum is not on the ballot for the "District Delegates" question).

RNC Members

Kevin DeWine
Robert Bennett
Jo Ann Davidson

Preliminary Results (as of 3/7)

Romney - 38
Santorum - 21
Unallocated - 4

Those 4 "Unallocated" delegates (1 in CD 3, 2 in CD 4, and 1 in CD 8 ) would be Santorum's, except he did not file complete delegate slates in those districts.  


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 05:22:32 PM
Super Tuesday: Part III

Oklahoma

Overview
43 Delegates (1.88% of total)
Primary
25 At-Large, Proportional
15 by CD, Proportional
3 RNC Members

OK GOP Rules (http://gallery.mailchimp.com/512354e730a88fee4fcc330f7/files/ORP_Rules___Amended_August_27__2011.pdf)

25 delegates are elected At-Large.  If a candidate receives a statewide majority, they win all 25 delegates.  Otherwise, delegates are apportioned proportionally among all candidates who get at least 15%, rounded to the nearest whole number (rounding error handling unknown).

15 delegates are elected by CD, 3 each.  If a candidate receives a majority (or only 1 places above 15%), they win all 3 delegates.  If only two candidates place above 15%, 2 delegates are awarded to the winner, and 1 to the second-place finisher.  Otherwise, 1 delegate is awarded to each of the top 3 finishers.

RNC Members

Matt Pinnell
James Dunn
Carolyn McLarty

Results (as of 3/7)

Santorum - 14
Romney - 13
Gingrich - 13

Tennessee

Overview
58 Delegates (2.54% of total)
Primary
28 At-Large, Proportional
27 by CD, Proportional
3 RNC Members

TN GOP Rules (http://www.tennesseerader.com/republican/bylaws/TRP%20Bylaws.pdf)
YouTube Clarification from Chris DeVaney (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hx7_73D9rbw&feature=youtu.be)

28 delegates are selected At-Large.  If any candidate receives a two-thirds majority (or is the only candidate to break 20%) statewide, they are allocated all 28 delegates.  Otherwise, allocate proportionally among all candidates who receive at least 20% of the vote.  Round all fractions up; remove delegates from the lowest threshold-meeting candidate as necessary to allocate exactly 28 delegates.

27 delegates are selected by CD.  If any candidate receives a two-thirds majority (or is the only candidate to break 20%), they receive all 3 delegates.  Otherwise, the winner gets 2 delegates an the second place finisher gets 1 delegate.

Ballot Access
Many candidates (everyone but Romney) have incomplete slates of delegates (Santorum has no delegates at all).  This has no effect on delegate allocation, as candidates so affected can provide delegate names later.  See discussion here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3200303#msg3200303), and the YouTube video posted above.

RNC Members

Chris DeVaney
Peggy Lambert
John Ryder

Preliminary Results (as of 4/3)

Santorum - 29
Romney - 17
Gingrich - 9

Virginia

Overview
49 Delegates (2.14% of total)
Primary
13 At-Large, Proportional
33 by CD, WTA
3 RNC Members

13 delegates are selected At-Large.  If a candidate receives a majority statewide, they receive all 13 delegates.  Otherwise, delegates are allocated proportionally among candidates winning at least 15% of the vote.  Round up all fractions; remove delegates from the lowest threshold-meeting candidate as necessary to allocate exactly 13 delegates.

33 delegates are selected by CD.  The winner in each CD receives all 3 delegates.

Ballot Access
Only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul made the ballot in Virginia.

RNC Members
Pat Mullins
Morton Blackwell
Kathy Terry

Results (as of 3/7)

Romney - 43
Paul - 3

Vermont

Overview
17 Delegates (0.74% of total)
Primary
3 At-Large, WTA
14 At-Large, Proportional

VT GOP Rules (http://vtgop.org/about-2/)

The statewide winner wins 3 delegates.  The remaining 14 (including the RNC members) are given to the majority winner, if there is one, or apportioned among candidates meeting a 20% threshold if not.  Rounding details are unspecified.

RNC Members

Pat McDonald
George Schiavone - Romney
Susie Hudson - Romney

The RNC members are bound to the statewide winner, so their preferences are moot.

Results (as of 3/7)

Romney - 9
Paul - 4
Santorum - 4


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on February 17, 2012, 05:38:51 PM
Quote
27 delegates are selected by CD.  If any candidate receives a two-thirds majority (or is the only candidate to break 20%), they receive all 3 delegates.  If there are only two candidates to break 20%, the winner gets 2 delegates and the second gets 1; otherwise the top 3 finishers get 1 each.

So basically if a district splits 60%-20%-20%, its delegates are split evenly. What a dumb system.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on February 17, 2012, 05:41:50 PM
A question, are these contests using the old or new CD maps?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 17, 2012, 05:52:51 PM
Idaho

If a candidate gets 50%+ of the statewide delegates they get all the national convention delegates.

http://idgop.org/party-rules-on-pres-caucus/

Quote
Section 5:  The sum of all the Counties’ shares for each candidate, rounding the sum to the nearest whole delegate, will be that candidate’s share of the Delegates and Alternates to the National Convention with the proviso that, if one candidate wins more than 50% of the Idaho allotment of delegates, that candidate shall receive the entire 100% of the allotment of Delegates and Alternates to the National Convention.

Since all but the top two candidates in each county are eliminated it would seem very likely that the statewide winner would get all the delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 05:56:47 PM
A question, are these contests using the old or new CD maps?

Each state is entitled to 3 delegates per CD based on the 2010 census reapportionment.  Whether that means they actually use the new boundaries precisely or not is going to vary from state to state, depending on the progress of redistricting, whether it's a caucus or a primary, etc.

Some states are smart and provide for this uncertainty (e.g. Ohio has provisions to just use the old boundaries with 2 delegates a piece, with the rest WTA, if they lost representatives and redistricting wasn't finished yet---ultimately unnecessary, as they have finished redistricting), while others haven't.  In less prepared states, this may be up for a challenge at the credentials committee if it should make a difference.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 05:58:45 PM
Idaho

If a candidate gets 50%+ of the statewide delegates they get all the national convention delegates.

http://idgop.org/party-rules-on-pres-caucus/

Quote
Section 5:  The sum of all the Counties’ shares for each candidate, rounding the sum to the nearest whole delegate, will be that candidate’s share of the Delegates and Alternates to the National Convention with the proviso that, if one candidate wins more than 50% of the Idaho allotment of delegates, that candidate shall receive the entire 100% of the allotment of Delegates and Alternates to the National Convention.

Since all but the top two candidates in each county are eliminated it would seem very likely that the statewide winner would get all the delegates.

Good catch.  Whether that outcome is likely really depends on the manner of the tactical voting that occurs during the recaucusing, and whether it differs wildly from county to county.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 17, 2012, 06:03:20 PM
A question, are these contests using the old or new CD maps?

Each state is entitled to 3 delegates per CD based on the 2010 census reapportionment.  Whether that means they actually use the new boundaries precisely or not is going to vary from state to state, depending on the progress of redistricting, whether it's a caucus or a primary, etc.

Some states are smart and provide for this uncertainty (e.g. Ohio has provisions to just use the old boundaries with 2 delegates a piece, with the rest WTA, if they lost representatives and redistricting wasn't finished yet---ultimately unnecessary, as they have finished redistricting), while others haven't.  In less prepared states, this may be up for a challenge at the credentials committee if it should make a difference.

New York is using the old districts, with 2 Delegates WTA per old CD and the rest at large.

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/

Republicans really do have a screwy system of picking a president, you get the same amount of delegates for winning Charlie Rangell's district as for winning the most republican district in the state.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 17, 2012, 06:04:47 PM
BTW Erc, thanks for the research and posting the info.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 17, 2012, 06:06:51 PM
A question, are these contests using the old or new CD maps?

Each state is entitled to 3 delegates per CD based on the 2010 census reapportionment.  Whether that means they actually use the new boundaries precisely or not is going to vary from state to state, depending on the progress of redistricting, whether it's a caucus or a primary, etc.

Some states are smart and provide for this uncertainty (e.g. Ohio has provisions to just use the old boundaries with 2 delegates a piece, with the rest WTA, if they lost representatives and redistricting wasn't finished yet---ultimately unnecessary, as they have finished redistricting), while others haven't.  In less prepared states, this may be up for a challenge at the credentials committee if it should make a difference.

New York is using the old districts, with 2 Delegates WTA per old CD and the rest at large.

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/

Republicans really do have a screwy system of picking a president, you get the same amount of delegates for winning Charlie Rangell's district as for winning the most republican district in the state.


As a Republican in a district in which we can't even get a House candidate on the ballot most of the time, I wish the same were true in Massachusetts ;)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on February 17, 2012, 06:14:04 PM
A question, are these contests using the old or new CD maps?

Each state is entitled to 3 delegates per CD based on the 2010 census reapportionment.  Whether that means they actually use the new boundaries precisely or not is going to vary from state to state, depending on the progress of redistricting, whether it's a caucus or a primary, etc.

Some states are smart and provide for this uncertainty (e.g. Ohio has provisions to just use the old boundaries with 2 delegates a piece, with the rest WTA, if they lost representatives and redistricting wasn't finished yet---ultimately unnecessary, as they have finished redistricting), while others haven't.  In less prepared states, this may be up for a challenge at the credentials committee if it should make a difference.
If this thing goes to the convention, the GOP nomination will be bogged down for days in the credentials committee, won't it?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on February 19, 2012, 12:31:10 AM
I'm curious in a map of these four "regions" in North Dakota. I'm going to guess that it's the Fargo area, the rest of eastern North Dakota/Red River Valley, the Bismarck/Mandan metro and the areas in the southwest where essentially no one lives and then the rest of the state (essentially Minot, a Reservation and some oil drilling places)?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 19, 2012, 01:21:33 AM
I'm curious in a map of these four "regions" in North Dakota. I'm going to guess that it's the Fargo area, the rest of eastern North Dakota/Red River Valley, the Bismarck/Mandan metro and the areas in the southwest where essentially no one lives and then the rest of the state (essentially Minot, a Reservation and some oil drilling places)?

Basically spot on.  For the gorey details, you can check out the ND GOP rules (Article III, Section 4) and the 2000 census legislative district maps.

Williston has a legislative district all its own?  They really do not need that many people in the state legislature...


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on February 19, 2012, 04:10:14 AM
Quote
27 delegates are selected by CD.  If any candidate receives a two-thirds majority (or is the only candidate to break 20%), they receive all 3 delegates.  If there are only two candidates to break 20%, the winner gets 2 delegates and the second gets 1; otherwise the top 3 finishers get 1 each.

So basically if a district splits 60%-20%-20%, its delegates are split evenly. What a dumb system.

Reminds me of the Chilean Senate.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on February 19, 2012, 06:35:17 PM
Williston's an important town in North Dakota. Everyone there knows where it is and did even before the oil boom. Basically in ND if a town is big enough to have 24-hour services, it'll have its own legislative district. No worse than a lot of the "county legislatures" in New York, I live in a county with over a million people and a 7-member county commission, they have places with around 20 districts for not even half that people...

And while that delegate system can be quite silly (and the Chilean Senate is too), it's not as bad as giving the same amount of delegates to whoever wins Charlie Rangel's district as whoever wins the State Island district or in the upcoming Michigan primary where those Detroit districts are worth as many delegates as the Republican seats in the state. I've noticed because of that Romney can lose Michigan and still win a strong majority of delegates (though as Erc noted we don't really know how the delegates are going to be apportioned.)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 19, 2012, 08:15:07 PM
Williston's an important town in North Dakota. Everyone there knows where it is and did even before the oil boom. Basically in ND if a town is big enough to have 24-hour services, it'll have its own legislative district. No worse than a lot of the "county legislatures" in New York, I live in a county with over a million people and a 7-member county commission, they have places with around 20 districts for not even half that people...

I know, Williston is very important!  It even has an international airport!  ;)

Quote
And while that delegate system can be quite silly (and the Chilean Senate is too), it's not as bad as giving the same amount of delegates to whoever wins Charlie Rangel's district as whoever wins the State Island district or in the upcoming Michigan primary where those Detroit districts are worth as many delegates as the Republican seats in the state. I've noticed because of that Romney can lose Michigan and still win a strong majority of delegates (though as Erc noted we don't really know how the delegates are going to be apportioned.)

The Michigan GOP seems to have decided on a delegate allocation plan if the sanctions stay in place, according to Frontloading (http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2012/02/2012-republican-delegate-allocation_14.html).  Basically, it's going to be as I expected--2 per CD, for a total of 28, plus 2 at-Large.  Whether those 2 at-Large are going to be "proportional" or WTA seems to still be up in the air.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: socaldem on February 22, 2012, 02:30:52 AM
Quote
27 delegates are selected by CD.  If any candidate receives a two-thirds majority (or is the only candidate to break 20%), they receive all 3 delegates.  If there are only two candidates to break 20%, the winner gets 2 delegates and the second gets 1; otherwise the top 3 finishers get 1 each.

So basically if a district splits 60%-20%-20%, its delegates are split evenly. What a dumb system.

Actually, no...

If one candidate gets a two-thirds majority or is the only candidate to break 20%, that candidate gets all 3 delegates:

Examples: Santorum wins 3 delegates

Santorum  69%   40%
Romney     22%   19%
Gingrich     4%     19%
Paul           5%     19%
Other         0%       3%

If two or more candidates get over 20%, the winner gets two delegates, second place gets 1 and the rest get zero.

Examples: Santorum 2; Romney 1

Santorum  65%   40%
Romney     21%   30%
Gingrich     9%     25%
Paul           5%     5%

Otherwise, the top three finishers get 1 each:

Examples: Santorum 1; Romney 1; Gingrich 1

Santorum  19%   
Romney     18%   
Gingrich     18%     
Paul           16%     
Perry          15%     
Bachman    14%   



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 22, 2012, 09:47:06 AM
Quote
27 delegates are selected by CD.  If any candidate receives a two-thirds majority (or is the only candidate to break 20%), they receive all 3 delegates.  If there are only two candidates to break 20%, the winner gets 2 delegates and the second gets 1; otherwise the top 3 finishers get 1 each.

So basically if a district splits 60%-20%-20%, its delegates are split evenly. What a dumb system.

Actually, no...


You are absolutely right, I misread the rules.  CD delegates in TN are only split 3 ways if no one meets the 20% threshold (mathematically impossible now).

Original post (for both TN and OK) has been changed accordingly.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 22, 2012, 10:15:12 AM
Minnesota has released its new Congressional District maps, and it does indeed appear that the MN GOP will be using the new maps throughout their process (precinct delegates will be informed as to which BPOU convention they will be attending).

When practicable, I will redo the precinct-level analysis given the new lines.  Don't hold your breath though.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 22, 2012, 02:19:05 PM
New Hampshire Update

The three candidates winning delegates in New Hampshire (Romney, Paul, and Huntsman) have chosen (http://www.sos.nh.gov/presprim2012/Delegates/2012%20Delegates%20&%20Alternates.pdf) which of their delegate candidates will be going to Tampa.

There is one complication, however; these were chosen under the assumption that the sanctions will be lifted.  That is, Romney chose 12 delegates (and alternates), Paul 5, and Huntsman 3, rather than the 7, 3, and 2, respectively, that they would be entitled to under sanctions.  We do not know which of these will be seated at Tampa should the sanctions be enforced (they are all listed alphabeticaly).

Regardless, we do now know the names of the 3 Huntsman delegates (2 of which will go to Tampa if sanctions are enforced).  They are:

Paul J. Collins, Jr.
Renee Plummer
Sarah Stewart

Of course, these will presumably vote for Romney, but we cannot be sure, so they stay Uncommitted until we hear otherwise.  Note that Sarah Stewart was formerly with the Pawlenty campaign before joining the Huntsman camp.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 22, 2012, 06:46:34 PM
Minnesota has released its new Congressional District maps, and it does indeed appear that the MN GOP will be using the new maps throughout their process (precinct delegates will be informed as to which BPOU convention they will be attending).

When practicable, I will redo the precinct-level analysis given the new lines.  Don't hold your breath though.

Not all that much change with the new lines (I won't bother posting the full numbers unless there's a demand).

Romney improves his numbers enough in CDs 2 and 5 that he is (barely) able to eke out two additional delegates, the former at the expense of Santorum, the latter at the expense of Paul.  He so marginally has a claim on these delegates that I assume that the BPOU round of winnowing will eliminate him from contention.  I am not so crazy as to do a full BPOU analysis on the new lines, so we'll just have to stick with these numbers.

Resulting delegate count:

Santorum - 29
Paul - 4
Romney - 4


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Vroke on February 22, 2012, 08:28:18 PM
I just want to thank you for this thread! It's nice to have everything in one thread :)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 24, 2012, 01:14:26 PM
March 10

In addition to the events listed below, Iowa (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3141942#msg3141942) also holds its County Conventions on March 10, which elect delegates to the State (and District) Conventions.  If there's any systematic reporting of these results (doubtful, but we can hope), this may give us our first indications of the current state of the race in Iowa---what's happened to Perry's supporters, how much of a "stealth Paul" effect is there, etc.

Kansas

Overview
40 Delegates (1.75% of total)
Caucus
12 by CD, WTA
28 At-Large, Proportional (20%)

KS Caucus Rules (http://ksgop.org/caucus/)

Kansas' caucus, like Nevada but unlike Iowa, actually binds its delegates on the results of the caucuses.  There are later rounds of conventions that choose the delegates themselves, but the delegates themselves are bound based on the March 10 vote.

12 delegates are allocated by CD; in each of Kansas' 4 Congressional Districts, the winner receives 3 delegates.  Kansas does not appear to have finished its redistricting yet, which could complicate matters.  Kansas did not gain or lose CDs with the census, so using the old borders is always a possibility.

25 delegates are allocated proportionally statewide, with a 20% threshold.  If only one candidate meets the threshold, there is no threshold.  Starting with the winner, each candidate receives a share of the 25 delegates commensurate with their share of the vote amongst threshold-reaching candidates, fractions rounded up.  Repeat for the next-highest placing candidate, and so forth, until all 25 delegates are assigned.

The 3 RNC members are pledged to the statewide winner.

RNC Members

The RNC members are pledged based on the statewide results, and thus do not act like superdelegates.

Preliminary Results (as of 3/10)

Santorum - 33
Romney - 7

Guam

Overview
9 Delegates (0.39% of total)
Convention
6 At-Large
3 RNC Members

A single territorial caucus is held.  Guam's six delegates are chosen in such a manner as to 'best reflect the presidential preference of the convention participants."

The convention convenes at 9 AM local time (that is, 6 PM Friday EST), so we may even get results before we go to bed Friday.

RNC members

Jesus "Jess" Torres - Romney
Peter Ada - Romney
Donna Jones - Romney

Demconwatch believes new RNC members will be elected at the March 10 convention.  However, the national RNC rules do state that RNC members terms last from the end of a national convention to the next, so I will assume that these three will be at Tampa unless the national GOP says otherwise.

Results (as of 3/10)

Romney won all 6 delegates, and the RNC members pledged themselves to him as well.

Northern Marianas

Overview
9 Delegates (0.39% of total)
Convention
6 At-Large
3 RNC Members

A vote is held to elect 6 delegates to the National Convention.

RNC Members

Gov. Benigno Fitial - Romney
Bo Palacios - Romney
Mary Lou S Ada - Romney (Demconwatch and the Saipan Tribune list Viola Alepuyo instead, but I will trust the national GOP over local news here)

Preliminary Results (as of 3/10)

With Romney winning 87% of the vote here, I think it's safe to assume that the 6 delegates elected were Romney supporters.  Officially, the delegates elected are unbound.

Virgin Islands

Overview
9 Delegates (0.39% of total)
Caucus
6 At-Large
3 RNC Members

USVI Caucus Rules (http://vigop.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Rules-of-the-Virgin-Islands-Republican-Caucus-Approved.pdf)
Sample Ballot (http://vigop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Official-Ballot-2012-Caucus.pdf) (thanks Minnesota Mike!)

Caucuses are held on St. Croix, St. Thomas, and St. John, between noon and 6 pm local time (11 AM and 5 PM EST).  Participants vote for the delegates directly; each participant may vote for 6 delegate candidates, and the top 6 vote-getters will go to Tampa.  Delegate candidates must have filed by February 10 (I cannot find a list of delegates so filed, though), and their presidential preference is listed next to them on the ballot.  Delegates so elected will be bound to their candidate on the first ballot.

This system makes it quite likely that a single candidate will win all 6 delegates.

RNC Members

Herbert Schoenbohm - Romney
Holland L Redfield, II - Romney
Lilliana Belardo De O'Neal - Romney

Results (as of 3/11)

Romney - 3
Uncommitted - 2
Paul - 1

The two Uncommitted delegates are Warren Bruce Cole, who has since declared for Romney, and Gwendolyn Brady, who is still uncommitted.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 24, 2012, 01:41:03 PM
Wyoming:  February 9 - February 29

Overview
29 Delegates (1.27% of total)
Caucus/Convention
12 by County
14 At-Large
3 RNC Members

WY GOP Bylaws (http://actnow.gop.com/states/WY/pdf/101617%20BYLAWS.PDF)

Precinct Caucuses

The Wyoming Precinct Caucuses were held between February 9 and February 29, on different dates in different parts of the state.  A straw poll was held, and delegates to the County Conventions were also elected.  Each precinct's representation at its County Convention is proportional to the share of the vote for Cynthia Lummis (WY-AL) in 2010, though each precinct is entitled to a minimum of 2 delegates.

County Conventions

The County Conventions were held March 6-10.  In addition to the delegates chosen at the Precinct Caucuses, the members of the County Central Committee were also automatically delegates.

Of Wyoming's 23 counties, 11 selected a delegate to Tampa, 11 selected a corresponding alternate to Tampa, and Laramie County selected one of each.  The counties that selected delegates:

Natrona, Carbon, Lincoln, Sublette Platte, Park, Washakie, Big Horn, Johnson, Weston, Niobrara, Platte, and of course Laramie.

These delegates are officially unbound, but are required to inform the county convention ahead of the vote which candidate they would vote for at Tampa.

The County Conventions also elect delegates to the State Convention.  Each county is entitled to a number of delegates in proportion to their vote for Cynthia Lummis (WY-AL) in 2010.  The exact number of delegates per county can be found here (http://wygop.org/2012-state-convention/).

Slates of nominations (for delegates to Tampa or for delegates to the State Convention) are drawn up by a Nominating Committee, whose members are chosen by the County Chairman.  However, additional nominations may be submitted from the floor.

State Convention

The State Convention, held April 12-14 in Cheyenne, chooses the remaining 14 delegates.  A Nominating Committee, consisting of two delegates from each county, chooses a slate of 14 delegates (and alternates).  This slate is presented to the convention as a whole.  Additional delegate nominees may be presented from the floor.  After a secret ballot, "the Delegates-at-large shall be elected by the equivalent number of nominees receiving the most votes."

(If anyone can figure out exactly what that last line means, I'd be much obliged)

These delegates are officially unbound, but must inform the convention which candidate they intend to vote for at Tampa.

RNC Members

Tammy Hooper
Greg Schaefer - Romney
Jan Larimer

Preliminary Results (as of 3/11)

County Conventions:

Romney - 8
Santorum - 2
Paul - 1
Uncommitted - 1

Projected State Convention:

Romney - 14

Based on the results of the County Conventions, it appears that Romney will have a majority at the State Convention and can elect an entirely-Romney slate.  This is based off of the votes for delegates and alternates at each of the County Conventions; if there was a significant difference between that vote and the vote for slates of delegates to the State Convention, Romney may not attain that majority.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 25, 2012, 12:56:13 PM
Some clarification of the Tennessee GOP process from the GOP Chairman in the state, Chris Devaney, is provided in this YouTube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hx7_73D9rbw&feature=youtu.be).

In particular, it is made patently clear that Santorum is still very much eligible for delegates despite not having any delegate candidates on the ballot.

It also seems that the 14 delegates appointed by the Executive committee are apportioned based on the primary results as well (basically, they get to pick who goes but the campaign signs off).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 25, 2012, 01:45:53 PM
"Proportionality" or Gingrich's Hope

As the race increasingly looks like a two-man contest between Romney and Santorum, how much hope is there for third (or fourth) place candidates to pick up delegates and play spoiler?

Many of the same arguments could apply to Paul, but he has a chance of snatching victory from defeat in Iowa-style caucuses, can occasionally take second place in caucus states (e.g. MN/ME), and is going to stay in the race regardless.

The following are states that have some possibility of awarding proportional delegates to Gingrich.  "XX% proportional" means XX% of the delegates (not including superdelegates) are awarded proportionally.  Some states cease being proportional if a candidate wins a majority (or supermajority) of the vote.

-- Up to Super Tuesday --

Washington - Iowa-style caucus.
Alaska - 100% proportional, no cutoff.
Georgia - Gingrich should do well here, regardless.
Massachusetts - 100% proportional, 15% cutoff
North Dakota - Iowa-style caucus OR 100% proportional, no cutoff (delegates' choice)
Ohio - 24% proportional, 20% cutoff
Oklahoma - 63% proportional, 15% cutoff
Tennessee - 51% proportional, 20% cutoff
Vermont - 79% proportional, 20% cutoff

-- March, After Super Tuesday --

Kansas - 63% proportional, 20% cutoff
Alabama - 55% proportional, 20% cutoff
Hawaii - 65% proportional, no cutoff
Mississippi - 100% proportional by jurisdiction, 15% cutoff
Missouri - Iowa-style caucus
Puerto Rico - 100% proportional, no cutoff
Louisiana - 47% proportional, 25% cutoff.  42% Iowa-style caucus.

-- April --

Connecticut - 40% proportional, 20% cutoff
Rhode Island - 100% proportional, 15% cutoff
New York - 37% proportional, 20% cutoff

-- May --

North Carolina - 100% proportional, no cutoff
Oregon - 100% proportional, no cutoff
Arkansas - 64% proportional, 15% cutoff
Kentucky - 57% proportional, 15% cutoff
Texas - 100% proportional, no cutoff.

-- June --

New Mexico - 100% proportional, 15% cutoff
South Dakota - 100% proportional, 20% cutoff

Gingrich, assuming he remains in 3rd or worse throughout, has no chance of picking up delegates in Arizona, Michigan, Idaho, Virginia, USVI, Illinois, DC, Maryland, Wisconsin, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Indiana, California, New Jersey, and Utah.  Not listed here are states/territories that just hold conventions (Wyoming, Montana, Guam, Northern Marianas, American Samoa).  West Virginia's process is still completely unknown.


Obviously, Gingrich is sticking it out until Super Tuesday.  Afterwards, the road forwards is pretty tough for him, due to the cutoffs.  Meeting 15% or 20% cutoffs may be possible in Alabama and Mississippi, and he may snag a couple delegates from Puerto Rico if no one wins a majority there...but other than that it's a long drought until May 8, when North Carolina gives him his next shot at delegates.

All in all, after Super Tuesday (or after AL/MS vote on March 13), his staying in the race is far more likely to give Romney a leg up in WTA states than it is to increase the chance of a brokered convention with him as a kingmaker.  Of course, he's probably hoping for yet another shot at becoming the Anti-Romney, but this becomes extremely remote (and only helps Romney's chances) after Super Tuesday.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Esquire 22 on February 25, 2012, 05:26:29 PM
Thanks Erc for these great posts.  I'm new to the forum so maybe this has already been discussed, but what happens to Gingrich's (or Paul's) delegates if he drops out/ suspends his campaign prior to Tampa?  Are his delegates bound to vote for him on the first ballot or do they get released?

If they are released, maybe a situation emerges where neither Romney or Santorum wins 1144 through primary victories, but still secures a first ballot nomination by "winning" unbound Gingrich/ Paul delegates through old fashioned wheeling and dealing.   There may be a major incentive for this to happen so that the party can avoid the potential embarrassment of a brokered convention.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 25, 2012, 07:23:26 PM
There's a lot of room for some fine subtleties.  A candidate can 'suspend' their campaign---this is is a signal to everyone that they're done, but they can keep fundraising to pay for campaign debts, and presumably their delegates still remain bound to them.  An actual 'withdrawal' from the race would generally unbind delegates, or a candidate who has suspended their campaign can also explicitly 'release' their delegates from being bound.

Often, if the candidate is not even placed into nomination, the delegates are released.  In order to be officially presented for nomination, the candidate must demonstrate the support of a plurality of at least 5 state delegations.

These rules tend to vary considerably from state to state, and it is unclear how such rules would be enforced.  If it should look that in a couple of months we are heading towards a deadlocked convention, I'll look at them in more detail.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 25, 2012, 07:29:27 PM
Something to look out for in a few months:

Since there is no threshold at all in Texas, there's a possibility (if the rounding goes well) that a candidate with as few as 0.34% of the overall vote in Texas can win a delegate.

Will Perry (or Cain, or Roemer for that matter) at long last win a delegate in this race?

EDIT:  This of course goes out the window entirely if the TX GOP ditches the primary, as looks increasingly likely.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on February 25, 2012, 11:21:04 PM
Erc, I'm wondering if you've read this latest blog post by Nate Silver:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/the-g-o-p-s-fuzzy-delegate-math/

in which he talks about the large number of delegates to the RNC who are not exactly technically bound to any particular candidate.  In 2008, there was a media narrative that the Democrats faced a huge problem in that unelected Super Delegates might end up deciding the nomination, but that this problem couldn't have existed on the GOP side, since they have so few such "Super Delegates".

But reading this post, I'm wondering if this narrative should actually be turned on its head.  Does the GOP, in fact, have a significant share of delegates who are not exactly "bound" to any particular candidate, and thus there's a good chance that the primary season ends with Romney and Santorum furiously lobbying delegates to publicly back them, and give them a majority, so as to spare the party a convention fight?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 26, 2012, 12:25:27 AM
Erc, I'm wondering if you've read this latest blog post by Nate Silver:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/25/the-g-o-p-s-fuzzy-delegate-math/

in which he talks about the large number of delegates to the RNC who are not exactly technically bound to any particular candidate.  In 2008, there was a media narrative that the Democrats faced a huge problem in that unelected Super Delegates might end up deciding the nomination, but that this problem couldn't have existed on the GOP side, since they have so few such "Super Delegates".

But reading this post, I'm wondering if this narrative should actually be turned on its head.  Does the GOP, in fact, have a significant share of delegates who are not exactly "bound" to any particular candidate, and thus there's a good chance that the primary season ends with Romney and Santorum furiously lobbying delegates to publicly back them, and give them a majority, so as to spare the party a convention fight?


Great post by Nate Silver, as this is exactly the sort of thing people should be paying attention to...but I think the risk of those bound/unbound technicalities is a bit less than that first chart might make it out to be.

A lot of these delegates are chosen at State Conventions, which mostly come very late in the cycle (I think the earliest is North Dakota's, at the very end of March).  At this point, it will be more clear how the race has shaped up, and if it really is a fight to the finish, supporters of each candidate will really be trying to elect loyal delegates who can be counted on to support their candidate in Tampa.  But maybe compromise candidates will be chosen if conventions have odd rules and end up getting extremely deadlocked (most likely in Iowa---though ND does this automatically in some sense, giving additional party leaders an almost-guaranteed ticket to Tampa)

A lot of the fighting for delegates will be done in odd venues---State Conventions, certain state executive committees, etc.---but I imagine the results of each will be rather clear after the event.  There will be a large number of delegates not chosen by strictly democratic means, but their voting intentions at Tampa will presumably not be in doubt.

Similarly, I imagine not-strictly-bound delegates chosen in primaries (OH/IL, for example) will remain loyal; Romney's organization was presumably good enough to pick reliable candidates, and anyone who signed on to be a delegate with Santorum pre-Iowa has got to be a True Believer.  There's always the possibility of a Paulista Fifth Column, but I'm skeptical.

I would very much be worried about Pennsylvania, which is going to be a complete mess.  It comes after another 3-week break in the season, though, which may give candidates enough time to get their act together.

As Nate Silver says, this probably matters most when one candidate is relatively close but not close enough to clinch on the regular bevy of endorsements alone---if one candidate is close enough that a few votes here and there might get him through on the first ballot---or enough switching beforehand makes sure that the convention is a coronation rather than a floor fight.

In the end, though, the media narrative matters.  The primary season effectively ends on June 3 (we all know who's winning Utah's delegates), and a floor fight seems possible, and the media start gunning for it over the following three months, whoever is in second place is probably going to fight tooth and nail for it---and all of these technicalities may get a lot of media attention.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on February 26, 2012, 01:01:34 AM
Thanks Erc.  I think I basically agree with you.  However, I'm thinking that if, say, Romney wins a plurality of both the "popular vote" and the "pledged delegates", yet even after the bulk of the truly uncommitted delegates have swung his direction in the interests of party unity, he's still about two dozen delegates short of a majority.........then I'd guess that various figures in the party leadership would do whatever they could to strongarm some of those Santorum delegates whose voting intentions were clearly for Santorum at the time they were chosen, yet are not officially bound to him.

Basically, I'm thinking that enough of the party seems to regard a contested convention as a disaster, that these rules that provide for so many delegates who are not officially bound to any candidate and who were not "strictly chosen by democratic means", provide a possible escape hatch for the party to avoid a contested convention.

Of course, that only works in a scenario where Romney has a decent lead on Santorum, but still falls a bit short of a majority.  If the two of them are much closer, and each have 45% or less of the total delegates in hand, then it gets much messier.  But I think the odds of that happening are slim.  A Mondale 1984 scenario seems more likely.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Esquire 22 on February 26, 2012, 02:39:47 AM
The whole process is a nightmare.  Do all of the nuances get worked out by the Rules Committee?  If things are really tight and there are all of these crazy contingencies and state law and state party requirements wouldn't it take a tremdous amount of time for the Committee to hear every case or challenge?  Can the Convention go on for longer than four days? 

Also, as an aside (and this is obviously an academic question) what would happen with a "faithless delegate"?  Who actually monitors whether or not a random delegate from Nebraska is bound to vote for Romney on the first and second ballot?  Is there like a post-balloting challenge procedure or something?  If the authority that binds the delegate to his or her convention vote is state law does the Republican party actually rely on a Nebraska statute to decide whether or not Joe Schmo can or cannot vote for the person they want to? 


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on February 26, 2012, 11:08:49 PM
Oklahoma

Erc,

I think Oklahoma's system for awarding Delegates at the congressional level is a little different than what you posted

http://gallery.mailchimp.com/512354e730a88fee4fcc330f7/files/ORP_Rules___Amended_August_27__2011.pdf
Quote
(2) All Delegates from each congressional district shall be awarded to a presidential candidate who receives a majority (more than 50%) of the votes in the Republican Presidential Preference Primary election in that district. If no presidential candidate receives a majority of the votes in a congressional district, then the award shall be as follows:
a. If three or more presidential candidates receive 15 percent or more of such total vote in the district, the top three finishers in the District shall each be awarded one Delegate from that district.
b. If only two presidential candidates receive 15 percent or more of such total vote in the district, the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in that congressional district shall receive two (2) Delegates and the presidential candidate who receives the second most votes in that congressional district shall receive one (1) Delegate; and,
c. If only one presidential candidate receives 15 percent or more of such total vote in the district, such presidential candidate shall be awarded all of the Delegates from that district

So if I understand the rules correctly if it's Santorum 49%, Romney 15%, Gingrich 15% then they each get 1 delegate. But if it's Santorum 50%, Romney 30%, Gingrich 20% Santorum would get all 3 Delegates. Odd system.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 26, 2012, 11:51:42 PM

You are absolutely right.  In fact, I believe that's what I originally had, but I changed it at the same time I corrected the opposite mistake I'd made in TN's rules.

Yet another reminder that the Green Papers are not infallible.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 27, 2012, 11:30:34 AM
March 13

Alabama

Overview
50 Delegates (2.19% of total)
Primary
26 At-Large (Proportional, 20%)
21 by CD (Proportional, 20%)
3 RNC Members

AL 2012 Presidential Preference Primary Resolution (http://algop.org/sites/default/files/Presidential_Preference_Primary_Resolution_.pdf)

21 delegates are assigned by CD, 3 in each of Alabama's 7 Congressional Districts.  If a candidate wins a majority of the vote (or is the only candidate above 20%), they win all 3 delegates.  Otherwise, the winner receives 2 delegates and the second-place finisher receives 1 delegates.

26 delegates are assigned At-Large.  If a candidate wins a majority of the vote (or is the only candidate above 20%), they win all 26 delegates.  Otherwise, the delegates are distributed among all candidates above 20%, in proportion to their share of the vote among all threshold-meeting candidates.  Fractions are rounded to the nearest whole number.  If too many or too few delegates are assigned, the last-place finisher loses delegates or the first-place finisher gains delegates, respectively.

RNC Members

Bill Armistead
Paul Reynolds
Bettye Fine Collins - Santorum

Results (as of 4/6)

Santorum - 22
Gingrich - 13
Romney - 12

Results have been certified (http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/gingrich_to_keep_questioned_al.html).

American Samoa

Overview
9 Delegates (0.39% of total)
Convention
6 At-Large
3 RNC Members

A Territorial Convention meets and chooses 6 At-Large delegates.  "The delegates from American Samoa are chosen in such a way so that they best reflect the presidential preference of the Caucus/Convention participants."

RNC Members

Victor Tofaeono - Romney
Te'o J. Fuavai - Romney
Amata C. Radewagen - Romney

Results (as of 3/14)

Romney won all delegates.

Hawaii

Overview
20 Delegates (0.87% of total)
Caucus
11 At-Large (Proportional)
6 by CD (Proportional)
3 RNC Members

Based on the caucus vote, 11 At-Large delegates and 6 CD delegates (3 for each CD) are assigned.  In each jurisdiction, starting with the first-place finisher, delegates are assigned in proportion to the candidate's share of the total vote in that jurisdiction, rounding all fractions up.  Repeat for the next-place finishers until all delegates are assigned.

RNC Members

David Chang
Ted Liu
Miriam Hellreich

Results (as of 3/14)

Romney - 9
Santorum - 5
Paul - 3

Mississippi

Overview
40 Delegates (1.75% of total)
Primary
25 At-Large (Proportional, 15%)
12 by CD (Proportional, 15%)
3 RNC Members

12 delegates are assigned by CD, 3 in each of Mississippi's 4 CDs.  25 delegates are assigned based on the statewide vote.  In each jurisdiction, if a candidate receives a majority of the vote, they receive all delegates.  Otherwise, delegates are assigned amongst all candidates meeting a 15% threshold, in proportion to each candidate's share of votes among threshold-meeting candidates.  Rounding is done to the nearest whole number.  If too many or too few delegates are assigned, the last-place finisher loses delegates or the first-place finisher gains delegates, respectively.

RNC Members

Joe Nosef
Henry Barbour - Romney
Jeanne Luckey

Note that Henry Barbour was in the Perry camp until he dropped out.

Results (as of 3/14)

Santorum - 13
Gingrich - 12
Romney - 12


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 28, 2012, 10:24:59 PM
With Arizona called for Romney, he wins the state's 29 delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 12:38:51 AM
Going to wait until the morning before seriously tackling Michigan.  A first glance would seem to suggest Romney has at least 13 delegates in the bag, and Santorum has at least 7.  I expect a majority of the remaining districts will break towards Santorum.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on February 29, 2012, 09:56:37 AM
Going to wait until the morning before seriously tackling Michigan.  A first glance would seem to suggest Romney has at least 13 delegates in the bag, and Santorum has at least 7.  I expect a majority of the remaining districts will break towards Santorum.

RCP is giving Romney 14, Santorum 12.  It looks like an even split of CD's.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 12:30:50 PM
Michigan by-CD results.  Again, not all precincts are reporting so there may be resulting errors.

CD 1: Very Likely Santorum.  Santorum has a 687-vote lead in the whole counties that comprise CD 1.  Mason County is split between CD 1 and CD 2.  Mason County is not reporting more detailed results, but Santorum won the county as a whole, so it is very unlikely Romney will make up the difference there.

CD 2: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 8500 votes.

CD 3: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 1100 votes.

CD 4: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 2000 votes.

CD 5: Too Close To Call.  Romney has around a 900 vote lead outside of Tuscola County (with some uncertainty, mainly due to incomplete reporting of absentee votes by precinct in Saginaw Twp). Tuscola County is not reporting by precinct, and Santorum leads there, but it seems unlikely that Santorum will make up the difference there.  However, the AP shows Santorum with a 200-vote lead (thanks cinyc!), so I don't know what to make of it.

CD 6: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 4000 votes.

CD 7: Santorum.  Santorum wins by around 700 votes.

CD 8: Romney.

CD 9: Romney.

CD 10: Likely Romney.  Division of Sterling Heights City and Tuscola County is unclear, but it seems Romney won the district by at least 2000 votes.

CD 11: Romney.

CD 12: Romney.

CD 13: Likely Santorum. (apparently, according to the AP)

CD 14: Romney.

I didn't bother digging through Wayne County, but I find it very unlikely Santorum wins a district there.

That's a total of 7 CDs for Romney, and 7 for Santorum.  This results in a 15-15 split of delegates in favor of Romney.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: cinyc on February 29, 2012, 12:52:20 PM
Macomb precinct results are here (http://74.208.45.94/m9/107-DEM_106-REP-bd.html).

MI-10 went to Romney.   MI-13 went to Santorum.  MI-05 is close, but Santorum leads by 269 votes with 7 precincts out per the AP (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2012/by_cd/MI_GOP_0228_VD.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS).

If Santorum's MI-05 lead holds,  it should be 8-6 Santorum, which means he won the most delegates 16-14.  If not, it's a tie and Romney wins the delegate tally 16-14.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 01:46:25 PM
Macomb precinct results are here (http://74.208.45.94/m9/107-DEM_106-REP-bd.html).

MI-10 went to Romney.   MI-13 went to Santorum.  MI-05 is close, but Santorum leads by 269 votes with 7 precincts out per the AP (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2012/by_cd/MI_GOP_0228_VD.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS).

If Santorum's MI-05 lead holds,  it should be 8-6 Santorum, which means he won the most delegates 16-14.  If not, it's a tie and Romney wins the delegate tally 16-14.

Yeah, I found the Macomb county results, and Romney does indeed win CD 10.

I do not feel like digging through Wayne County, so I will trust the AP there.  Number of votes in CD 13 is so small compared to the other CDs, it's pretty hilarious.

I am skeptical of the AP's CD 5 results, personally.  CD 5 breakdown:

Arenac, Bay, Genesse, and Iosco counties are entirely within CD 5.  In these counties:

Romney - 18632, Santorum - 18126 (506 vote margin for Romney).

Saginaw County is split with CD 4.  CD 5 contains the entirety of Blumfield Township, Bridgeport Township, Buena Vista Township, Carrollton Township, City of Saginaw, Spaulding Township, City of Zilwaukee, and Zilwaukee Township.  In these municipalities:

Romney - 1274, Santorum - 1622 (348 vote margin for Santorum).

Saginaw Township is split with CD 4.  Due to splitting of precincts, it's impossible to say the exact vote split.  However, the election-day vote in the CD 5 portion appears to be approximately:

Romney - 1561, Santorum - 1132 (429 vote margin for Romney, approximate).

The Absentee Vote is not reported by precinct (and many municipalities in Saginaw County aren't reporting AV at all, making me suspect that some may be from outside Saginaw Twp).  Assuming the Saginaw Twp AV vote breaks down by the same proportion by CDs as the election-day vote, and the %Romney isn't different in each CD (in actuality, Santorum did better in the CD-4 portion):

Romney - 403, Santorum - 119 (284 vote margin for Romney, approximately).

This is an approximate 871-vote margin for Romney outside of Tuscola County.  The most uncertainty is in the absentee vote totals in Saginaw Twp, but I'd imagine this margin is still accurate to within 150 votes either way.

In Tuscola County as a whole, the split was:

Romney - 2081, Santorum - 3089 (1008 vote margin for Santorum)

Slightly more of Tuscola County is in CD 10 than CD 5.  It thus seems quite unlikely, barring weird voting patterns, that Santorum would make up the difference in Tuscola County.

For main-page purposes, I'm going to move CD 5 back to Uncommitted, for now (Romney and Santorum trade CD 10 and CD 13).  The remaining delegates are split 15-13 for Santorum.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 02:12:55 PM
I found an actual MI GOP source for the CD breakdowns.  Since the MI GOP is what matters here, we should take this as the most authoritative source:

MI GOP Primary Results by CD (http://www.migopprimary.com/index.asp)

This has some major differences from the AP results.  Note that Romney is ahead in CD 5 by a few hundred votes, as expected.  CD 14 is the really odd one, though, with more than double the number of votes reported here than in the AP results.


Both AP and MI GOP counts are missing thousands of votes (compared to the statewide total), so they obviously haven't finished their tallying.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: cinyc on February 29, 2012, 02:48:04 PM
For main-page purposes, I'm going to move CD 5 back to Uncommitted, for now (Romney and Santorum trade CD 10 and CD 13).  The remaining delegates are split 15-13 for Santorum.
Why do you get 15-13?  Are the statewide two delegates split or do they both go to the winner?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 03:29:05 PM
For main-page purposes, I'm going to move CD 5 back to Uncommitted, for now (Romney and Santorum trade CD 10 and CD 13).  The remaining delegates are split 15-13 for Santorum.
Why do you get 15-13?  Are the statewide two delegates split or do they both go to the winner?

The reports are rather conflicting on that point.  The original delegate plan (pre-sanctions) had the At-Large delegates being assigned proportionally, with a 15% threshold.

Post-sanctions, it hasn't been as clear how the remaining 2 At-Large delegates will be assigned.  Some sources have said WTA, but the campaigns and sources within the MI GOP (http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2012/02/2012-republican-delegate-allocation_14.html) seem to indicate they'd be allocated proportionally (i.e. 1 for each), and I'm going with the latter interpretation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 05:17:23 PM
To make clearer my skepticism of the AP results by CD:

It's clear the AP is missing a bunch of results.  If you sum up their results by CD, Romney is 23,405 votes short of his statewide total (according to the Michigan SoS), and Santorum is short 16,582.

Most likely they just omit precincts that are split or that they are unsure about which CD they're in...it's 99% of precincts they know about reporting.

The situation for the MI GOP count is a bit better, but a bit weirder.  Romney is only short 893 votes, but Santorum has 2,532 more votes than in the SoS count.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 05:42:33 PM
Update on Alaska:

A Presdential Preference Poll is held statewide on March 6th, Super Tuesday, but only 17 out of 40 District Conventions are held on the 6th, and it is the preference of attendees at the latter that matter.

As a result, we should really not try to extrapolate any delegate information from the results from Alaska on Tuesday (not all people who vote in the Presidential Preference Poll will attend the District Conventions, even if held on the same day and in the same place; there are registration fees for the latter, for example).

We will not know the complete delegate distribution from Alaska until the final District Convention is held on March 24 in Nome.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 05:44:19 PM
Alaska: March 6

Overview
27 Delegates (1.18% of total)
Conventions
24 At-Large, Proportional
3 RNC members

AK GOP Rules (http://alaskarepublicans.com/about-the-arp/party-rules/)

The 24 At-Large delegates are allocated proportionally based on the vote held on March 6.  The proportionality is not based on the raw vote; instead, each district convention has its say weighted by the number of delegates to which it is entitled at the State Convention.  Number of delegates per district can be found here (http://alaskarepublicans.com/convention-call/).

All rounding of fractional delegates is done up for the number of highest finishers so that 24 delegates are allocated; all other rounding is down.

If any candidate entitled to delegates drops out between March 6 and the State Convention (April 26-28), the State Convention chooses officially 'Uncommitted' delegates in their stead.

RNC Members

Randy Ruedrich
Ralph Seekins
Debbie Joslin

Preliminary Results (as of 3/22)

Romney - 8
Santorum - 8
Paul - 6
Gingrich - 2

A final canvass of the votes has been completed (http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/gop-vote-finalized-rick-santorum-picks-alaska-delegate) and the resulting delegate count calculated.  Santorum picked up a delegate that I had originally assigned to Gingrich.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on February 29, 2012, 10:58:54 PM
AP has updated their by-CD results and now Romney has a 500-odd vote lead in CD 5.

I still don't like the look of some of their Wayne County results, but I now think everyone is in agreement as to who won which CDs.

This makes a final delegate total of Romney 15, Santorum 15 (with an outside shot at a 16-14 split if Romney is awarded both At-Large seats).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 01, 2012, 12:42:58 AM
I was mistaken as to the role of the Wyoming Precinct Caucuses (the Green Papers are not gospel, the Green Papers are not gospel).

My apologies to the folks I (wrongly) "corrected" over the last week or so.

Very tentative delegate allocation is:

Romney - 11
Santorum - 9
Paul - 6

(An alternative delegate allocation featuring Romney with 10 and Gingrich with 1 is also feasible [and CNN uses it], but I imagine Gingrich will get winnowed out at the County Conventions).

As usual, this doesn't account for a whole host of factors, all of which are exacerbated by the low turnout.  More details in the main Wyoming post. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3209121#msg3209121)


Title: The Treasure Fleet stops in San Juan in March, late in the month.
Post by: Erc on March 01, 2012, 02:16:20 AM
Late March
or, The Treasure Fleet stops in San Juan in March, late in the month.

Puerto Rico: March 18

Overview
23 Delegates (1.01% of total)
Primary
20 At-Large, Proportional
3 RNC Members

If a candidate wins a majority of the vote, they receive all 20 delegates.  Otherwise, the delegates are allocated proportionally, apparently with a 15% threshold (rounding details unknown).

RNC Members

Carlos Méndez - Gingrich
Luis G. Fortuno - Romney
Zoraida "Zori" Fonalledas - Romney

Results (as of 3/18)

Romney won a majority and all 20 delegates.

Illinois: March 20

Overview
69 Delegates (3.02% of total)
Primary/Convention
54 by CD, "Loophole"
12 At-Large, Convention

IL GOP Bylaws (http://www.digitalvictorycms.com/_uploaded/770881-ByLaws.pdf)
Sample Ballot (http://www.chicagoelections.com/sampleballots/REP-ES/REP-ES-468.pdf)

Each CD has between 2-4 delegates assigned to it, depending on its share of the vote for John McCain in 2008.  The exact allocation per CD can be found at the Green Papers (http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/IL-R#0306).  Voters vote for delegates directly, casting their vote for 2-4 (depending on their district) delegates, and the top 2-4 (as appropriate) vote winners have their ticket punched for Tampa.  Delegate candidates' Presidential Preference is listed by their name on the ballot, though the delegates are not officially bound.  

A presidential preference poll is also held; this has no bearing on delegate allocation.

12 delegates are chosen by the State Convention on June 8-9.  It is unclear how the delegates attending the State Convention are chosen.

Ballot Access

Santorum has no delegates on the ballot in 4th, 5th, 7th, and 13th CDs, and thus can win at most 44 out of a possible 54 points delegates.

RNC Members

Patrick Brady - Romney
Richard Williamson - Romney
Demetra DeMonte

Preliminary Results (as of 3/20)

Romney - 42
Santorum - 12

The AP has yet to call 11 delegates, so some of these may change as the final results come in.  Remember that a final 12 delegates will not be selected until June 9.

Louisiana: March 24, April 28

Overview
46 Delegates (2.01% of total)
Primary/Caucus/Convention
20 At-Large (Proportional, 25%)
18 by CD (Caucus/Convention)
5 At-Large (Smoke-Filled Room)
3 RNC Members

Primary: March 24

20 delegates are assigned proportionally, based on the percentage of the statewide total vote received, amongst all candidates meeting a 25% threshold.  Fractions are rounded to the nearest whole number.  Any remaining delegates (left over due to rounding errors or the threshold) are officially Uncommitted.

Caucus: April 28

District Caucuses choose delegates to the State Convention.

State Convention: June 2

Attendees meet by CD and choose 3 delegates per CD, for a total of 18. 

The convention as a whole also chooses the 20 At-Large delegates; these are mostly bound by the results of the primary, except for any designated as Uncommitted (there are 5 such delegates).

5 additional At-Large delegates are nominated by the Executive Committee and elected by the convention as a whole.

RNC Members

Roger F Villere, Jr.
Ross Little, Jr.
Ruth Ulrich

Note that Ruth Ulrich is also the vice-chairwoman of the RNC.

Preliminary Results (as of 3/25)
Santorum - 10
Romney - 5
Uncommitted - 5

Remember, an additional 23 delegates (as well as those 5 Uncommitted At-Large delegates) are chosen later in the process.

Missouri: March 15-24, April 21, June 2

Overview
52 Delegates (2.27% of total)
Caucus/Convention
24 by CD
25 At-Large
3 RNC Members

Missouri Caucus and Convention information (http://www.mogop.org/2012stateconvention/caucuses/)

A Presidential Preference Primary was held on February 7.  This had no impact whatsoever on delegate allocation.

County Caucuses: March 15-24

County caucuses elect delegates to Congressional District and State Conventions.  Most counties caucus by March 17; however, Jackson County and the city of St. Louis caucus on the 24th.  The number of delegates elected per county is proportional to the county's vote for John McCain in 2008.  Detailed allocation can be found here (http://www.mogop.org/docs/sc2012/sc2012_allocation.pdf).

It is unlikely that reliable projections can be made from these caucuses, as no straw poll is held and there is no centralized reporting of any kind of results.  As such, we will be in the dark until April 21.

CD Conventions: April 21

Each CD elects 3 delegates, for a total of 24 statewide.  Attendees vote for individual delegates, who will have stated their presidential preference.

State Convention: June 2

The convention as a whole chooses 25 At-Large delegates.  Attendees vote on full slates of delegates.  If no slate wins a majority in the first ballot, the top two slates are voted on in the second ballot; the winning slate goes to Tampa.

RNC Members

David Cole
Lance Beshore
Ann Dickinson


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Tender Branson on March 01, 2012, 06:01:30 AM
Which site has the best and most uptodate delegate allocation ?

Because if you look at NYT, CNN, FOX, CBS, Greenpapers they all have different delegate counts.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Franzl on March 01, 2012, 06:04:30 AM
Which site has the best and most uptodate delegate allocation ?

Because if you look at NYT, CNN, FOX, CBS, Greenpapers they all have different delegate counts.

The caucuses that have non-binding preference polls involve quite a bit of guessing..


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on March 01, 2012, 08:38:18 AM
Michigan by-CD results.  Again, not all precincts are reporting so there may be resulting errors.

CD 1: Very Likely Santorum.  Santorum has a 687-vote lead in the whole counties that comprise CD 1.  Mason County is split between CD 1 and CD 2.  Mason County is not reporting more detailed results, but Santorum won the county as a whole, so it is very unlikely Romney will make up the difference there.

CD 2: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 8500 votes.

CD 3: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 1100 votes.

CD 4: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 2000 votes.

CD 5: Too Close To Call.  Romney has around a 900 vote lead outside of Tuscola County (with some uncertainty, mainly due to incomplete reporting of absentee votes by precinct in Saginaw Twp). Tuscola County is not reporting by precinct, and Santorum leads there, but it seems unlikely that Santorum will make up the difference there.  However, the AP shows Santorum with a 200-vote lead (thanks cinyc!), so I don't know what to make of it.

CD 6: Santorum.  Santorum wins by at least 4000 votes.

CD 7: Santorum.  Santorum wins by around 700 votes.

CD 8: Romney.

CD 9: Romney.

CD 10: Likely Romney.  Division of Sterling Heights City and Tuscola County is unclear, but it seems Romney won the district by at least 2000 votes.

CD 11: Romney.

CD 12: Romney.

CD 13: Likely Santorum. (apparently, according to the AP)

CD 14: Romney.

I didn't bother digging through Wayne County, but I find it very unlikely Santorum wins a district there.

That's a total of 8 CDs for Romney, and 6 for Santorum.  This results in a 17-13 split of delegates in favor of Romney.

I think you miscounted, that adds up to seven CDs for both Romney and Santorum.  Also, MI-13 could be explained simply by the fact that there are so few Republicans in the district that even a fairly small number of Democrats voting for Santorum could have actually affected the outcome here (I would argue it certainly made CD-12 closer than it should've been).  Another possibility is that there are so few Republicans here that the people who still are Republicans in the district are farther to the right than one would expect given the area (sort of like how I'd bet that the people in VT who are still active Republican primary voters are more conservative than one would expect given that it is VT, and that as a result while Romney will easily win the state, it won't be by as big a margin as people expect).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: © tweed on March 01, 2012, 01:18:06 PM
so you have Romney at under 50% of delegates awarded so far?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 01, 2012, 02:06:57 PM
so you have Romney at under 50% of delegates awarded so far?

Just barely over.  A bit more over if you include supers in states that haven't voted yet.

I ran through a somewhat optimistic (but not crazily so) scenario for Santorum recently...Romney just sort of hovers around that 50% mark for the rest of the campaign, and would need maybe only a third of the superdelegates to clinch on the first ballot.

I'll post a more detailed set of projections after Super Tuesday, but it is going to take some doing for Romney not to effectively clinch this by June 3.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on March 01, 2012, 02:30:02 PM
A measure I would like to see from one of you number crunchers is what % of upcoming outstanding delegates each candidate needs to win in order to secure the nomination.

This metric can be updated after each primary.

I suspect that sometime in April Gingrich, Santorum and Paul will all reach the 100% mark, and so while Romney will still not have enough to win, the remaining candidates will be guaranteed not to win. At that point they will only remain in hopes of forcing a contested convention, and calls for them to withdraw will probably rise to a new level.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on March 01, 2012, 03:56:04 PM
I'll post a more detailed set of projections after Super Tuesday, but it is going to take some doing for Romney not to effectively clinch this by June 3.

Romney's going to clinch this two days *before* California votes?  ;)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 01, 2012, 05:25:39 PM
I'll post a more detailed set of projections after Super Tuesday, but it is going to take some doing for Romney not to effectively clinch this by June 3.

Romney's going to clinch this two days *before* California votes?  ;)


Yeah, when Obama wins South Dakota and Montana on June 3, 2008. ;)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Tidewater_Wave on March 01, 2012, 10:16:06 PM
Republicans take note: Obama is pulling for Santorum which is because he thinks Santorum is the easiest to beat. I'll be damned if that guy in the oval office is going to tell me who I should vote for to be his opponent.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 02, 2012, 12:22:53 AM
As noted elsewhere, the Michigan GOP has clarified (http://www.freep.com/article/20120301/NEWS15/120301038/Mitt-Romney-gets-Michigan-s-large-delegates) that the 2 At-Large delegates are to be assigned WTA, so the final total is, as cinyc suspected, 16-14 in favor of Romney.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Nation on March 03, 2012, 10:49:45 AM
Politico reporting that Santorum may not qualify for upwards of 18 Ohio delegates because he didn't qualify for any in nine different congressional distircts.


I mean, we can talk about "momemtum" day and night but if THIS is how Santorum's campaign is being run, combined with failing to qualify for the VA ballot -- then wow. I knew Romney's campaign was organized, but I think it's the failure of the other campaigns to have any semblance of organization that is helping him more.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 03, 2012, 05:04:17 PM
Politico reporting that Santorum may not qualify for upwards of 18 Ohio delegates because he didn't qualify for any in nine different congressional distircts.


I mean, we can talk about "momemtum" day and night but if THIS is how Santorum's campaign is being run, combined with failing to qualify for the VA ballot -- then wow. I knew Romney's campaign was organized, but I think it's the failure of the other campaigns to have any semblance of organization that is helping him more.

He is at least on the ballot in 6 of those congressional districts (he isn't in the other 3, for the purposes of district delegates), so he has a shot of 'winning' those delegates.  I assume the Ohio GOP will coordinate with his campaign when choosing whatever additional delegates need to be allocated.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 03, 2012, 05:09:44 PM
Politico reporting that Santorum may not qualify for upwards of 18 Ohio delegates because he didn't qualify for any in nine different congressional distircts.


I mean, we can talk about "momemtum" day and night but if THIS is how Santorum's campaign is being run, combined with failing to qualify for the VA ballot -- then wow. I knew Romney's campaign was organized, but I think it's the failure of the other campaigns to have any semblance of organization that is helping him more.

He is at least on the ballot in 6 of those congressional districts (he isn't in the other 3, for the purposes of district delegates), so he has a shot of 'winning' those delegates.  I assume the Ohio GOP will coordinate with his campaign when choosing whatever additional delegates need to be allocated.

I think there is a thread on the party rules on this issue.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 04, 2012, 12:55:52 AM
Making a projection in Washington is difficult, due to the enforced runoff balloting at the LD/County conventions (once sub-20% slates are eliminated, it's French-style between the two top placers).  This means that tactical voting plays an extremely important role in determining what slates are chosen to go to the State Convention.

If one is completely agnostic about this, and just assumes supporters of candidates who don't make the last runoff distribute themselves evenly (or just don't vote), Romney easily wins the entire Tampa delegation.

If one assumes Gingrich supporters predominantly go to Santorum (while remaining agnostic about Paulistas), Santorum should pick up the delegates from CDs 5 (Spokane) and 6 (Olympic Peninsula), but the convention as a whole is dominated by Romney supporters.  Paul is a non-factor.

Of course, in addition to these tactical voting concerns, there are the more mundane concerns...LD results aren't known yet, so it's possible someone other than Romney will be able to dominate certain King County (and environs) LDs and change this analysis.  And of course, Stealth Paul, etc.

I'm going to tentatively go with the Gingrich -> Santorum tactical voting prescription.  To be honest, I think it's a decent lower bound for Romney, and as he's the man to beat we may as well be conservative with his delegate projections.

Romney - 34
Santorum - 6

 


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on March 05, 2012, 08:54:04 AM
Have you got a map with the number of delegates on each of the states like the EV map? It'd be very helpful. Best thing about super tuesday is that Romney's best states have few delegates (apart from Virginia).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 05, 2012, 10:51:37 AM
(
)

I need to display Maine and Nebraska's CDs in order to get the proper delegate total to show up in the state itself; pay no attention to the '1' value in each CD (though I have colored the Maine CDs appropriately for reference).

The numbers off the coast of Florida correspond to Puerto Rico and the insular territories (Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Marianas).  All these territories have already voted, all overwhelmingly for Romney.

Atlas conventions for the colors:  Green = Romney, Blue = Gingrich, Orange = Santorum, Yellow = Paul (ME CD 2).

Of course, most states are not winner-takes-all, so don't take a map like this too seriously.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 05, 2012, 11:12:48 AM
Chronological delegate assignment:

(
)

For states that have multiple processes or stages (Louisiana, for example), the conclusion of the first media-reported process/stage that has any bearing on delegate allocation is what is reflected here.

Gray: Already occurred
Orange: April 21
Red: April 24
Blue: May 8
Green: May 15-29
Yellow: June

All insular territories have already voted.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on March 05, 2012, 01:33:36 PM
Did you colour Alaska wrong or does the caucus just not pick the delegates tomorrow? Anyway, thanks very much. I love the way Georgia is the 4th most important.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 05, 2012, 03:03:36 PM
Did you colour Alaska wrong or does the caucus just not pick the delegates tomorrow? Anyway, thanks very much. I love the way Georgia is the 4th most important.

The poll taken tomorrow does not actually determine the delegate allocations; a separate poll is taken upon entrance to the district conventions, which take place over the next few weeks.  A sizable number of the district conventions do take place tomorrow (a bit under half of the total), but they do not finish until Nome has its on the 24th.  Even for the district conventions that do take place tomorrow, there could be a substantial difference between the two votes; there are registration fees for the district conventions, for example.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on March 06, 2012, 12:03:58 AM
(
)

I need to display Maine and Nebraska's CDs in order to get the proper delegate total to show up in the state itself; pay no attention to the '1' value in each CD (though I have colored the Maine CDs appropriately for reference).

The numbers off the coast of Florida correspond to Puerto Rico and the insular territories (Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Marianas).  Puerto Rico unfortunately no longer displays on the map as it used to.

Atlas conventions for the colors:  Green = Romney, Blue = Gingrich, Orange = Santorum, Yellow = Paul (ME CD 2).

Of course, most states are not winner-takes-all (only AZ & FL have been so far), so don't take a map like this too seriously.

Just change the year to 1968 and the Maine and Nebraska CDs go away.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 06, 2012, 11:57:34 PM
The easy calls:

Romney wins all of Idaho's 32 delegates as he got a majority in the state.  

Romney wins all of Massachusetts' 38 delegates as no other candidate got above 15% of the vote.

In North Dakota, the delegation (which automatically includes around 7 superdelegates) may assign itself proportionally based on the statewide vote.  If this happens, the vote would presumably be 11 Santorum, 8 Paul, 7 Romney and 2 Gingrich.  I'll check later to see how reasonable this expectation is, but I'll stick with this allocation for the time being.

In Virginia, Romney won a majority statewide and won all At-Large delegates.  Apparently, Paul won VA-03 and does pick up 3 delegates in the state to Romney's 43.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: muon2 on March 07, 2012, 08:41:29 AM
Politico reporting that Santorum may not qualify for upwards of 18 Ohio delegates because he didn't qualify for any in nine different congressional distircts.


I mean, we can talk about "momemtum" day and night but if THIS is how Santorum's campaign is being run, combined with failing to qualify for the VA ballot -- then wow. I knew Romney's campaign was organized, but I think it's the failure of the other campaigns to have any semblance of organization that is helping him more.

That's been very apparent in IL, too. Romney was organized with delegate slates last summer, and started getting signatures right away in the fall. Paul was reasonably well organized. Gingrich only put together a slate over Thanksgiving weekend. Santorum had no presence until Cain dropped out, and then basically inherited the Cain slate.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 07, 2012, 12:33:31 PM
Super Tuesday Results

Georgia

Gingrich wins the At-Large delegates, 20-11, and picks up the 3 RNC members for winning the state.  Santorum falls just short of the 20% threshold needed for winning At-Large delegates.

DeKalb County (feat. Atlanta) has yet to report breakdowns by CD.  As a result, I cannot call the delegates from CDs 4, 5, and 6 as of yet.  Among the other 11 CDs, Gingrich wins 27 delegates, while Romney and Santorum win 3 a pieces.  The remaining 9 delegates will presumably break strongly for Romney, who won DeKalb county.

Total:
Gingrich - 50
Romney - 14
Santorum - 3
Pending - 9

Idaho

Romney wins all 32 delegates.

Massachusetts

Romney wins all 38 delegates.

North Dakota

If the delegation is allocated proportionally:

Santorum - 11
Paul - 8
Romney - 7
Gingrich - 2

I'll see how feasible this is later.

Ohio

Romney - 38
Santorum - 21
Unallocated - 4

Those 4 'Unallocated' delegates are the delegates in CDs where Santorum won but did not file a complete delegate slate.  A contest committee (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/rick-santorums-ohio-delegate-problems-pile-up/) will decide how these delegates will be awarded.

Also remember that all Ohio delegates are only "morally bound" and could shift their vote.

Oklahoma

Santorum - 14
Romney - 13
Gingrich - 13

Tennessee

Is not providing CD breakdowns at the moment, although they easily could.  The At-Large delegation split 12-9-7, Santorum-Romney-Gingrich.  The CD delegates should split heavily in favor of Santorum.

Virginia

Romney - 43
Paul - 3

Vermont

Romney - 9
Paul - 4
Santorum - 4


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 07, 2012, 02:23:58 PM
Tennessee CD Results

Remember, in each CD, the winner gets 2 and the placer gets 1 (unless someone breaks 2/3rds or only 1 candidate breaks 20%).  The old CD lines are used, as the new ones were not in place prior to the filing deadlines.

CD 1: Winner: Santorum.  Placer: Slight Lean Romney

In the counties entirely within CD 1, Gingrich has a 596-vote lead over Romney.  In Sevier County, which is about 75% in CD 1, Romney has a 865-vote lead over Gingrich.  In Jefferson County, which is about 22% in CD 1, Romney has a 61-vote lead over Gingrich.  Romney may squeak this one out, but it really depends on the exact breakdown in Sevier.

CD 2: Winner: Santorum.  Placer: Romney

CD 3: Winner: Santorum.  Placer:  Slight Lean Romney

In the counties wholly within CD 3, Romney has a 57-vote lead.  In Jefferson County (78% in CD 3), Romney has a 61-vote lead.  In Roane County (26% in CD 3), Romney has a 224-vote lead.

CD 4:  Winner: Santorum.  Placer: Likely Gingrich

In the counties wholly within CD 4, Gingrich has a 1091-vote lead.  In Roane County (76% in CD 4), Romney has a 224-vote lead.  In Hickman County (59% in CD 4), Gingrich has a 132-vote lead.  In Williamson County (12% in CD 4), Romney has a 3465-vote lead.

CD 5:  Winner:  Likely Santorum.  Placer: Likely Romney

Despite a narrow win in Davidson, Romney was trounced in Wilson and Cheatham counties, and likely loses the CD.

CD 6:  Winner: Santorum.  Placer: Likely Gingrich

Gingrich is ahead by 177 votes outside of Wilson county.  Gingrich is also ahead 501 votes in Wilson, though only 22% of the county is in CD 6.

CD 7:  Winner:  Likely Santorum.  Placer:  Likely Romney

CD 8:  Winner: Santorum.  Placer:  Likely Gingrich

CD 9:  Winner: Lean Santorum.  Placer:  Lean Romney

Due to the split of Shelby County, CDs 7, 8, and 9 are harder to figure out.  CD 9, in particular, is almost sheer guesswork.

If these assignments hold (and there are many razor-thin margins for second place, and Lord knows about Shelby County):

Santorum - 18
Romney - 6
Gingrich - 3


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 07, 2012, 03:03:46 PM
Alaska, North Dakota Updates

I apparently, once again, misread the Alaska GOP rules.  Last night's voting results were indeed binding on the GOP delegation; there is no additional ballot held at the District Conventions for fee-paying attendees, as I had previously stated.

The (approximate) resulting delegate allocation:

Romney - 8
Santorum - 7
Paul - 6
Gingrich - 3

This is based off of the total statewide vote; if anyone can find breakdowns by LD or precinct, I'd be able to come up with a more accurate result---in particular, Santorum is on the cusp of gaining another delegate, at Gingrich's expense.



North Dakota's rules are apparently quite similar; there are separate District Conventions which actually elect the delegates to the State Conventions---these were not what happened last night.  These began on January 17, and end on March 10.  The final delegation to Tampa may choose to assign itself proportionally based on the results of last night's vote---or they may not, it is entirely voluntary.  For now, I'll assume that they do---but if they don't, the results of the District and State Conventions may be quite important.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: © tweed on March 07, 2012, 03:47:03 PM
so you have Romney at 52.6% of total.  could dwindle towards the half mark these next few weeks.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 07, 2012, 04:10:57 PM
so you have Romney at 52.6% of total.  could dwindle towards the half mark these next few weeks.

And then he'll come shooting back up in April.

My current conservative (i.e. favorable-to-Santorum) projections have Romney coming in at 50.1% of total delegates at the end of this process, leaving the supers uncommitted.  That is, even if every single currently undeclared super declares against Romney, he still wins on the first ballot.

I'll be refining these "worst case for Romney" projections and scenarios in the coming weeks...but the future looks quite bright for Mr. Romney, even if it takes until June for his opponents to give up the ghost.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: nclib on March 07, 2012, 11:19:57 PM
It would be good to have a running tally (either here or on another thread) of results by CD.

I think these have been confirmed:

ID (all) - Romney
WY-AL - Romney
MA (all) - Romney
SC-1 - Romney
SC 2-7 Gingrich
VT-AL Romney
ND-AL Santorum
MN 1-4,6-8 Santorum
MN-5 - Paul
ME-1 Romney
ME-2 Paul
ND-AL Santorum
IA 1-3 Romney
IA-4 Santorum
AK-AL Romney


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on March 08, 2012, 12:21:53 AM
I'd be surprised if Santorum won TN-9, in 2008 McCain won the district despite Huckabee winning the county, this seems like a similar situation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 08, 2012, 12:37:34 AM
I'd be surprised if Santorum won TN-9, in 2008 McCain won the district despite Huckabee winning the county, this seems like a similar situation.

Very plausible.

Without any other information, my proxy would be the votes for the individual delegates in a given district; if Gingrich did well, Santorum probably did too.  However, in TN-9 not even Gingrich had a slate of delegates.

Shelby County's election returns website is hilarious, by the way.


In other news, DeKalb finally reported in in Georgia, and those 9 delegates did indeed break 5-4 Romney, as expected.  Gingrich was just short of a majority in CD 4.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 08, 2012, 07:57:43 PM
April 3

With April comes the removal of the requirements that delegate allocation be proportional, and we have some WTA states again, simplifying our lives.

District of Columbia

Overview
19 Delegates (0.83% of total)
Primary
16 At-Large, WTA
3 RNC Members

DC Primary Rules (http://www.dcgop.com/uploads/File/DCRC%20DRAFT%202012%20Primary%20Plan.pdf)

The winner of the primary receives all 16 At-Large delegates.

RNC Members

Robert Kabel
Anthony W. Parker
Betsy Warronen - Romney

Results (as of 4/4)

Romney won and receives all 16 delegates.

Maryland

Overview
37 Delegates (1.62% of total)
Primary
13 At-Large, WTA
24 by CD, WTA

13 delegates (this includes the RNC members) are awarded to the winner of the primary.

3 delegates are awarded to the winner of each of Maryland's 8 CDs, for a total of 24 by CD.

RNC Members

RNC Members are bound to the statewide winner.

Results (as of 4/4)

Romney swept all CDs and wins all 37 delegates.

Wisconsin

Overview
42 Delegates (1.84% of total)
Primary
18 At-Large, WTA
24 by CD, WTA

WI GOP Constitution (http://www.wisgop.org/constitution-republican-party-wisconsin)

18 delegates (this includes the RNC members) are awarded to the winner of the primary.

3 delegates are awarded to the winner of each of Wisconsin's 8 CDs, for a total of 24 by CD.

RNC Members

RNC Members are bound to the statewide winner.

Results (as of 4/4)

Romney - 33
Santorum - 9

This is tentative, and still pending some CD results.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 08, 2012, 08:32:47 PM
April 24

Connecticut

Overview
28 Delegates (1.22% of total)
Primary
10 At-Large (Proportional, 20%)
15 by CD, WTA
3 RNC Members

CT GOP Rules (http://www.ct.gov/sots/LIB/sots/ElectionServices/tcrules/RSCC.pdf)

3 delegates are assigned to the winner of each of Connecticut's 5 CDs, for a total of 15 CDs.

10 delegates are assigned based on the statewide vote.  If a candidate gets a majority, they win all 10 delegates.  Otherwise, delegates are assigned among all candidates who meet a 20% threshold, proportionally to their share of the vote among all threshold-meeting candidates.  Fractions are rounded to the nearest whole number; if rounding errors occur, remove delegates from the loser or add delegates to the winner, as appropriate.

RNC Members

Jerry Labriola
John Frey
Pat Longo

Delaware

Overview
17 Delegates (0.74% of total)
Primary
17 At-Large, WTA

State Law (http://delcode.delaware.gov/title15/c031/sc05/index.shtml) leaves delegate allocation to the DE GOP, whose rules I cannot find at present.

The winner of the primary receives all 17 Delegates (including RNC Members)

RNC Members

RNC Members are bound to the primary winner.

New York

Overview
95 Delegates (4.16% of total)
Primary
34 At-Large, Proportional
58 by CD, WTA
3 RNC Members

NY State Law (http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=SB5753&term=&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Votes=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y), see section 2-122-b.

2 delegates are assigned to the winner of each of New York's 29 CDs (2000 boundaries), for a total of 58.

34 delegates are assigned based on the statewide vote.  If a candidate gets a majority, they win all 10 delegates.  Otherwise, delegates are assigned among all candidates who meet a 20% threshold, proportional to their share of the vote among all threshold-meeting candidates.  Round all fractions to the nearest whole number.  If rounding errors result, add candidates to the winner or remove them from the loser, as appropriate.

RNC Members

Ed Cox - Romney
Lawrence Kadish - Gingrich
Jennifer Rich

Pennsylvania

Overview
72 Delegates (3.15% of total)
'Loophole' Primary / Convention
59 by CD
10 At-Large (Convention)
3 RNC Members

I cannot find the PA GOP Rules at present.

In each CD, voters directly elect 3 or 4 (http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/PA-R#0424) delegates.  The presidential preference of the delegates is not listed on the ballot.  A Presidential Preference Poll is also held, but it has no influence on the delegate allocation.

A full list of delegate candidates can be found here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=150423.msg3225575#msg3225575).

On June 10, the Pennsylvania GOP State Committee chooses the 10 At-Large delegates.

RNC Members
Robert A. Gleason, Jr.
Robert B. Asher - Romney
Christine Toretti

Rhode Island

Overview
19 Delegates (0.83% of total)
Primary
16 by CD (Proportional)
3 RNC Members

RI Primary Rules (http://sos.ri.gov/documents/elections/2012%20DELEGATE%20SELECTION%20PROCESS%20Republican.pdf)

A candidate must receive 15% of the statewide vote in order to receive any delegates.

In each of Rhode Island's 2 CDs, 8 delegates are distributed proportionally based on the results of the vote in that CD.  Round fractions to the nearest whole number.  Resolution of rounding errors is done by the RI GOP State Central Committee.

RNC Members

Mark Zaccaria - Romney
Joseph Trillo - Romney
Carol A. Mumford



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on March 08, 2012, 10:46:24 PM
I'd be surprised if Santorum won TN-9, in 2008 McCain won the district despite Huckabee winning the county, this seems like a similar situation.

Very plausible.

Without any other information, my proxy would be the votes for the individual delegates in a given district; if Gingrich did well, Santorum probably did too.  However, in TN-9 not even Gingrich had a slate of delegates.

Shelby County's election returns website is hilarious, by the way.

I got the report from the Election Commission - Romney did win TN-9 which should give him 2 delegates and Santorum one.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 09, 2012, 01:04:16 AM
I'd be surprised if Santorum won TN-9, in 2008 McCain won the district despite Huckabee winning the county, this seems like a similar situation.

Very plausible.

Without any other information, my proxy would be the votes for the individual delegates in a given district; if Gingrich did well, Santorum probably did too.  However, in TN-9 not even Gingrich had a slate of delegates.

Shelby County's election returns website is hilarious, by the way.

I got the report from the Election Commission - Romney did win TN-9 which should give him 2 delegates and Santorum one.

Any other things to note?  I assume Santorum won all the other CDs, but did I get the second place finishers right?  (Romney second in 5 districts, Gingrich second in 3, Santorum second in 1)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on March 09, 2012, 04:18:59 AM
How did the Iowa district caucuses go?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 09, 2012, 04:23:23 AM
How did the Iowa district caucuses go?

They are this Saturday, along with the rest of Wyoming.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on March 10, 2012, 12:08:55 AM
Some time this weekend (BTW weekend for me is Sunday/Monday, I'm still working tomorrow), I might try to look up info on the Minnesota conventions that have been held, though I'll be somewhat busy (Mass Effect 3, plus I'm helping my buddies out setting up for the preview gathering for their new church on Sunday too.) But plenty of counties and districts should've had held their conventions already.

Unfortunately while Minnesota has several fine progressive blogs that report on the DFL caucus numbers well, Minnesota right wing blogs tend to be little more than hit pieces on Democrats and don't provide much useful info (for comparison the largest Minnesota progressive blog is titled the "Minnesota Progressive Project" while the largest conservative blog is titled "Minnesota Democrats Exposed".)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on March 10, 2012, 07:21:18 AM
Hopefully the Iowa district caucuses tell us about whether Ron Paul really does have an army of ninja delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Matthew on March 10, 2012, 07:38:17 AM
I'd bet that Romney takes quite a few of Pauls delegates away. Wouldn't suprise me if Santorum loses some too with those organizional problems.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 10, 2012, 08:16:15 AM
Hopefully the Iowa district caucuses tell us about whether Ron Paul really does have an army of ninja delegates.

Hopefully we get some reliable reports from people outside the Paul camp...


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on March 10, 2012, 11:58:09 AM
I'd bet that Romney takes quite a few of Pauls delegates away. Wouldn't suprise me if Santorum loses some too with those organizional problems.


Infact he does have an Iowa organisation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 11, 2012, 08:31:28 AM
Based on the results from the Wyoming County Conventions, I now project that Romney will have a majority of the support at the Wyoming State Convention, and will be able to elect a full slate of 14 At-Large delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Angel of Death on March 12, 2012, 12:53:37 PM
When exactly is Romney's relative delegate share most likely to be the smallest?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 12, 2012, 05:43:37 PM
When exactly is Romney's relative delegate share most likely to be the smallest?

Between South Carolina and Florida, of course. ;)

In all seriousness, if this continues as a competitive race to the finish...likely after Texas on May 29.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: defe07 on March 12, 2012, 06:26:02 PM
I need help looking for a Congressional District breakdown of the results from Ohio. Especially districts 6, 9 and 13.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2012, 06:32:12 PM
I need help looking for a Congressional District breakdown of the results from Ohio. Especially districts 6, 9 and 13.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_Congressional_Districts


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Adam Griffin on March 12, 2012, 09:56:04 PM
I need help looking for a Congressional District breakdown of the results from Ohio. Especially districts 6, 9 and 13.

Are the new CDs in effect in OH yet? The reason I ask is because the link Matthew posted appears to show a map of the old CDs. Here's something that might help you in your journey:

http://gardow.com/davebradlee/redistricting/davesredistricting2.0.aspx (http://gardow.com/davebradlee/redistricting/davesredistricting2.0.aspx)

Select OH as your state. At the top of the page (once it's loaded), you can check the 'Old CDs' box, which will display the old congressional districts. You'll be able to see each precinct and can then compile a list of precincts (in the counties that are split) and then reference that data to SOS/RPO precinct-level results, which I've yet to find after briefly looking on OHSOS' website.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: TJ in Oregon on March 12, 2012, 10:30:32 PM
The Ohio primary was counted based on the NEW congressional districts rather than the old ones.

Here's the map.
()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Matthew on March 12, 2012, 11:43:54 PM
based on that map, a rough guess
Santorum 5, 6, 15, 2, 4, 12, 7
Romney 8th*, 9, 11, 13, 3, 14, 10, 1, 16
http://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/results
8-Butler has 2,665 more votes for romney, while not even half of mercer is within the 8th. If it was santorum would take it, but unlikely.

Santorum doesn't get the 6th, 9th or 13th. Good thing Romney got the 9th and 13th anyways.

Santorum 18(would be 21)
Romney 27

At large
Romney 8
Santorum 7

For a total of
So Romney 8+27=35
Santorum 7+18=25


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 13, 2012, 07:49:37 AM
The Ohio SoS has had the by-CD results posted for a long while (at least for the delegates-by-CD vote, if not for the delegates-at-large vote)...while I appreciate your efforts, it wasn't really necessary.

The only Super Tuesday state without an accurate by-CD breakdown is Tennessee (we know Santorum won CDs 1-8, and Romney won CD 9, but we don't know who came in second everywhere).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 13, 2012, 11:01:21 PM
In Mississippi, all three candidates received between one-sixth and one-half of the vote in all jurisdictions.  It therefore appears that the delegate allocation is:

Santorum - 13
Gingrich - 12
Romney - 12

A detailed delegate breakdown in Alabama will require digging through precinct-level data (which I will do tomorrow).  In the meantime, we can allocate the At-Large delegates:

Santorum - 10
Gingrich - 8
Romney - 8
Uncalled - 21


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 14, 2012, 09:30:29 AM
Alabama CD Results (Provisional)

CD 1
Romney: 33128
Santorum: 30020
Gingrich: 24131

There are 358 votes in Clarke county that cannot be accurately split between CDs 1 and 7 (absentee votes and one split precinct); this does not alter the result that Romney wins the CD and Santorum is second, making the delegate split 2 Romney - 1 Santorum.

CD 2
Gingrich: 32632
Santorum: 29155
Romney: 26200

There are 8940 votes in Montgomery county that cannot accurately be split (absentee votes and 20! split precincts).  However, Gingrich is still guaranteed to win the CD overall.  While it may be mathematically possible for Romney to take 2nd place from the outstanding votes in Montgomery, this is exceedingly unlikely.  The resulting delegate split is 2 Gingrich - 1 Santorum.

CD 3
Santorum: 25408
Gingrich: 23833
Romney: 19633

There are 6525 votes in Montgomery county that cannot accurately be split (absentee votes and 6 split precincts).  Additionally, Cleburne county has yet to report.  However, it seems very unlikely that the order of candidates will change, making the resulting delegate split 2 Santorum - 1 Gingrich.

CD 4
Santorum: 39029
Gingrich: 25114
Romney: 21843

There are 2758 votes in Jackson, Blount, and Tuscaloosa counties that cannot accurately be split (absentee votes and 2, 4, and 2 split precincts, respectively).  These cannot change the outcome; the delegate split is 2 Santorum - 1 Gingrich.

CD 5
Santorum: 37095
Romney: 28273
Gingrich: 27221

There are 178 votes in Jackson county that cannot accurately be split (absentee votes and 2 split precincts).  However, this cannot change the outcome; the delegate split here is 2 Santorum - 1 Romney.

CD 6
Santorum: 36600
Romney: 35263
Gingrich: 32805

There are 12894 votes in Blount and Jefferson counties that cannot accurately be split (absentee votes and 4 and 16 split precincts, respectively).  The outstanding votes seem to slightly favor Santorum over Romney; thus it is quite likely Santorum retains his lead over Romney, and the delegate split is 2 Santorum - 1 Romney

CD 7
Santorum - 7805
Gingrich - 7170
Romney - 6974

There are 16075 votes in Clarke, Montgomery, Tuscaloosa and Jefferson counties that cannot accurately be split.  While, due to gerrymandering, it is very likely that most of these votes reside outside of CD7, this district is basically impossible to call.  Additionally, Greene county has yet to report.  If these standings hold, the allocation would be Santorum 2 - Gingrich 1.

Total Delegates by CD (total of 21)
Santorum - 12
Gingrich - 5
Romney - 4

Again, these are tentative; the winner in CD 6 may end up being Romney, and the CD 7 results are basically guesswork at this point.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 14, 2012, 11:31:37 AM
Gingrich's Prospects

I've talked about this before, but now that the key states (for Gingrich) of AL/MS have passed, I think it's a good time to return to this topic.

The bare minimum for Gingrich staying in the race was reaching 20% in AL/MS.  He well exceeded this, beating Romney in both the overall vote and (possibly) the delegate count.  That said, he probably hurt the ABR camp delegate-wise in those states; Santorum likely could have won majorities statewide and in most CDs and come close to sweeping the delegates.

But that's in the past.  What are his prospects going forward, both for picking up delegates himself and for helping (or hurting) the ABR cause?  I assume throughout that, should Gingrich drop out, a majority (but not all) of his support goes to Santorum, and Gingrich himself (and his represenatives at state conventions) are not prepared to strike a deal with the Romney camp (i.e. they really are in the ABR camp).

Puerto Rico:  There is apparently a 15% threshold, meaning Gingrich might struggle to win delegates himself.  The commonwealth is WTA if someone gets a majority, though; so staying in the race may help deprive Romney of a majority here.

Illinois:  This is a straight up loophole contest for delegates, so Gingrich straight-up hurts Santorum here without any chance to win delegates himself.

Louisiana Primary:  Gingrich should meet the 25% threshold here, and the state doesn't go WTA if you win a majority, so it helps the ABR camp for him to stay in here.

Missouri Caucuses:  As a caucus process, there's little harm in staying in, even though Gingrich himself is unlikely to get many delegates out of the process due to the way voting works at the State Convention.

District of Columbia:  WTA, so there's really no point...though Romney is likely to win here regardless.

Maryland:  WTA by jurisdiction, so he has little hope of getting anything himself, and may hurt Santorum in the few CDs he might have a chance of winning.

Wisconsin:  WTA by jurisdiction: he just plain hurts Santorum here.

Connecticut:  There's a slim chance he might help the ABR camp by denying Romney an overall majority here, but it's quite unlikely that Romney won't sweep the state regardless.

Delaware:  WTA, so unless he thinks he can win the state outright, he just hurts Santorum here.

New York:  He may hurt Santorum in a few CDs, but could play a critical role in stopping Romney getting 50% statewide and winning all the At-Large delegates.

Pennsylvania:  I'm not touching this one.

Rhode Island:  He won't make the 15% threshold, so no point.

Louisiana Caucus:  No reason not to compete, as it's a caucus state.

Indiana:  WTA by CD, he just hurts Santorum here.

North Carolina:  Purely proportional, no reason not to stay in.

West Virginia: WTA by jurisdiction; he just hurts Santorum here.

Oregon:  Purely proportional, no reason not to go for it.

Arkansas:  Although he is almost guaranteed to get at least one delegate from here if he stays in, he runs the significant chance of depriving Santorum of a majority and the chance to almost-sweep the state's delegates (as in AL/MS).

Kentucky:  Although it's proportional with a 15% cutoff statewide, he runs the risk of acting as a spoiler in the WTA CDs---likely net negative for the ABR camp.

Texas:  Purely proportional, no reason not to go for it.

California:  WTA by jurisdiction, he just hurts Santorum here.

New Jersey:  WTA, no reason to try and he hurts what slim chance Santorum had.

New Mexico:  Proportional, with a 15% cutoff.  Can't hurt to go for it.

South Dakota:  Proportional, with a 20% cutoff.  Likely hurts Santorum somewhat if he doesn't make it.

Nebraska, Montana:  Convention states, no reason not to try.

Utah:  Hah.





Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: © tweed on March 14, 2012, 11:36:04 AM
with Romney at 51.9% I suppose the chances of him finishing below 50 are pretty bleak (barring losses in the massive firewalls, NY/CA)?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 14, 2012, 11:39:20 AM
Gingrich's Prospects: TL;DR

While there are many states where Gingrich staying in the race just straight up helps Romney, there are others where it's not so clear-cut, or he has a chance of hurting him.  Remember, not all Gingrich voters would immediately flock to Santorum if he dropped out.

If he can target his campaign to certain states and try to make himself as much of a non-factor as possible in the others, there may be a role for him yet.

Gingrich's Good States (he has a chance of winning delegates without hurting Santorum)
Puerto Rico, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, New Mexico, Nebraska, Montana

Gingrich's Middling States (he has a chance of winning delegates but may hurt Santorum, or he has a chance of helping Santorum even if he wins no or few delegates)
Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Kentucky, South Dakota

Gingrich's Bad States (no chance of winning delegates and he just hurts Santorum)
Illinois, DC, Wisconsin, Delaware, Rhode Island, Indiana, West Virginia, California, New Jersey


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 14, 2012, 11:41:45 AM
with Romney at 51.9% I suppose the chances of him finishing below 50 are pretty bleak (barring losses in the massive firewalls, NY/CA)?

I'd say so.  Santorum has to either pick up some surprising wins, or rack up huge margins in states where he can, to stop a Romney first ballot victory.

May is pretty good territory for Santorum, though, so unless he loses Pennsylvania there is no reason for him not to continue the race until California on June 5.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 14, 2012, 11:43:41 AM
I question whether Romney failed to come first in AL-06 (my eyeballing suggested Romney won by a bit), but accepting the numbers above that he didn't, after all the sound an fury, Mittens was 6 delegates short of my projection (mostly due to his subpar performance in Alabama where the CD delegate allocation is 2-1-0).  I didn't allocate any of the supers, although the press thinks Mittens got all 3 supers in Samoa, and Green Papers gives one Alabama super to Rick. Anyway, Mittens should be over 500 delegates now. As one can see, with these proportional rules, closing the gap with Mittens is very difficult, and is moving at a glacial pace. Before, Mittens needed about 47.5% of the remaining delegates, and now he needs 48.5% of them.   All in all, not too bad after returns dominated by an area where he was projected to be very weak until recently.

That 48.5% figure should drop back down after next week. Mittens should get a huge margin of the delegates in Illinois, since it is winner take all by CD and effectively that way with the at large delegates, and Rick isn't on the ballot in four CD's.  On the other hand, Missouri sort of has the same system of allocation, and Rick should get a huge margin there. However, the state has 17 fewer delegates than Illinois.

Illinois is shaping up as a state probably next in importance to only Florida thus far. It should be a barn burner.  However, even if Rick wins many of the CD's, with his delegates not on the ballot in four CD's (it would be nice to know which ones, because if some or all of them are downstate, then Rick is really screwed), the odds are that Mittens will get all of the 12 at large delegates.

()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on March 14, 2012, 08:02:04 PM
Gingrich's Prospects: TL;DR

While there are many states where Gingrich staying in the race just straight up helps Romney, there are others where it's not so clear-cut, or he has a chance of hurting him.  Remember, not all Gingrich voters would immediately flock to Santorum if he dropped out.

If he can target his campaign to certain states and try to make himself as much of a non-factor as possible in the others, there may be a role for him yet.

This is a useful benchmark, but I don't think it captures the point of how Gingrich dropping out is the only hope for ABR.  If the status quo continues, with both Gingrich and Santorum in the race, then Romney wins the nomination relatively easily, even though he doesn't mathematically clinch it until June 5.

OTOH, if Gingrich drops out within the next few days, then it's at least possible that Santorum surges into a national polling lead over Romney, the media narrative becomes "This gives Santorum a big boost because he's no longer splitting the 'conservative vote'", Santorum wins the popular vote in Illinois even if he doesn't win the most delegates, and the collective wins from KS/AL/MS/IL/LA (new meme: Romney can now only win on islands) gives Santorum real momentum, potentially drawing in some votes in later states that might have otherwise gone to Romney.

I'm not saying that this would happen, but it's at least a possibility.  It's the only real hope for ABR, to change the narrative and shake up the race in a way that can't be captured in these static "who does Gingrich help or hit in such-and-such-a-state" analyses.

So if Gingrich really wants to stop Romney, I think he should suspend his campaign.  But maybe wait until Sunday night, after Puerto Rico votes, if he thinks there's any chance that being in the race prevents Romney from reaching 50%.  (But really, Romney probably reaches 50% there regardless, so I guess it doesn't matter.)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 14, 2012, 09:45:42 PM
There is some possibility that Newt, as he runs out of money and relevance, if, will cease to secure double digit percentages even if he stays in. And while he would still be a factor, he would be sliding towards something with considerably more marginal impact. We shall see how many votes Newt siphons from Rick in Illinois, understanding that maybe a quarter to a third of Newt's defectors (defectors who migrate to one or the other rather than Paul or not voting, which would be as if they were not voting in most cases) will migrate to Romney rather than Rick, but yes, Newt getting out will up Rick's percentages more than Romney's, by a factor of from 2-1 to 3-1 as things stand now.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Fritz on March 15, 2012, 01:27:25 AM
A comparison of different delegate counts:

Data sourceRomneySantorumGingrichPauluncommittedtotal
Erc's count- Atlas Forum5132481395344997
US Election Atlas (Dave Leip)391177135322737
Green Papers (hard count)38516713325262972
Green Papers (soft count)493235157775967
MSNBC419184136340773
NYTimes495252131480926


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on March 15, 2012, 10:14:02 AM
Gingrich's Prospects: TL;DR

While there are many states where Gingrich staying in the race just straight up helps Romney, there are others where it's not so clear-cut, or he has a chance of hurting him.  Remember, not all Gingrich voters would immediately flock to Santorum if he dropped out.

If he can target his campaign to certain states and try to make himself as much of a non-factor as possible in the others, there may be a role for him yet.

This is a useful benchmark, but I don't think it captures the point of how Gingrich dropping out is the only hope for ABR.  If the status quo continues, with both Gingrich and Santorum in the race, then Romney wins the nomination relatively easily, even though he doesn't mathematically clinch it until June 5.

OTOH, if Gingrich drops out within the next few days, then it's at least possible that Santorum surges into a national polling lead over Romney, the media narrative becomes "This gives Santorum a big boost because he's no longer splitting the 'conservative vote'", Santorum wins the popular vote in Illinois even if he doesn't win the most delegates, and the collective wins from KS/AL/MS/IL/LA (new meme: Romney can now only win on islands) gives Santorum real momentum, potentially drawing in some votes in later states that might have otherwise gone to Romney.

I'm not saying that this would happen, but it's at least a possibility.  It's the only real hope for ABR, to change the narrative and shake up the race in a way that can't be captured in these static "who does Gingrich help or hit in such-and-such-a-state" analyses.

So if Gingrich really wants to stop Romney, I think he should suspend his campaign.  But maybe wait until Sunday night, after Puerto Rico votes, if he thinks there's any chance that being in the race prevents Romney from reaching 50%.  (But really, Romney probably reaches 50% there regardless, so I guess it doesn't matter.)

 

I think Adelson is continuing to fund Gingrich because he (Adelson) is a Romney supporter and is dangling Gingrich like a puppet on a string to split the ABM vote.  This is not to say that Gingrich was always on the take (certainly not in NH or even SC), but he probably is at this point.  Another possibility is that Gingrich's ego is such that he's convinced himself that his presence in the race is crucial to stopping Romney (would anyone really be surprised if this were the case?).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Earthling on March 15, 2012, 10:29:06 AM
Maybe Gingrich wants to be the kingmaker. Paul probably won't have enough delegates to help Romney in August, Gingrich will. He can give Romney the nomination and ask for something in return (like the second spot).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 15, 2012, 11:54:28 AM
As I've hit the character limit in the main post, spinning off the full calendar to this post.

Calendar of Remaining Events

April 28:  Louisiana District Caucuses. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823)
May 5:  Minnesota State Convention ends.
May 6:  Maine State Convention.
May 8:  Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia Primaries.
May 15:  Oregon Primary, Nebraska Beauty Contest.
May 22:  Arkansas, Kentucky Primary.
May 29:  Texas Primary.
June 2:  Louisiana, Missouri (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823), Washington State Conventions.
June 5:  California, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Dakota Primaries, Montana Beauty Contest.
June 9:  Indiana, Illinois (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823) State Conventions end.
June 10:  Nebraska County Conventions end.  Pennsylvania State Committee Summer Meeting.
June 16:  Iowa, Montana State Conventions end.
June 26:  Utah Primary.
July 14:  Nebraska State Convention.
July 23:  Final Delegate Selection Deadline (all states)

If this should come down to a credentials fight, a timeline of that process can be found here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3239465#msg3239465).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 15, 2012, 12:02:42 PM
Maybe Gingrich wants to be the kingmaker. Paul probably won't have enough delegates to help Romney in August, Gingrich will. He can give Romney the nomination and ask for something in return (like the second spot).

I think that is it.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: anvi on March 15, 2012, 12:43:05 PM
Just out of curiosity (I make no claim to know otherwise, since my predictions about the 2012 primary season have proven so dismally poor), this is my question.

After all the acrimony of the primary season, after all the time he has spent propping up Santorum and excoriating Romney, why would Gingrich want to go to bat for Romney with his delegates in August in trade for a post in a Romney administration?  Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing Gingrich of having principles or anything, so I concede that after all the hew and cry, he might just do it.  But hasn't all of Gingrich's invective made it very unlikely that Romney would want to give him anything even if Gingrich dangled his delegates in August?  Wouldn't the delegates Gingrich may have picked up by then just split on their own on the convention floor and go over to Santorum if Gingrich did something that cynical?  I'm not claiming to know better, please understand; I'm just not seeing how that kind of move on Gingrich's part could possibly work. 


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 15, 2012, 01:13:35 PM
Just out of curiosity (I make no claim to know otherwise, since my predictions about the 2012 primary season have proven so dismally poor), this is my question.

After all the acrimony of the primary season, after all the time he has spent propping up Santorum and excoriating Romney, why would Gingrich want to go to bat for Romney with his delegates in August in trade for a post in a Romney administration?  Don't get me wrong, I'm not accusing Gingrich of having principles or anything, so I concede that after all the hew and cry, he might just do it.  But hasn't all of Gingrich's invective made it very unlikely that Romney would want to give him anything even if Gingrich dangled his delegates in August?  Wouldn't the delegates Gingrich may have picked up by then just split on their own on the convention floor and go over to Santorum if Gingrich did something that cynical?  I'm not claiming to know better, please understand; I'm just not seeing how that kind of move on Gingrich's part could possibly work.  

I don't think that is really Newt's goal, or that he is delusional enough to think the odds are anything but remote that his delegates will be needed by anyone, and yes, delegates after the first ballot are not the personal property of the candidate to which they were bound on the first ballot anyway. Newt is in it for the attention. If Romney really needs someone else's delegates (very doubtful), the go to man will be Ron Paul. Ron has far more potential to be a king maker in the remote chance that one is required, than either Rick or Newt.

For even the bulk of the Paul delegates to still not be enough for Romney in this implausible scenario, the Rick/Newt candidate will have to get a lot more non-Evangelical votes outside the south and non-industrial midwest than he is getting now. We shall see just how well the Rick/Newt candidate does in the Chicago suburbs next week. The demographics there for Mittens are not quite as good as CA, but they are still his kind of place - higher income and more secular. The irony is that Rick has been a bust with Catholics so far, at least urban/suburban Catholics, where most of them live.

By the way, Dick Morris said last night that he expects Mittens to end up with 1298 delegates (http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/how-the-race-stacks-up-from-here/#more-6688). :P  Granted, some of his assumptions are questionable, like Mittens winning West Virginia, and taking all 172 CA delegates (I would subtract six CD's from that, or 18 delegates to take a middle of the road position), and no doubt there are some other errors, but they don't add up to a lot of delegates. 1200 seems more reasonable perhaps, absent some substantial change.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: anvi on March 15, 2012, 02:03:51 PM
Yeah, a lot of that looks right to me, Torie.  I think Paul would be far more likely to help Mitt out in August if he needed it.  But with the delegate count going the way it is, and with big contests like Illinois, New York and California coming down the pike. Romney still looks on track without needing much help.  But, like I said, my predictions for this primary season have genuinely sucked, so we'll see.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on March 15, 2012, 04:34:06 PM
If Dick Morris says that Romney will end up with 1298 delegates, then either Romney isn't getting a majority or we're in for a "broken clock" scenario.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Bacon King on March 15, 2012, 10:30:44 PM
If Dick Morris says that Romney will end up with 1298 delegates, then either Romney isn't getting a majority or we're in for a "broken clock" scenario.

Have no fear, Dick Morris is still an idiot.

  • He counts unpledged RNC delegates in states delegate totals
  • Some of the "Winner take all" states he counts for Romney are actually proportional (Oregon, Puerto Rico, etc)
  • Other "WTA" states are actually caucus states or directly elected delegate states (WV, for example) where you can't really tell what's going on ahead of time anyway
  • A lot of the states are really WTA by CD, like California, Wisconsin, Indiana, etc
  • He's quite obviously just pulling numbers out of his ass for the "proportional representation" states he lists
  • He also thinks Pennsylvania and North Carolina are WTA for some reason; PA elects delegates directly and NC is proportional
  • He seems to think Romney will win in WV, NE, and ND

So, yeah, he really has no idea what he's talking about.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: ajb on March 15, 2012, 11:27:32 PM
If Dick Morris says that Romney will end up with 1298 delegates, then either Romney isn't getting a majority or we're in for a "broken clock" scenario.

Have no fear, Dick Morris is still an idiot.

  • He counts unpledged RNC delegates in states delegate totals
  • Some of the "Winner take all" states he counts for Romney are actually proportional (Oregon, Puerto Rico, etc)
  • Other "WTA" states are actually caucus states or directly elected delegate states (WV, for example) where you can't really tell what's going on ahead of time anyway
  • A lot of the states are really WTA by CD, like California, Wisconsin, Indiana, etc
  • He's quite obviously just pulling numbers out of his ass for the "proportional representation" states he lists
  • He also thinks Pennsylvania and North Carolina are WTA for some reason; PA elects delegates directly and NC is proportional
  • He seems to think Romney will win in WV, NE, and ND

So, yeah, he really has no idea what he's talking about.

Bringing back memories of his 2008 Electoral College maps, where Arkansas was Safe Obama, and Louisiana was a toss-up, but Indiana was Safe McCain. Good times.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 16, 2012, 08:43:17 AM


Have no fear, Dick Morris is still an idiot.


  • Some of the "Winner take all" states he counts for Romney are actually proportional (Oregon, Puerto Rico, etc)
  • He also thinks Pennsylvania and North Carolina are WTA for some reason; PA elects delegates directly and NC is proportional
I agree that Morris is an idiot, but PR is WTA, if a candidate gets above 50%.

PA does elect delegates directly, but no preference is listed on the ballot, and they are totally unpledged.  It is very possible that Santorum will win big in the popular vote in PA, and lose a plurality, or even a majority, of the delegates.

Phil and I both agree on the unpledged aspect (though not the result) in PA, and, despite the fact that we support different candidates, neither of us like it.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 16, 2012, 10:46:21 AM
If Dick Morris says that Romney will end up with 1298 delegates, then either Romney isn't getting a majority or we're in for a "broken clock" scenario.

Have no fear, Dick Morris is still an idiot.

  • He counts unpledged RNC delegates in states delegate totals
  • Some of the "Winner take all" states he counts for Romney are actually proportional (Oregon, Puerto Rico, etc)
  • Other "WTA" states are actually caucus states or directly elected delegate states (WV, for example) where you can't really tell what's going on ahead of time anyway
  • A lot of the states are really WTA by CD, like California, Wisconsin, Indiana, etc
  • He's quite obviously just pulling numbers out of his ass for the "proportional representation" states he lists
  • He also thinks Pennsylvania and North Carolina are WTA for some reason; PA elects delegates directly and NC is proportional
  • He seems to think Romney will win in WV, NE, and ND

So, yeah, he really has no idea what he's talking about.

Nice research job there BK. I was too lazy to do it. That's why I cut it down to around 1200 as a rough cut. Somebody using the demographic benchmarks that seem to be holding pretty well, could do a more refined analysis. But that would probably be silly, until we see how the Chicago suburbs vote. That is a big test for Mittens, and whether or not he continues to hold his demographic at the level he needs to, to secure his absolute majority, after adding in all the "softies."


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on March 16, 2012, 02:51:15 PM

That 48.5% figure should drop back down after next week. Mittens should get a huge margin of the delegates in Illinois, since it is winner take all by CD and effectively that way with the at large delegates, and Rick isn't on the ballot in four CD's.  On the other hand, Missouri sort of has the same system of allocation, and Rick should get a huge margin there. However, the state has 17 fewer delegates than Illinois.

Illinois is shaping up as a state probably next in importance to only Florida thus far. It should be a barn burner.  However, even if Rick wins many of the CD's, with his delegates not on the ballot in four CD's (it would be nice to know which ones, because if some or all of them are downstate, then Rick is really screwed), the odds are that Mittens will get all of the 12 at large delegates.

According to Erc's post on the 13th, it is the 4th, 5th, 7th and 13th that Rick doesn't have delegates. https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823

Three of them are in Chicago. I was concerned that the 7th might end up like MI-13. ILL-01 and 02 have significant suburban portions that should dominate a Republican contest enough to give them to Mittens.

The 13th is a downstate seat. How Romney does in the cities downstate, will likely determine the vote in the 13th, as well as the 17th and 18th. Rick probably has 12 and 15 secured.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Bacon King on March 16, 2012, 03:19:30 PM
The 13th is a downstate seat. How Romney does in the cities downstate, will likely determine the vote in the 13th, as well as the 17th and 18th. Rick probably has 12 and 15 secured.

The 13th includes Springfield, some wealthier St. Louis exurbs, and the wealthy and white collar cities of Bloomington and Champaign. Decatur is probably the only populated area in the district that would vote for Santorum, but it'll certainly be outvoted. Even if Romney doesn't win anywhere else downstate, I think he'll carry the 13th anyway. I don't think Santorum's delegate problems here will be an issue.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 16, 2012, 09:04:55 PM

That 48.5% figure should drop back down after next week. Mittens should get a huge margin of the delegates in Illinois, since it is winner take all by CD and effectively that way with the at large delegates, and Rick isn't on the ballot in four CD's.  On the other hand, Missouri sort of has the same system of allocation, and Rick should get a huge margin there. However, the state has 17 fewer delegates than Illinois.

Illinois is shaping up as a state probably next in importance to only Florida thus far. It should be a barn burner.  However, even if Rick wins many of the CD's, with his delegates not on the ballot in four CD's (it would be nice to know which ones, because if some or all of them are downstate, then Rick is really screwed), the odds are that Mittens will get all of the 12 at large delegates.

According to Erc's post on the 13th, it is the 4th, 5th, 7th and 13th that Rick doesn't have delegates. https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=145763.msg3215823#msg3215823

Three of them are in Chicago. I was concerned that the 7th might end up like MI-13. ILL-01 and 02 have significant suburban portions that should dominate a Republican contest enough to give them to Mittens.

The 13th is a downstate seat. How Romney does in the cities downstate, will likely determine the vote in the 13th, as well as the 17th and 18th. Rick probably has 12 and 15 secured.



Guys, for reasons in some controversy, and whether the Romney guy on the scene went rogue, or Romney decided to do a beau geste, Mittens withdrew his objections, and Rick no longer has a failure to file delegates issue, and the issue is moot. I could spend some time to document this, but just trust the old man this time. Mittens had a notarization in Mass rather than Illinois notarization problem (as a lawyer that one sounds like real BS, since foreign state notarizations are accepted across state lines, but I digress), and that went away too.

I read somewhere back when that the CD's were in Mittens country (well the Chicago burbs), and so maybe that is the real explanation;  if Mittens lost these 4 CD's, or most of them, the least of his worries would be the delegates involved - his demographic base would have eroded to the point where he would be on life support.  So why not do a "costless" beau geste? It may give him a card later.

CC:  Keystone Phil
       Bacon King


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 16, 2012, 09:56:02 PM
Aren't the ballots already drawn up?  I've got a sample ballot linked in the main Illinois post, and the Cook County Clerk still shows no Santorum delegates as candidates for the addresses I've checked in CD 5.

This is a real loophole primary; the vote for delegates, not the topline Presidential vote, is what matters.  (Occasionally it does make a difference; Dennis Hastert got elected as a Romney delegate in 2008 on the basis of his personal vote despite an overall McCain sweep)

I don't know what Romney offered, but if those delegates aren't on the ballot, Santorum's outta luck.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 17, 2012, 12:47:46 PM
Aren't the ballots already drawn up?  I've got a sample ballot linked in the main Illinois post, and the Cook County Clerk still shows no Santorum delegates as candidates for the addresses I've checked in CD 5.

This is a real loophole primary; the vote for delegates, not the topline Presidential vote, is what matters.  (Occasionally it does make a difference; Dennis Hastert got elected as a Romney delegate in 2008 on the basis of his personal vote despite an overall McCain sweep)

I don't know what Romney offered, but if those delegates aren't on the ballot, Santorum's outta luck.


Right you are Erc. The Mittens concession (http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/how-romney-gave-rick-santorum-an-opening-in-illino) was for a shortage of petitions for 30 other delegates. Rick is still out of the hunt for 12 delegates in the four CD's - all of which will probably go to Mittens anyway I guess. The story was updated to so clarify since I read it, in my defense. :)

By the way, will the remaining 6 delegates for the 2 Alabama CD's still up in the air ever be allocated in my lifetime? 


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 17, 2012, 04:32:27 PM
Aren't the ballots already drawn up?  I've got a sample ballot linked in the main Illinois post, and the Cook County Clerk still shows no Santorum delegates as candidates for the addresses I've checked in CD 5.

This is a real loophole primary; the vote for delegates, not the topline Presidential vote, is what matters.  (Occasionally it does make a difference; Dennis Hastert got elected as a Romney delegate in 2008 on the basis of his personal vote despite an overall McCain sweep)

I don't know what Romney offered, but if those delegates aren't on the ballot, Santorum's outta luck.


This is a popular vote exercise, not a delegate exercise. Most of these little counties just don't mean a damn really. Rick will win a couple of CD's where he has delegates, and that is about it. That is my guess.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 17, 2012, 05:16:46 PM
By the way, will the remaining 6 delegates for the 2 Alabama CD's still up in the air ever be allocated in my lifetime? 

Unlikely; the AP still hasn't called a few delegates in TN, and they've had a week longer (and far more resources than I do) to figure those out.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 18, 2012, 05:09:37 PM
()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on March 18, 2012, 05:21:30 PM

That is cool. Why not break out all the candidates. I think it will be interesting to see how each approaches the 100% mark.

We know once Santorum hits the mark, phrases like "impossible to reach" and "mathematically eliminated" will feature prominently in every press release when talking about Rick, Newt and Ron.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 18, 2012, 05:44:14 PM
Nobody thinks somebody not named Mittens has a shot to get to a majority of delegates on their own.

Here is the chart after projecting Illinois, giving Rick all 5 CD's that he has a shot of winning where he has filed for delegates. I know Mittens has one super delegate, the party chairman, Brady, who has endorsed him, but I don't count supers unless CNN counts them (and he may have already been counted - in fact he probably has).  

()

()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on March 18, 2012, 06:15:37 PM
Nobody thinks somebody not named Mittens has a shot to get to a majority of delegates on their own.

Obviously that is true. But I think it is interesting to countdown to the 100% threshold as we know that Romney will make a big point about that. I expect it will happen on 4/24.

Also it is interesting to keep track of the % won for each candidate and not just Romney.

Just a suggestion, it is your chart. I was thinking of doing one myself but since you are that close I was hoping you could save me the trouble. ;) Maybe others will find it useful too.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 18, 2012, 06:34:47 PM
Nobody thinks somebody not named Mittens has a shot to get to a majority of delegates on their own.

Obviously that is true. But I think it is interesting to countdown to the 100% threshold as we know that Romney will make a big point about that. I expect it will happen on 4/24.

Also it is interesting to keep track of the % won for each candidate and not just Romney.

Just a suggestion, it is your chart. I was thinking of doing one myself but since you are that close I was hoping you could save me the trouble. ;) Maybe others will find it useful too.

Is this what you are looking for?

()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Likely Voter on March 18, 2012, 06:37:12 PM
great thanks!


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 18, 2012, 06:38:49 PM
Nice job everyone.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 18, 2012, 06:39:41 PM

You're welcome. After Tuesday, Rick will just need to win about 70% of the delegates left, and he will have this wrapped up by June.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on March 18, 2012, 06:45:39 PM
I think a lot of Torie's numbers are premature until we get more concrete information from the caucus state conventions. Romney is likely to lose a fair number of delegates from the current estimates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 18, 2012, 07:04:02 PM
I think a lot of Torie's [CNN's] numbers are premature until we get more concrete information from the caucus state conventions. Romney is likely to lose a fair number of delegates from the current estimates.

Fixed. How many of those delegates might be in play?  40 delegates max? What states might this happen in?  I ask, because no doubt you or someone else, following far more the Paulite antics, might know better than I. So I am merely asking, not hectoring - this time. :)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Matthew on March 18, 2012, 07:47:16 PM
I think a lot of Torie's numbers are premature until we get more concrete information from the caucus state conventions. Romney is likely to lose a fair number of delegates from the current estimates.

Santorum is just as open to Ron Paul stealing his soft delegates. Missouri, Minnesota are two states that Santorum could lose as many if not more then Romney.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: RI on March 18, 2012, 07:49:08 PM
Nevada, Washington, and maybe Alaska are places Paulites could steal a bunch from Romney.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on March 18, 2012, 07:50:00 PM
Are the Iowa delegates at risk as well?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on March 18, 2012, 07:56:01 PM
Washington, Iowa, Colorado, and Maine are the main states where Romney is likely to do worse than media estimates, and he could lose 50+ delegates between all of those.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on March 18, 2012, 08:01:02 PM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 18, 2012, 08:25:11 PM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)

No, that will never happen, unless the non-Mittens get a majority without having done that, in which event it will be moot.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on March 19, 2012, 09:13:50 PM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)

No, that will never happen, unless the non-Mittens get a majority without having done that, in which event it will be moot.
Are you sure?  What would it take for the Santorum people to mount a credentials challenge of Florida at the convention?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 19, 2012, 09:24:29 PM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)

No, that will never happen, unless the non-Mittens get a majority without having done that, in which event it will be moot.
Are you sure?  What would it take for the Santorum people to mount a credentials challenge of Florida at the convention?

A majority, including one of the contested delegations.  If Santorum challenges FL, AZ gets to vote on it.  If Santorum challenges AZ, FL gets to vote on it. 


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: BigSkyBob on March 20, 2012, 11:01:10 AM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)

No, that will never happen, unless the non-Mittens get a majority without having done that, in which event it will be moot.
Are you sure?  What would it take for the Santorum people to mount a credentials challenge of Florida at the convention?

A majority, including one of the contested delegations.  If Santorum challenges FL, AZ gets to vote on it.  If Santorum challenges AZ, FL gets to vote on it. 

If Romney is short of 1144, it won't matter. After both challenges, he will be well short of 1144.

What you are describing is an act of a banana republic.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on March 20, 2012, 11:32:48 AM
I'm sure Romney really wants to build his delegate majority on illegal delegations. That'll go over real well with Santorum/Gingrich/Paul supporters.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: CultureKing on March 20, 2012, 11:55:07 AM
I thought this would be of interest:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2017792794_paul_supporters_sweep_two_seat.html

Paul's supporters may manage to take a huge bite out of Romney's projected delegate totals in Washington. The fact that they took all the delegates from two legislative district in King county is especially telling: he lost the county by over 20%.

Any ideas on how this will shake out at the state convention? (besides likely chaos as party operatives seek to avoid a Paul victory)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 20, 2012, 12:27:21 PM
I thought this would be of interest:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2017792794_paul_supporters_sweep_two_seat.html

Paul's supporters may manage to take a huge bite out of Romney's projected delegate totals in Washington. The fact that they took all the delegates from two legislative district in King county is especially telling: he lost the county by over 20%.

Any ideas on how this will shake out at the state convention? (besides likely chaos as party operatives seek to avoid a Paul victory)

Paul may end up dominating a Seattle-area CD and pick up some delegates as a result.

Statewide---it makes the scenario I originally outlined (Romney camp dominating the State Convention and taking 34 out of 40 delegates) less likely, so the Santorum camp should be pleased at the news. 

It doesn't sound that Paul had the same sort of success everywhere, so I assume that the anti-Paul forces will still have a majority in most places at the State Convention.  I expect that resisting the Paulistas will prove more important that the Romney-Santorum fight, so an appropriately-divided Romney-Santorum slate is rather likely.  The 122 'superdelegates' at the State Convention would presumably also help out the anti-Paul forces as well.

If I can accumulate more solid data as to the results of the LD/County caucuses, I'll update my projection.  They run through to April 21, though, so don't hold your breath.

The State Convention ends June 2.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 20, 2012, 01:17:36 PM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)

No, that will never happen, unless the non-Mittens get a majority without having done that, in which event it will be moot.
Are you sure?  What would it take for the Santorum people to mount a credentials challenge of Florida at the convention?

A majority, including one of the contested delegations.  If Santorum challenges FL, AZ gets to vote on it.  If Santorum challenges AZ, FL gets to vote on it. 

If Romney is short of 1144, it won't matter. After both challenges, he will be well short of 1144.

What you are describing is an act of a banana republic.

What I am describing is found p. 616, ll. 20-30 of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (2011).  That is the rule.  He will need only to have a majority, minus the largest delegation.

For example, if there is a challenge to the FL delegation, Romney will only needs 1119 votes to have them seated.

BTW:  This is how Eisenhower got the nomination on the first ballot in 1952, IIRC.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: CultureKing on March 20, 2012, 02:12:44 PM
I thought this would be of interest:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2017792794_paul_supporters_sweep_two_seat.html

Paul's supporters may manage to take a huge bite out of Romney's projected delegate totals in Washington. The fact that they took all the delegates from two legislative district in King county is especially telling: he lost the county by over 20%.

Any ideas on how this will shake out at the state convention? (besides likely chaos as party operatives seek to avoid a Paul victory)

Paul may end up dominating a Seattle-area CD and pick up some delegates as a result.

Statewide---it makes the scenario I originally outlined (Romney camp dominating the State Convention and taking 34 out of 40 delegates) less likely, so the Santorum camp should be pleased at the news. 

It doesn't sound that Paul had the same sort of success everywhere, so I assume that the anti-Paul forces will still have a majority in most places at the State Convention.  I expect that resisting the Paulistas will prove more important that the Romney-Santorum fight, so an appropriately-divided Romney-Santorum slate is rather likely.  The 122 'superdelegates' at the State Convention would presumably also help out the anti-Paul forces as well.

If I can accumulate more solid data as to the results of the LD/County caucuses, I'll update my projection.  They run through to April 21, though, so don't hold your breath.

The State Convention ends June 2.

I believe they are both part of the 7th CD which basically contains Seattle proper. Personally I see Paul racking up delegates in Eastern Washington plus the urban cores (Seattle, Bellingham, Vancouver). At the very least it should provide some fun entertainment.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Matthew on March 20, 2012, 02:57:04 PM
Santorum Loses Wyoming Delegate to Romney  by: Oreo
Tue Mar 20, 2012 at 15:37:06 PM EDT
 
Mitt Romney's supporters in Wyoming have successfully challenged a delegate to the party's national convention that had been awarded to rival Rick Santorum — showing the lengths the campaigns are willing to go to fight over a single delegate.
State GOP Chairwoman Tammy Hooper said Tuesday the delegate is now awarded to Romney. - US News
 
http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/5239/santorum-loses-wyoming-delegate-to-romney


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 20, 2012, 03:18:22 PM
Santorum Loses Wyoming Delegate to Romney  by: Oreo
Tue Mar 20, 2012 at 15:37:06 PM EDT
 
Mitt Romney's supporters in Wyoming have successfully challenged a delegate to the party's national convention that had been awarded to rival Rick Santorum — showing the lengths the campaigns are willing to go to fight over a single delegate.
State GOP Chairwoman Tammy Hooper said Tuesday the delegate is now awarded to Romney. - US News
 
http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/5239/santorum-loses-wyoming-delegate-to-romney

Thanks for the heads up!  I'd had the delegate in the "Uncommitted" column pending resolution of the dispute.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: BigSkyBob on March 21, 2012, 11:03:06 AM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)

No, that will never happen, unless the non-Mittens get a majority without having done that, in which event it will be moot.
Are you sure?  What would it take for the Santorum people to mount a credentials challenge of Florida at the convention?

A majority, including one of the contested delegations.  If Santorum challenges FL, AZ gets to vote on it.  If Santorum challenges AZ, FL gets to vote on it. 

If Romney is short of 1144, it won't matter. After both challenges, he will be well short of 1144.

What you are describing is an act of a banana republic.

What I am describing is found p. 616, ll. 20-30 of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (2011).  That is the rule.  He will need only to have a majority, minus the largest delegation.

For example, if there is a challenge to the FL delegation, Romney will only needs 1119 votes to have them seated.

BTW:  This is how Eisenhower got the nomination on the first ballot in 1952, IIRC.

Um, he will need 1169 since that counts the 50 delegates from Florida who won't be able to vote to seat themselves.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: BigSkyBob on March 21, 2012, 11:04:29 AM
I think a lot of Torie's numbers are premature until we get more concrete information from the caucus state conventions. Romney is likely to lose a fair number of delegates from the current estimates.

Santorum is just as open to Ron Paul stealing his soft delegates. Missouri, Minnesota are two states that Santorum could lose as many if not more then Romney.

Does help Romney to 1144.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: BigSkyBob on March 21, 2012, 11:08:51 AM
I thought this would be of interest:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2017792794_paul_supporters_sweep_two_seat.html

Paul's supporters may manage to take a huge bite out of Romney's projected delegate totals in Washington. The fact that they took all the delegates from two legislative district in King county is especially telling: he lost the county by over 20%.

Any ideas on how this will shake out at the state convention? (besides likely chaos as party operatives seek to avoid a Paul victory)

Paul may end up dominating a Seattle-area CD and pick up some delegates as a result.

Statewide---it makes the scenario I originally outlined (Romney camp dominating the State Convention and taking 34 out of 40 delegates) less likely, so the Santorum camp should be pleased at the news. 

It doesn't sound that Paul had the same sort of success everywhere, so I assume that the anti-Paul forces will still have a majority in most places at the State Convention.  I expect that resisting the Paulistas will prove more important that the Romney-Santorum fight, so an appropriately-divided Romney-Santorum slate is rather likely.  The 122 'superdelegates' at the State Convention would presumably also help out the anti-Paul forces as well.

If I can accumulate more solid data as to the results of the LD/County caucuses, I'll update my projection.  They run through to April 21, though, so don't hold your breath.

The State Convention ends June 2.

Since the number 1 priority of the candidates other than Romney is to assure Romney does reach 1144 [1169 before the challenges to Florida and Arizona] the rational act for all Santorum, Gingrich and Paul supporters is to apportion all caucus states delegates amongst themselves. If would suicidal for Santorum to throw in with Romney in Washington.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 21, 2012, 11:59:04 AM
()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: firennice on March 21, 2012, 12:24:13 PM
Interesting chart.
There are four winner take all states  left(counting DC), that are truly winner take all.  and Romney is expected to win them all.  DC, Deleware, New Jersey, Utah. 123 delegates (according to the greenpapers) that receive the most votes. 

That would mean he would need 40% of the remaining delegates (461).  Is that doable with what is left?  I guess it depends a lot on how Texas, and California Split up when they get there. 


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 12:38:01 PM
Plus it's very likely that Florida will be made proportional, which means Romney loses another 25 delegates from the current estimates. (Possibly Arizona as well)

No, that will never happen, unless the non-Mittens get a majority without having done that, in which event it will be moot.
Are you sure?  What would it take for the Santorum people to mount a credentials challenge of Florida at the convention?

A majority, including one of the contested delegations.  If Santorum challenges FL, AZ gets to vote on it.  If Santorum challenges AZ, FL gets to vote on it. 

If Romney is short of 1144, it won't matter. After both challenges, he will be well short of 1144.

What you are describing is an act of a banana republic.

What I am describing is found p. 616, ll. 20-30 of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (2011).  That is the rule.  He will need only to have a majority, minus the largest delegation.

For example, if there is a challenge to the FL delegation, Romney will only needs 1119 votes to have them seated.

BTW:  This is how Eisenhower got the nomination on the first ballot in 1952, IIRC.

Um, he will need 1169 since that counts the 50 delegates from Florida who won't be able to vote to seat themselves.

No, those fifty won't be counted in the majority. 

2286 total, with 50 from FL (according to RCP).  Subtract FL, 2236 total.  One half of that, 1118.  Majority in whole numbers 1119.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 21, 2012, 12:49:03 PM
Yes, that's right JJ, but BSB's point, is that if the 50 Florida Mittens delegates cannot vote, Mittens will need 1169 delegates in his corner, to get to 1119 without his 50 Florida delegates voting. Are you sure the Robert's Rules or Order apply here?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 01:56:45 PM
Yes, that's right JJ, but BSB's point, is that if the 50 Florida Mittens delegates cannot vote, Mittens will need 1169 delegates in his corner, to get to 1119 without his 50 Florida delegates voting. Are you sure the Robert's Rules or Order apply here?

It lowers the majority needed to adopt.  As long as Romney gets to 1119, without FL. he has it.  The majority, according to RCP, is 1,144, with FL.  If FL is challenged, the majority drops to 1,119, without FL.  He'd need 1,169 only if you do count FL.  Or, Romney needs 1,119 without FL.

I know that Robert's Rules Newly Revised, current edition is their parliamentary authority, but the convention is covered by US House Rules, .  I checked and it is in their own rules, (Rule 23).  Only one delegation may be challenged at one time.

Further, if FL would be challenged, it would be up to the state chair to appoint the delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 21, 2012, 02:36:11 PM
Yes, that's right JJ, but BSB's point, is that if the 50 Florida Mittens delegates cannot vote, Mittens will need 1169 delegates in his corner, to get to 1119 without his 50 Florida delegates voting. Are you sure the Robert's Rules or Order apply here?

It lowers the majority needed to adopt.  As long as Romney gets to 1119, without FL. he has it.  The majority, according to RCP, is 1,144, with FL.  If FL is challenged, the majority drops to 1,119, without FL.  He'd need 1,169 only if you do count FL.  Or, Romney needs 1,119 without FL.

I know that Robert's Rules Newly Revised, current edition is their parliamentary authority, but the convention is covered by US House Rules, .  I checked and it is in their own rules, (Rule 23).  Only one delegation may be challenged at one time.

Further, if FL would be challenged, it would be up to the state chair to appoint the delegates.

JJ, if Mittens does not have 1169 delegates with the Florida delegation, and it can't vote on its own challenge, then Mittens does not have 1119 votes to defeat the challenge on his own. The issue is if the Florida delegation can vote on its own challenge. When you say that if Florida were challenged, it is up to the state chair to appoint the delegates, do you mean that if the challenge is successful, the chairman can appoint anyone he wants? Or does he need to appoint delegates proportionally?

It might be helpful to put up the actual text. What language are you relying upon for your opinion?

Quote
RULE NO. 23

Contest Procedure

(a) The Committee on Contests shall have the power to adopt procedural rules, not inconsistent with these rules, which shall govern the expeditious resolution of contests before the Committee on Contests. When any deadline set out in this rule falls on a Sunday or legal holiday, such deadline shall be extended to the following day.

(b) No later than twenty-two (22) days before the convening of the national convention (or, in the case of delegates or alternate delegates elected at a time or times in accordance with applicable state law rendering impossible compliance with this requirement, within five (5) days after such election), each of the parties shall file with the secretary of the Republican National Committee at least three (3) printed or typewritten copies of the statement of position in support of the party’s claim to sit as delegates or alternate delegates to the national convention together with such affidavits or other evidence as desired. The secretary of the Republican National Committee, upon receiving the statement of position of a party, shall furnish the opposing party a copy of said statement of position. Each statement of position shall begin with a summary of not more than one thousand (1,000) words setting forth succinctly a synopsis of the statement of position and a specific statement of the points relied upon.

(c) The Committee on Contests shall promptly hear the matter; decide which issues are involved, either of law or fact, or both; decide upon its recommendation for resolution of such issues; and submit such issues and its recommendations for resolution to the Republican National Committee. The issues so submitted by the Committee on Contests shall be the sole issues passed upon and determined by the Republican National Committee unless the Republican National Committee shall, by a majority vote, extend or change the same. If the Committee on Contests for any reason shall fail to state the issues either of law or fact, the Republican National Committee shall decide upon what issues the contest shall be tried, and the hearing shall be limited to such issues unless the Republican National Committee, by a majority vote, shall decide otherwise.

(d) The Committee on Contests shall make up a report of each contest filed, showing the grounds of contest; the statute and rule, if any, under which the contest is waged; and the contentions of each party thereto. The report shall conclude with a statement of the points of issue in the contest, both of fact and law, and a statement of the recommendation of the Committee on Contests as to resolution of such points of issue, and shall be signed by the chairman or his designee. When the Committee on Contests has prepared such report stating the issues of law and fact, a copy of the statement of such issues shall be submitted forthwith to a person in the convention city, whom the parties must appoint at the time of filing the contest to receive such statement, and a copy shall be served forthwith by the chairman of the Committee on Contests upon the parties by the most expeditious method available, providing for written evidence of receipt including, but not limited to, overnight delivery service.

(e) The parties shall have eight ( 8 ) days to file written objections to the Committee on Contests’ statement of the issues of fact or law, or both, unless the Republican National Committee is called to act upon the contest sooner, in which case such objections shall be made before the meeting of the whole committee. The objections shall contain any additional statement of issues of either law or fact, or both, claimed by the party submitting the same to be involved in and necessary to be decided in the contest.

(f) When the Republican National Committee is called to pass upon any contest that may arise, the members of the Convention Committee on Credentials shall also be notified of the time and place of such meeting and shall have the right to attend all hearings of all contests but without the right to participate in the discussion or the vote.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: firennice on March 21, 2012, 02:43:17 PM
Another thought.  If the greenpapers are right all states are to complete their delegate selection by June 23, however in Utah are primary is June 26th.  Another challenge? Penalty?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 21, 2012, 02:51:47 PM
EDIT: Torie beat me to the punch with a huge post, but maybe this will be of help as well.

The following appears to be the full contest procedure.  Throughout, RNC = Republican National Committee, and "state" includes the territories.

July 23:  All delegates and alternates must be selected by this date.

July 28:  The RNC secretary must receive the credentials of every delegate and alternates by this date, and their names are placed on the Temporary Roll.

If a state selects more delegates than it is entitled to (I'm looking at you, New Hampshire), they are automatically deemed under contest.

Any other contests must be filed with the RNC secretary by this date.  Only contests regarding delegates selected at-Large may be presented, unless the contest is due to the irregular or unlawful action of the State Committee or State Convention.

Any contested delegate does not have voting rights at the convention (or any of its committees) until the contest is permanently resolved by the vote of the convention of a whole, with one exception (see August 13, below).

The RNC secretary also receives the names of delegates elected to the Convention Committee on Credentials by this date.  The Committee on Credentials (which does not convene until the Convention itself) consists of one man and one woman from each state.

August 5:  Parties involved in contests must submit statements to the Committee on Contests by this date.  The Committee on Contests "promptly" hears the matter and prepares a statement stating the points of issue in the contest and their recommendation for its resolution, which is delivered to the RNC and the involved parties.  The involved parties have eight days to file written objections to this statement.

August 13 (or later):  The RNC votes on the resolution of contests.  The RNC may choose to restore convention voting rights to a contested delegate on the Temporary Roll at this time, except no delegate may vote on matters involving his own credentials.

August 27:  Appeals of RNC rulings on contests must be filed with the RNC secretary by this date. The Committee on Credentials hears these appeals, and submits its report to the Convention as a whole.  The Committee on Credentials may choose to restore convention voting rights to a contested delegate on the Temporary Roll at this time, except no delegate may vote on matters involving his own credentials.

The report of the Committee on Credentials is the first matter voted on by the convention as a whole.  Amendments to this report may be proposed, but no amendment may concern the credentials of delegates from more than one state.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 21, 2012, 03:02:56 PM
TL;DR:

1) Amendments to the final report of the Credentials Committee may be proposed from the floor; however, no amendment may affect the delegates from more than one state.

2) No delegate may ever participate in votes concerning his own credentials.

3) No contested delegate has voting rights at all at the convention unless they are restored by a vote of the Republican National Committee or the Committee on Credentials.


Basically, Florida's delegates indeed cannot vote on questions concerning their own credentials.  Arizona delegates can vote on questions concerning Florida's credentials if and only if either the Republican National Committee or the Committee on Credentials rules in their favor when they ruled on the contest earlier.

Another thought.  If the greenpapers are right all states are to complete their delegate selection by June 23, however in Utah are primary is June 26th.  Another challenge? Penalty?

The date in question is July 23, not June 23.  Nebraska cuts it the closest, with their State Convention not held until July 14.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 21, 2012, 03:23:27 PM
In a reminder to us all that the whims of the superdelegates may be fickle, we have the first switch of the season:

Carlos Méndez (PR) has switched his support (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/03/mitt-romney-announces-support-aguadilla-puerto-rico-mayor-carlos-méndez-gains-one) from Gingrich to Romney.  This gives Romney the unanimous support of the Puerto Rico delegation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 04:00:07 PM
Torrie, here is the rule regarding the penalty:

Quote

RULE NO. 16
Enforcement of Rules
(a) If any state or state Republican Party
violates The Rules of the Republican Party relating to
25 of 41
the timing of the election or selection process with the
result that any delegate from that state to the national
convention is bound by statute or rule to vote for a
presidential nominee selected or determined before the
first day of the month in which that state is authorized
by Rule No. 15(b) to vote for a presidential candidate
and/or elect, select, allocate, or bind delegates or
alternate delegates to the national convention, the
number of delegates to the national convention from
that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), and
the corresponding alternate delegates also shall be
reduced by the same percentage. Any sum presenting a
fraction shall be increased to the next whole number.
No delegation shall be reduced to less than two (2)
delegates and a corresponding number of alternates.

I think the only challenge could be that FL should get its full number of delegates.  Then that would create a vacancy that would default back to the state rules:

Rule 17 c

(c) Where neither the rules adopted by a state
Republican Party nor state laws provide a method for
filling vacancies in its national convention delegation,
the state Republican Party should make every effort to
elect those individuals filling the vacancies in the
delegation in the same manner as the delegates were
originally elected or selected, or by vote of the state
Republican Party executive committee or if the state
executive committee has not filled the vacancy by ten
(10) days prior to the convention, by vote of the state
delegation. This section shall not apply to the delegates
allocated to the state in Rule No. 13(a)(2).




The problem is that the FL rules then would kick in:

Rule K:
In the event a delegate or an alternate delegate is unable to attend the Republican National Convention, the Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, or his or her designee, shall select his or her replacement.

Rule M (part):

In the event that the Republican National Convention refuses to seat the full allotment of Florida delegates, all remaining delegates shall be Delegates at Large and shall be selected by the Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida from the original delegation. In that event, the Chairman shall select at least one (1) delegate from each congressional district, with the advice and consent of each State Executive Committee Congressional District Chairman.

http://rpof.org/wp-content/uploads/RPOFRule10.pdf

If the credentials committee were to rule that they shouldn't be penalized under Rule 16, arguably under Rule M, but definitely under Rule K.  It doesn't do any good unless the credentials committee decides to violate their own rules.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 21, 2012, 05:00:38 PM
Those rules are not helpful if some additional penalty is decided upon for winner take all early states, as to who will be removed, and who added.

Quote
15(b) ...
(1) No primary, caucus, or convention to elect, select, allocate, or bind delegates to the national convention shall occur prior to the first Tuesday in March in the year in which a national convention is held. Except Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada may begin their processes at any time on or after February 1 in the year in which a national convention is held and shall not be subject to
the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this rule.
(2) Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April
in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis.

However, notice that rule 15(b) covers both violations, the too early primary and the too early winner take all allocation method. Yet, the sole penalty for violating rule 15(b), and one violates it either by violating just one or both of its provisions, is losing half your delegates - and nothing more. On top of that, this intent reflected in the clear language, is reemphasized by the insertion of a critical "and/or" in Rule 16, along with the use of the term "election or selection process," with the word "selection" encompassing the allocation method.   There is no ambiguity. Therefore, I just don't see it happening.

My inserted text is in brackets, and I bolded and underlined the critical "and/or" words.  It is not a close case.

RULE NO. 16
Enforcement of Rules
(a) If any state or state Republican Party
violates The Rules of the Republican Party relating to [1]
the timing of the election or selection process with the
result that any delegate from that state to the national
convention is bound by statute or rule to vote for a
presidential nominee selected or determined before the
first day of the month in which that state is authorized
by Rule No. 15(b) to vote for a presidential candidate [to wit, too early a primary]
and/or [2] elect, select, allocate, or bind delegates or
alternate delegates to the national convention [that word allocate here covers an illicit winner take all primary], [then the penalty for either the one or both violations is that] the
number of delegates to the national convention from
that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), and
the corresponding alternate delegates also shall be
reduced by the same percentage. ... .


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 05:23:51 PM
Those rules are not helpful if some additional penalty is decided upon for winner take all early states, as to who will be removed, and who added.

However, in the rule below there is one critical word in there, "and" which makes it clear to me that even if you violate the no winner take all primary if it is too early rule and hold the primary too early, the sole penalty even for the double violation is just losing half your delegates. There is no ambiguity. Therefore, I just don't see it happening.

My inserted text is in brackets, and I bolded and underlined the critical "and/or" words.  It is not a close case.

RULE NO. 16
Enforcement of Rules
(a) If any state or state Republican Party
violates The Rules of the Republican Party relating to [1]
the timing of the election or selection process with the
result that any delegate from that state to the national
convention is bound by statute or rule to vote for a
presidential nominee selected or determined before the
first day of the month in which that state is authorized
by Rule No. 15(b) to vote for a presidential candidate [to wit, too early a primary]
and/or [2] elect, select, allocate, or bind delegates or
alternate delegates to the national convention [that word allocate here covers an illicit winner take all primary], [then the penalty for either the one or both violations is that] the
number of delegates to the national convention from
that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), and
the corresponding alternate delegates also shall be
reduced by the same percentage. ... .

I would not agree, and would note that the rule is covered by Robert's p. 591, "The imposition of a definite penalty for a particular action prohibits the increase or diminution of the penalty (p. 592, ll. 1-2)."  Robert's would apply as this decision is not made within the convention and the committee is covered by RONR.

Even if we were to follow you logic here, the majority needed would be reduced to 1131.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 21, 2012, 05:28:08 PM
Now 1131 pops up for some reason. So many numbers, so little time. Anyway, I revised my post above, while you were responding to my earlier text, deciding that I should read rule 15(b) as well just to make sure I was not putting my foot in it, which upon reading, just reinforced my opinion I think. So maybe you want to revise yours, or not. :)

Are you now suggesting that a motion to make Florida proportional, and unseat some Mittens delegates, and insert some Newt and Rick delegates, would be ruled out of order because it constitutes an "additional penalty?" If so, and that is in fact the rule that would be applied by the Convention chair, or parliamentarian or whatever, that does appear to be an interior line of defense for team Mittens.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 05:28:48 PM
In a reminder to us all that the whims of the superdelegates may be fickle, we have the first switch of the season:

Carlos Méndez (PR) has switched his support (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/03/mitt-romney-announces-support-aguadilla-puerto-rico-mayor-carlos-méndez-gains-one) from Gingrich to Romney.  This gives Romney the unanimous support of the Puerto Rico delegation.

There were six additional GA delegates (I'm guessing statewide) given to Romney, possibly some to Gingrich as well.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 05:32:22 PM
Now 1131 pops up for some reason. So many numbers, so little time. Anyway, I revised my post above, while you were responding to my earlier text, deciding that I should read rule 15(b) as well just to make sure I was not putting my foot in it, which upon reading, just reinforced my opinion I think. So maybe you want to revise yours, or not. :)

No, the penalty is the number of delegates to the national convention from that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), not "75%."


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 21, 2012, 06:08:59 PM
Now 1131 pops up for some reason. So many numbers, so little time. Anyway, I revised my post above, while you were responding to my earlier text, deciding that I should read rule 15(b) as well just to make sure I was not putting my foot in it, which upon reading, just reinforced my opinion I think. So maybe you want to revise yours, or not. :)

No, the penalty is the number of delegates to the national convention from that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), not "75%."

The Committee on Contests, the Republican National Committee, and the Committee on Credentials will I'm sure take all of these fine points into account, but nothing prevents the convention as a whole from simply rejecting their findings out of hand, so long as the contest was appealed all the way to the convention.

As for if sanctions are removed...I would be very surprised if the states do not have a full set of delegates lined up in case sanctions are removed (as they were in 2008).  I know for a fact certain states (NH, for instance, and I think MI) are going to submit a full slate of delegates and let the Contest Committee sort it out.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 06:18:30 PM


The Committee on Contests, the Republican National Committee, and the Committee on Credentials will I'm sure take all of these fine points into account, but nothing prevents the convention as a whole from simply rejecting their findings out of hand, so long as the contest was appealed all the way to the convention.

The would still need a majority (without FL) to do it, which comes back to 1119.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 21, 2012, 06:38:41 PM
Now 1131 pops up for some reason. So many numbers, so little time. Anyway, I revised my post above, while you were responding to my earlier text, deciding that I should read rule 15(b) as well just to make sure I was not putting my foot in it, which upon reading, just reinforced my opinion I think. So maybe you want to revise yours, or not. :)

No, the penalty is the number of delegates to the national convention from that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), not "75%."

Who implied that it was 75%?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 21, 2012, 06:47:01 PM
In a reminder to us all that the whims of the superdelegates may be fickle, we have the first switch of the season:

Carlos Méndez (PR) has switched his support (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/03/mitt-romney-announces-support-aguadilla-puerto-rico-mayor-carlos-méndez-gains-one) from Gingrich to Romney.  This gives Romney the unanimous support of the Puerto Rico delegation.

There were six additional GA delegates (I'm guessing statewide) given to Romney, possibly some to Gingrich as well.

Don't quite know what you mean by that, but thanks for the heads up, as I did find something while I was poking around.

Apparently, the GA GOP says (http://www.gagop.org/georgia-republican-presidential-preference-primary-delegate-count/) that the final delegate count out of Georgia was Gingrich 52 - Romney 21 - Santorum 3, not the 54-19-3 split that I had.

How could they have gotten this count?  The source I would first think of is the CD breakdowns; the breakdowns on the Georgia SoS website are still "Unofficial," although the election results as a whole have been certified.

Was Romney close to winning additional delegates at the expense of Gingrich in any CDs?  Looking at the results, it's a definite no---he's at least 6% off from it in every CD.

So basically, there are a few possiblities:

1) The reporting by CD was completely messed up and these "unofficial" numbers are completely unreliable.

2) We don't actually understand the GA GOP rules, but they seem pretty unambiguous...

3) The Georgia GOP messed up, and the Gingrich camp should challenge this.

Regardless, I have to trust the Georgia GOP over my own calculations, and will update the main post accordingly.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 21, 2012, 06:54:11 PM
Now 1131 pops up for some reason. So many numbers, so little time. Anyway, I revised my post above, while you were responding to my earlier text, deciding that I should read rule 15(b) as well just to make sure I was not putting my foot in it, which upon reading, just reinforced my opinion I think. So maybe you want to revise yours, or not. :)

No, the penalty is the number of delegates to the national convention from that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), not "75%."

Who implied that it was 75%?

There are a few reasonable ways to contest Florida delegates:

1) Remove all sanctions, delegates are allocated as they were by the original FL rules (WTA by CD and At-Large.  Gingrich picks up a few delegates, but Romney is the net winner).

2) Keep the 50% penalty, but seat a delegation that is more in line with the original FL rules (WTA by CD and At-Large.  Gingrich picks up a few delegates at the expense of Romney).

3) Penalize the state an additional 50%, but the state stays completely WTA (all delegates to Romney, this is the best case scenario for Gingrich).

Of these options, 3) is what J.J. is talking about and what has gotten some attention in the press.  For understandable reasons that have been discussed, this is unlikely to succeed, but it is a possibility.  2) is a more reasonable choice and may succeed.  1) is presumably actually the most likely outcome when all is said and done.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 21, 2012, 08:53:32 PM
Now 1131 pops up for some reason. So many numbers, so little time. Anyway, I revised my post above, while you were responding to my earlier text, deciding that I should read rule 15(b) as well just to make sure I was not putting my foot in it, which upon reading, just reinforced my opinion I think. So maybe you want to revise yours, or not. :)

No, the penalty is the number of delegates to the national convention from that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), not "75%."

Who implied that it was 75%?

99 normally, 50 with a 50% cut, 25 with a 50% cut of that.  A total reduction of about 75%.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 22, 2012, 10:39:38 AM


There are a few reasonable ways to contest Florida delegates:

1) Remove all sanctions, delegates are allocated as they were by the original FL rules (WTA by CD and At-Large.  Gingrich picks up a few delegates, but Romney is the net winner).

I think it would be possible to remove the early sanction, and permit a proportional seating and this would be the cleanest way, but it won't help Gingrich very much, if at all.  I would raise the majority to 1,168.  In other words, if Mittens gets 25 of the newly seated delegates, he still has a majority.

Quote
2) Keep the 50% penalty, but seat a delegation that is more in line with the original FL rules (WTA by CD and At-Large.  Gingrich picks up a few delegates at the expense of Romney).

I think there is a political problem.  Newt has to say "I want one rule to apply, but not the other."  It is possible, but it could offend a lot of people.  Conversely, Mitt could move to remove the early penalty but keep the WTA rule without a penalty.  I think there would be outrage at either, if it effects the result.

Quote
3) Penalize the state an additional 50%, but the state stays completely WTA (all delegates to Romney, this is the best case scenario for Gingrich).

Of these options, 3) is what J.J. is talking about and what has gotten some attention in the press.  For understandable reasons that have been discussed, this is unlikely to succeed, but it is a possibility.  2) is a more reasonable choice and may succeed.  1) is presumably actually the most likely outcome when all is said and done.

The problem is, this violates the rule.  In fact, everything here contemplates the existing rules being amended or suspended. 

The National Committee could amend them prior to the convention, but the convention can, in adopting the rules, amend them.  The problem is that the certification of the delegates occurs prior to adopting the rules.  Approval could be laid on the table, by a majority vote.  The problem is, the delegates from FL will be seated at that point.

I don't see this as workable solution if Romney has 1144 delegates, with FL, who will the way he wants them too, or Santorum/Gingrich can persuade the National Committee to amend the temporary rules.

Gingrich/Santorum might have a better shot challenging at the state level.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 22, 2012, 11:49:40 AM
2) Keep the 50% penalty, but seat a delegation that is more in line with the original FL rules (WTA by CD and At-Large.  Gingrich picks up a few delegates at the expense of Romney).

I think there is a political problem.  Newt has to say "I want one rule to apply, but not the other."  It is possible, but it could offend a lot of people.  Conversely, Mitt could move to remove the early penalty but keep the WTA rule without a penalty.  I think there would be outrage at either, if it effects the result.


This is all a bit academic, anyway, as we've glossed over one important point.  Florida is going to submit its full delegation to the RNC secretary regardless.  This delegation consists of 54 delegates by CD, 42 delegates At-Large, and 3 RNC members.  [Of those, it's around 89 Romney - 10 Gingrich, worst-case scenario for Romney].

As Florida is trying to seat more delegates than it is entitled to by the rules, a contest is automatically triggered.  What final delegation will actually be seated is then up to the Committee on Contests, the Republican National Committee, the Committee on Credentials, and, ultimately, the Republican National Convention itself.

The Florida rules say that 50 At-Large delegates will be seated if "the Republican National Convention refuses to seat the full allotment of Florida delegates," but it really doesn't seem that the Florida rules could possibly apply at that point.  The Republican National Committee (which decides which 50 of the 99 delegates will appear on the Temporary Roll of the Convention) could defer to the Florida rules, but I don't think they'd need to.

A subsidiary point: the binding of the Florida delegates to a particular candidate, after the final delegation has been decided, may be even more of a wrangle than usual...

Also complicating this is redistricting, which was not finished before the primary.  Gingrich won 3 of Florida's 25 congressional districts (2000 boundaries), it's unclear how many he won on the 2010 boundaries.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 22, 2012, 12:10:36 PM


The Florida rules say that 50 At-Large delegates will be seated if "the Republican National Convention refuses to seat the full allotment of Florida delegates," but it really doesn't seem that the Florida rules could possibly apply at that point.  The Republican National Committee (which decides which 50 of the 99 delegates will appear on the Temporary Roll of the Convention) could defer to the Florida rules, but I don't think they'd need to.

The RNC Rules defer back to the state:

RULE NO. 17
Vacancies in a State Delegation
(a) Where the rules adopted by a state
Republican Party provide a method for filling vacancies
in its national convention delegation, they shall be filled
pursuant to such method.
(b) Where the rules adopted by a state
Republican Party do not provide a method for filling
vacancies in its national convention delegation, and
where the state laws do provide such a method of
replacement, they shall be filled pursuant to such
method provided by state laws.
(c) Where neither the rules adopted by a state
Republican Party nor state laws provide a method for
filling vacancies in its national convention delegation,
the state Republican Party should make every effort to
elect those individuals filling the vacancies in the
delegation in the same manner as the delegates were
originally elected or selected, or by vote of the state
Republican Party executive committee or if the state
executive committee has not filled the vacancy by ten
(10) days prior to the convention, by vote of the state
delegation. This section shall not apply to the delegates
allocated to the state in Rule No. 13(a)(2)
[RNC members].

Quote
A subsidiary point: the binding of the Florida delegates to a particular candidate, after the final delegation has been decided, may be even more of a wrangle than usual...

Unless there is something worked out, FL will either provide 50 delegates for Mittens, or the majority will be 1119.  I do not see any method for Newt to get them, unless he goes through the National Committee or the Florida State Committee.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 22, 2012, 12:18:25 PM
RULE NO. 17
Vacancies in a State Delegation
...

99 is greater than 50.  We're not dealing with vacancies in a delegation, we're dealing with Excess Delegates:

Quote from: RNC Rules
RULE NO. 18
Excess Delegates and Alternate Delegates
(a) No state shall elect or select a greater number of persons to act as delegates and alternate
delegates than the actual number of delegates and alternate delegates, respectively, to which it is entitled under the call for the national convention, including any Rule No. 16 penalties. No unit of representation may elect or select any delegate or alternate  delegate with permission to cast a fractional vote.
(b) Where more than the authorized number of delegates from any state is certified and forwarded to the secretary of the Republican National Committee in the manner provided in Rule No. 19, a contest shall be deemed to exist and the secretary shall notify the several claimants so reported and shall submit all such credentials and claims to the whole Republican
National Committee for decision as to which claimants reported shall be placed upon the temporary roll of the national convention.

The Republican National Committee decides which 50 of the 99 delegates is placed on the Temporary Roll, then the normal contest procedure ensues.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 22, 2012, 12:53:06 PM
RULE NO. 17
Vacancies in a State Delegation
...


99 is greater than 50.  We're not dealing with vacancies in a delegation, we're dealing with Excess Delegates:


Quote from: RNC Rules
RULE NO. 18
Excess Delegates and Alternate Delegates
(a) No state shall elect or select a greater number of persons to act as delegates and alternate
delegates than the actual number of delegates and alternate delegates, respectively, to which it is entitled under the call for the national convention, including any Rule No. 16 penalties. No unit of representation may elect or select any delegate or alternate  delegate with permission to cast a fractional vote.
(b) Where more than the authorized number of delegates from any state is certified and forwarded to the secretary of the Republican National Committee in the manner provided in Rule No. 19, a contest shall be deemed to exist and the secretary shall notify the several claimants so reported and shall submit all such credentials and claims to the whole Republican
National Committee for decision as to which claimants reported shall be placed upon the temporary roll of the national convention.

The Republican National Committee decides which 50 of the 99 delegates is placed on the Temporary Roll, then the normal contest procedure ensues.

That rule only deals with more delegates elected than there are positions.  There, in that circumstance, would be less than the authorized number of delegates, not "more."  It is a vacancy and would be filled as such.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 22, 2012, 01:10:22 PM
RULE NO. 17
Vacancies in a State Delegation
...


99 is greater than 50.  We're not dealing with vacancies in a delegation, we're dealing with Excess Delegates:


Quote from: RNC Rules
RULE NO. 18
Excess Delegates and Alternate Delegates
(a) No state shall elect or select a greater number of persons to act as delegates and alternate
delegates than the actual number of delegates and alternate delegates, respectively, to which it is entitled under the call for the national convention, including any Rule No. 16 penalties. No unit of representation may elect or select any delegate or alternate  delegate with permission to cast a fractional vote.
(b) Where more than the authorized number of delegates from any state is certified and forwarded to the secretary of the Republican National Committee in the manner provided in Rule No. 19, a contest shall be deemed to exist and the secretary shall notify the several claimants so reported and shall submit all such credentials and claims to the whole Republican
National Committee for decision as to which claimants reported shall be placed upon the temporary roll of the national convention.

The Republican National Committee decides which 50 of the 99 delegates is placed on the Temporary Roll, then the normal contest procedure ensues.

That rule only deals with more delegates elected than there are positions.  There, in that circumstance, would be less than the authorized number of delegates, not "more."  It is a vacancy and would be filled as such.

According to the rules of the Republican Party (including the 50% penalty in rule 16), Florida is entitled to 50 delegates.  Florida, according to its own rules, will be sending a list to the RNC secretary with 99 delegates on it, more than they are entitled to.  This is an excess of delegates, and falls under Rule 18.

I am not discussing the scenario (which is what I think you're talking about) in which Florida sends a list of 50 delegates to the RNC, this is contested by someone from Florida, and in the ensuing contest, the sanctions are lifted and 99 delegates are seated.  The Florida GOP Rules (http://rpof.org/wp-content/uploads/RPOFRule10.pdf) clearly state that they will be sending the full 99 delegates to Tampa, unless the Republican National Convention refuses to seat them.

In any event, we will have a better picture of what Florida is planning to do after the delegates themselves are selected; delegates by CDs are selected at caucuses from February 7 - March 30, and the At-Large delegates are selected on April 28. Source. (http://rpof.org/wp-content/uploads/Convention-FAQs-2.pdf)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 22, 2012, 01:11:58 PM
Alaska has finished canvassing (http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/gop-vote-finalized-rick-santorum-picks-alaska-delegate) its votes from the Super Tuesday Presidential Preference Poll, and finalized its delegate count.

As was quite probable, Gingrich lost a delegate; Santorum was the beneficiary.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 22, 2012, 01:56:08 PM


According to the rules of the Republican Party (including the 50% penalty in rule 16), Florida is entitled to 50 delegates.  Florida, according to its own rules, will be sending a list to the RNC secretary with 99 delegates on it, more than they are entitled to.  This is an excess of delegates, and falls under Rule 18.

Okay, I see what you are referring to.  I'm not sure, however, that they will send more than 50 (49 to be precise).  It would probably be safer not to.



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 22, 2012, 08:09:42 PM
That 1040 number for a plurality just seems so appropriate for tax time doesn't it?  :)

The plurality game is a different game from the majority game, and I suspect everybody is playing the majority game, to wit, Mittens versus non-Mittens. But given the chatter about pluralities, I thought I would add the plurality game to the chart. It gave me a headache to come up with the formula for the plurality game. Don't ask how I did it. :P

()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 24, 2012, 10:45:28 PM
Romney barely scrapes by the threshold, winning 7 delegates to Santorum's 13.

Gingrich loses his last honest shot at delegates until May 8.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Colbert on March 24, 2012, 10:50:40 PM
what is an unplegged delegate? A free delegate with no obligation to vote for "his" candidate?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on March 24, 2012, 11:13:45 PM
Erc, I don't think you're reading the rules right. The delegates that would have gone to candidate who did not meet the threshold become uncommitted. It should be Santorum 10, Romney 5, Uncommitted 5 (+5).


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Smash255 on March 24, 2012, 11:15:54 PM
Erc, I don't think you're reading the rules right. The delegates that would have gone to candidate who did not meet the threshold become uncommitted. It should be Santorum 10, Romney 5, Uncommitted 5 (+5).

green papers has it as 13 to 7 as well, but also has another explanation.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on March 24, 2012, 11:38:57 PM
Erc, I don't think you're reading the rules right. The delegates that would have gone to candidate who did not meet the threshold become uncommitted. It should be Santorum 10, Romney 5, Uncommitted 5 (+5).

I believe you are correct.

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2012/03/2012-republican-delegate-allocation_23.html



Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Colbert on March 24, 2012, 11:40:22 PM
what is an unplegged delegate? A free delegate with no obligation to vote for "his" candidate?



:(


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 24, 2012, 11:53:48 PM
what is an unplegged delegate? A free delegate with no obligation to vote for "his" candidate?



:(

A delegate that is not bound to support any candidate; he may use his own judgment when voting.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Colbert on March 25, 2012, 10:12:57 AM
ok, thanks :)

based on this : http://edition.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/scorecard/statebystate/r

I count 534 solid delegates for romney

259+134+71 solid anti-mitt delegates = 464

and 39 unplegged


so, maybe nothing is done for the convention, hu?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 25, 2012, 11:47:10 AM
Erc, I don't think you're reading the rules right. The delegates that would have gone to candidate who did not meet the threshold become uncommitted. It should be Santorum 10, Romney 5, Uncommitted 5 (+5).

I went back and forth on that interpretation, as the RNC rules themselves seemed somewhat ambiguous.

Here are the rules in question:
Quote from: LA GOP Rules
RULE NO. 19

(d) After the election of District Delegates and Alternates set forth above, the convention shall proceed to the election of twenty (20) at large delegates. After the election of at large delegates, the convention shall proceed to the election of twenty (20) at large alternate delegates.

(e) After the elections above, the convention shall proceed to the election of the remainder of at large delegates and alternates to be elected. The remainder of at large delegates and alternate delegates to be elected shall be nominated by the Executive Committee.

RULE NO. 20

(b) At Large Delegates elected in accordance with Rule 19 (d) shall be allocated to a Presidential candidate only if a candidate receives at least 25% of votes in the Presidential Preference Primary. If a candidate receives at least 25% of the votes in the Presidential Preference Primary, that candidate shall be allocated at large delegates in proportion to the percentage of the votes received, rounded to the nearest delegate. If no candidate receives at least 25% of the votes in the Presidential Preference Primary, such at large delegates are designated as uncommitted. All other at large delegates shall be allocated and designated as uncommitted.

The question is, how to interpret that last line of Rule 20 (b).  What are "all other at large delegates"?  Since the rest of the rule was dealing with the at large delegates elected in accordance with Rule 19 (d), I figured that "all other at large delegates" referred to the other at large delegates, i.e. those elected in accordance with Rule 19 (e).  All 20 delegates under Rule 19 (d) are allocated by the results of the primary, among threshold-meeting candidates.

The other interpretation is that "all other at large delegates" refers to both those elected in accordance with Rule 19 (e) and anything left over from the allocation in the rest of Rule 20 (b).  This seems to go along better with the rest of Rule 20 (b), though it would render the second-to-last line of Rule 20 (b) rather superfluous.

On net, it seems that I chose the worse interpretation.  As the media have uniformly gone with the latter interpretation, I'll go along with them as well.

The authoritative statement would of course come from the LA GOP, but they're having bandwidth issues at the moment.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 25, 2012, 05:00:15 PM
Erc, I don't think you're reading the rules right. The delegates that would have gone to candidate who did not meet the threshold become uncommitted. It should be Santorum 10, Romney 5, Uncommitted 5 (+5).

You are in agreement with Fox.  ;)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: nclib on March 25, 2012, 07:03:15 PM
Any updated results on CD's? I know Santorum only won IL-12, IL-15, and IL-17, and Romney the rest of IL. LA is of course Santorum except for possibly LA-2.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on March 25, 2012, 11:12:25 PM
Any updated results on CD's? I know Santorum only won IL-12, IL-15, and IL-17, and Romney the rest of IL. LA is of course Santorum except for possibly LA-2.

I think someone mentioned they were not up at this point.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on March 26, 2012, 12:23:43 AM
Green Papers has them: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/IL-R#0320

Looks like all the districts voted for a full ticket of the district winner, except IL-16 and IL-18 that gave Santorum one delegate.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 28, 2012, 06:29:01 PM
The last possible day for Colorado County Assemblies was today, though it appears the last in fact finished on the 25th.

Lack of centralized reporting and large numbers of explicitly 'Uncommitted' delegates (some of which may be unity Anti-Romney tickets, others of which may be stealth Paul delegates) make it hard to make accurate projections.

This source (http://www.coloradostatesman.com/content/993390-still-too-soon-determine-who%3Fs-ahead-colorado%3Fs-race-prez) has some scattered results and general reporting; I know other articles have been posted elsewhere on the forums.

Congressional District Conventions are held on April 12 and 13, and the State Convention is on April 14.


Next on the agenda:  Minnesota's BPOU Conventions wrap up this Saturday, and we have the first State Convention of the season, in North Dakota, concluding its business on Sunday.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on March 28, 2012, 07:18:02 PM
Minnesota's 7th congressional district convention is also this weekend.

http://mncd7gop.com/Convention_Information.html

This should be Santorum's best district in the state, anything less than getting all 3 National Convention delegates would be a sign of trouble.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on March 31, 2012, 04:48:09 PM
MN 7th District convention elects 2 Santorum Delegates and 1 Paul Delegate.

https://twitter.com/#!/patandersonmn

This should have been Santorum's best district, he got around 57% in the straw poll.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on March 31, 2012, 05:53:12 PM
MN 7th District convention elects 2 Santorum Delegates and 1 Paul Delegate.

https://twitter.com/#!/patandersonmn

This should have been Santorum's best district, he got around 57% in the straw poll.


Thanks!  Moved a delegate from Santorum to Paul on the front page.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: jmc247 on March 31, 2012, 07:55:24 PM
What offically happens to Newt's delegates if he does drop out?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 31, 2012, 08:52:44 PM
Assuming Mittens wins Wisconsin, I think I know the delegate count this time, so I might as well put it up 3 days early. I added in Utah since there is no suspense there, so the measurement is for the balance of the run ex-Utah. Ron Paul, as an example, ex-Utah, will have a rather uphill climb to win a majority of the delegates, a mere 97% of them. :)  Mittens needs about 37%.

()


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on March 31, 2012, 10:00:39 PM
Isn't the majority 1144 rather than 1044?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Torie on March 31, 2012, 11:09:26 PM
Isn't the majority 1144 rather than 1044?

1040 assures a plurality.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 01, 2012, 10:37:09 PM
North Dakota chose its delegation Saturday morning.

It appears (http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/2f7fbe4b28224354be015a3b86d27cf8/ND--GOP-Convention-Delegates/) that the original slate of delegates nominated by the Committee on Permanent Organization was indeed elected at the convention; additional names were put forward in nomination on the floor, but none of them were elected.

The 25 delegates chosen include Rick Berg and John Hoeven (as expected), First Lady Betsy Dalrymple, Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, and seven state legislators. 

The 28 delegates (the 25 chosen plus 3 RNC members) may choose as a group to vote based on the caucus results; however, they need not do so, in which case they are simply unpledged delegates.  If, as is rumored, most of the 25 are pro-Romney, they will likely choose not to follow the results of the caucus and just vote for Romney.

At least one of the 25 delegates (Gary Emineth) is in the Santorum camp.

When I get a full list of delegates I may change the main page; most likely the vast majority will move into the "Uncommitted" column and be treated like superdelegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 01, 2012, 10:43:52 PM
Twitter rumor (http://twitter.com/#!/lukehellier/status/186111569669787648) is 20 Romney, 6 Santorum, 2 Paul. 

I'm a bit skeptical of this, because the total is 28, and (as far as I know) the 3 RNC members haven't committed to a candidate yet.  Perhaps this may be including the RNC Committeeman and Committeewoman elected at the convention (whose terms start after the close of proceedings at Tampa), and assuming Stan Stein is in the Romney camp?

Hopefully we have a bit more info in the coming days.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on April 02, 2012, 12:13:53 AM
That's disgusting...


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on April 02, 2012, 06:42:08 AM
So were the caucuses just a beauty contest? It truly is a joke that 3rd place can get the vast majority of delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: J. J. on April 02, 2012, 07:07:55 AM
So were the caucuses just a beauty contest? It truly is a joke that 3rd place can get the vast majority of delegates.

It is like MO in that circumstance.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: argentarius on April 02, 2012, 07:15:21 AM
So were the caucuses just a beauty contest? It truly is a joke that 3rd place can get the vast majority of delegates.

It is like MO in that circumstance.
Yeah but it's wrong because the revaLOOshun is getting fked here, unlike in MO.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Snowstalker Mk. II on April 02, 2012, 07:18:09 AM
All delegate results should be directly tied to the primary/caucus results.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on April 02, 2012, 07:46:33 AM


It really is, whether it's Romney, Paul, Santorum, or Gingrich's campaign doing it.  One would hope that they'd have a little bit more respect for the will of the voters, but obviously they don't.  Romney should get his fair share of delegates in Nevada and Washington just like Santorum should in Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, North Dakota, and especially Missouri (even if no where else, since he basically ran the board here).  This whole Republican primary season has been one big argument for abolishing caucuses and having every state distribute its delegates based either on the candidates percentage of the state-wide popular vote.  There are definitely problems with distributing delegates by congressional district, or worse still, winner-take-all.  However, the caucus' have consistently resulted in each of the remaining campaigns actively subverting the will of the voters.  It just seems so...undemocratic.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook on April 02, 2012, 05:42:57 PM
When's the Texas Primary? I just got my voter thing in the mail so I want an answer.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: RI on April 02, 2012, 08:02:15 PM
When's the Texas Primary? I just got my voter thing in the mail so I want an answer.

May 29.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on April 02, 2012, 08:35:55 PM
When's the Texas Primary? I just got my voter thing in the mail so I want an answer.
Yo, bro, maybe you should read the OP.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook on April 02, 2012, 09:42:30 PM
When's the Texas Primary? I just got my voter thing in the mail so I want an answer.
Yo, bro, maybe you should read the OP.
It wasn't mentioned in the OP.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Yelnoc on April 02, 2012, 09:47:55 PM
When's the Texas Primary? I just got my voter thing in the mail so I want an answer.
Yo, bro, maybe you should read the OP.
It wasn't mentioned in the OP.
Did you look?  Because there was a link at the bottom to the Full Calendar.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 03, 2012, 01:12:30 AM
Our good friends at Demconwatch (http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/5265/nd-selects-25-national-delegates) have the list of all 25 delegates selected at the ND GOP state convention.

Of these, 5 can be explicitly confirmed to be for Romney and 1 for Santorum, while the intentions of the other 19 cannot be confirmed at this time.


In other news, one of Huntsman's three delegates in New Hampshire, Paul Collins, has endorsed Romney (http://www.democraticconventionwatch.com/diary/5255/former-huntsman-new-hampshire-delegate-endorses-romney), while the other two have confirmed they remain uncommitted.  As New Hampshire is subject to sanctions due to its early timing, it is unclear which (presumably two) of the three will be seated, so the main page count remains unchanged at the moment.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 03, 2012, 10:53:03 AM
I'll be treating North Dakota's 25 delegates as superdelegates, so we'd better start keeping track of them.

The official list of delegates and alternates elected can be found here (http://www.northdakotagop.org/2012/04/results-of-national-delegatealternate-elections/).

John Hoeven (US Senator) - ROMNEY (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/02/mitt-romney-announces-support-north-dakota-elected-officials-and-grassroots-volun)
Rick Berg (US Congressman)
Betsy Dalrymple (First Lady)
Wayne Stenehjem (Attorney General) - ROMNEY (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/02/mitt-romney-announces-support-north-dakota-elected-officials-and-grassroots-volun)
Robert Harms (NDGOP treasurer) - ROMNEY (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/02/mitt-romney-announces-support-north-dakota-elected-officials-and-grassroots-volun)
Kyle Handegard (associated with Rick Berg's office)
Clare Carlson - ROMNEY (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/02/mitt-romney-announces-support-north-dakota-elected-officials-and-grassroots-volun)
Gary Emineth (former NDGOP chairman) - SANTORUM (http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/usatoday/article/38934101?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p)
Joe Miller (State Senator) - SANTORUM (http://santorumillinois.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/big-win-in-north-dakota-for-santorum/)
Margaret Sitte (Former State Rep.) - PAUL (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?107169-Ron-Paul-s-North-Dakota-endorsements)
Delores Rath (2004, 2008 Delegate)
Jim Poolman (ND GOP Vice-Chairman) - ROMNEY (http://www.mittromney.com/news/press/2012/02/mitt-romney-announces-support-north-dakota-elected-officials-and-grassroots-volun)
Kelly Schmidt (State Treasurer)
Paul Henderson - PAUL (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?107169-Ron-Paul-s-North-Dakota-endorsements)
Gary Lee (State Senator)
Francis Klein
Mike Schatz (State Rep.)
Carol Nitschke
Shane Goettle (U.S. House candidate) - ROMNEY (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVgzNxYS-qT3IkowPQp0VQDRLSvw?docId=159f0c652c88426d9fad7732603b3b67), but would support a proportional allocation
Caren Mikesh
Karen Rohr (State Rep.)
Craig Headland (State Rep.)
Paul Owens
Jim Kasper (State Rep.)
John Kerian - SANTORUM (http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/norindsea.shtml)

And, don't forget the three RNC Members:

Stan Stein
Curly Haugland
Sandy Boehler - ROMNEY (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVgzNxYS-qT3IkowPQp0VQDRLSvw?docId=159f0c652c88426d9fad7732603b3b67)

This gives a confirmed total of Romney - 5, Santorum - 3, Paul - 2, with 18 still uncommitted.  If the general rumor of Romney - 20, Santorum - 6, Paul - 2 is correct, it means the vast majority of the above are going to break for Romney.  However, since several of the above have explicitly refused to make an endorsement (Rick Berg, Betsy Dalrymple), I'm disinclined to completely trust the rumors.

The AP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVgzNxYS-qT3IkowPQp0VQDRLSvw?docId=159f0c652c88426d9fad7732603b3b67) has surveyed all 25 delegates, and found that 12 supported Romney, 8 supported Santorum, 2 supported Paul, and 1 supported Gingrich.  2 were still undecided.

This leaves open the question of whether the delegation as it stands will vote according to the results of the caucuses, or according to their personal preferences.

Shane Goettle, a Romney supporter, has said he will support a proportional allocation of their votes, and it seems that others may agree with him---of course, if this should come down to a fight at the convention where every delegate matters, I doubt the Romney supporters would be so quick to agree to a plan like that.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 03, 2012, 11:09:33 AM
In other news:

Tennessee has finally certified (http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120330/NEWS02/303300028/Rick-Santorum-takes-half-Tennessee-GOP-delegates?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s) the results of its primary.

As we knew already, Santorum won CDs 1-8 and placed second in CD 9 (which Romney won).

Romney placed second in all other CDs except CDs 6 and 8, where Gingrich placed second.

Basically, as far as the front page is concerned---Romney placed second in CD 4 instead of Gingrich, and picks up a delegate at Gingrich's expense.

TN delegate breakdown is 29 - 17 - 9, S - R - G.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 03, 2012, 11:55:37 PM
Romney sweeps Maryland and DC, wins Wisconsin by about 33 - 9.  While we aren't entirely certain about the exact Wisconsin breakdown, this is clearly a good night for Romney on the delegate front.

Santorum did better than expectations (my expectations, certainly), but we're in WTA (or nearly WTA) country now, and close doesn't quite cut it.

My current Santorum-favorable projection for future contests (it had Santorum winning Wisconsin before today) has Romney coming in with 51 more votes than he needs for a majority, even if every single remaining superdelegate breaks against him.

While it's still of course possible that Romney won't have clinched in an extremely technical sense by the end of this process (not all of his delegates will be technically bound to him, and could still change their minds or be Paulista fifth columnists), that's a hope even more distant than Gary Hart's in 84.

Santorum needs to completely shake up the race in order to have a shot at this, and Gingrich dropping out wouldn't cut it at this point.   Basically, he needs to follow up a win in Pennsylvania by sweeping all the May states, and then somehow turning that into a win in California...and possibly New Jersey as well, while we're at it.

May is a very good month for Santorum (if he survives April)...but if CA/NJ don't budge from the Romney camp, Romney gets declared the nominee June 5.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on April 06, 2012, 04:00:20 AM
The Santorum campaign is trying to get Texas to change to WTA, but it's unlikely that the Texas GOP would agree to that, and less likely that the RC would grant Texas the necessary waiver to change their delegate allocation rules this late in the game:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/05/11041257-is-texas-looking-to-change-its-delegate-rules-to-help-santorum


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 06, 2012, 12:47:30 PM
A change in the delegate selection process this late in the game is very expressly against RNC rules.  While a vote at the convention itself (excluding Texas' delegates) could overturn that, there's no way that, if Texas were the deciding factor in stopping a Romney majority, that the vote would pass on the floor.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 06, 2012, 12:58:27 PM
Alabama has finished and reviewed the certification (http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/gingrich_to_keep_questioned_al.html) of last month's primary results.

The biggest mess, as we all knew, was CD 7, due to its huge number of split precincts.  After a review of results there, it was determined that Gingrich did in fact beat Romney for second place there.  Sadly I don't have numbers for you guys.

The resulting delegate count is Santorum - 22, Gingrich - 13, Romney - 12, luckily enough in exact accordance with my original projection.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 06, 2012, 01:06:34 PM
Those fate of those four delegate slots in Ohio (where Santorum won the vote but had no delegate candidates) is still up in the air.  Romney is actively pushing (http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/content/blogs/the-daily-briefing/2012/04/4-5-12-romney-wants-santorums-ohio-delegates.html) to have his delegates (which were on the ballot) seated instead.  There are similarly 15 alternate slots---which may prove important if any of Santorum's delegates, many of whom were chosen in an extremely slapdash manner, fail to make it to the convention.

It seems the matter may be decided next week, when the State Central Committee meets on April 13.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 06, 2012, 01:20:09 PM
The RNC apparently keeps a similar post (http://www.gop.com/index.php/comms/comments/updated_rnc_delegate_count1/) updated from time to time; they get their counts directly from the state parties.  As is understandable, it only tracks delegates from states that bind their delegates (or 'morally' bind them, in the case of Illinois and Ohio), so many caucus states are left out.

The only discrepancies between their count and mine are in Alabama and Tennessee, where Gingrich has an extra delegate at the expense of Romney.  All the other media sources seem to agree with my count, though.

Between this and those two weird delegates in Georgia, I don't know what's going on down South.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 06, 2012, 09:56:44 PM
The AP has interviewed (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVgzNxYS-qT3IkowPQp0VQDRLSvw?docId=159f0c652c88426d9fad7732603b3b67) North Dakota's 28 delegates, and found that the Twitter rumors were, of course, exaggerated.

Romney - 13
Santorum - 8
Paul - 2
Gingrich - 1
Uncommitted - 4

More tellingly, however, it seems that the delegation may, despite the large amount of Romney support, decide to vote on the basis of the caucus after all.  One Romney supporter (US House candidate Shane Goettle) was quoted as saying that he would vote as necessary to ensure that the delegation's vote reflects the caucuses, and the AP has implied that this is the general consensus.

Of course, in the event this actually does go to Tampa, it's likely going to be every man for himself.

To reflect this uncertainty, the main page will give each candidate the minimum number of delegates among the two counts (i.e. their worst-case scenario).  This works out to be:

Santorum - 8
Romney - 7
Paul - 2
Gingrich - 1
Unallocated/Uncommitted - 10


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: BigSkyBob on April 09, 2012, 02:34:36 PM
The Santorum campaign is trying to get Texas to change to WTA, but it's unlikely that the Texas GOP would agree to that, and less likely that the RC would grant Texas the necessary waiver to change their delegate allocation rules this late in the game:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/05/11041257-is-texas-looking-to-change-its-delegate-rules-to-help-santorum

The RNC waiver would be a formality at this point. Do you really think they would want to maintain the appearance of grossly favoring Romney yet one more time?

Texas has been WTA. The only reason it was not WTA this time is the fact that RNC rules disallowed a WTA primary in March. Since the Courts pushed the primary date past the date that WTA primaries could occur, the basic presumption would be that Texas would switch back.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: BigSkyBob on April 09, 2012, 02:38:25 PM
A change in the delegate selection process this late in the game is very expressly against RNC rules.  While a vote at the convention itself (excluding Texas' delegates) could overturn that, there's no way that, if Texas were the deciding factor in stopping a Romney majority, that the vote would pass on the floor.

Unless, the party bosses decided stopping Romney was in their best interests.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 10, 2012, 02:58:35 AM
Your caucus estimates are way off and favoring Romney while underestimating Paul.  There's nothing conservative about them.

Romney is likely getting zero delegates in Iowa and less delegates than Paul in Washington.  Paul also seems like he's going to win Maine by quite a bit.  The Paulites seem to think they have Colorado too but I find that hard to believe.  Minnesota looks like Paul probably will have more than Santorum though.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 10, 2012, 03:01:54 AM
A change in the delegate selection process this late in the game is very expressly against RNC rules.  While a vote at the convention itself (excluding Texas' delegates) could overturn that, there's no way that, if Texas were the deciding factor in stopping a Romney majority, that the vote would pass on the floor.
Actually, it would appear that WTA contests are against national RNC rules, so I think there's actually more chance that when it's all said and done that Willard will lose some from Arizona and Florida, rather than anything crazy happening with Texas.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Bacon King on April 10, 2012, 08:21:33 AM
A change in the delegate selection process this late in the game is very expressly against RNC rules.  While a vote at the convention itself (excluding Texas' delegates) could overturn that, there's no way that, if Texas were the deciding factor in stopping a Romney majority, that the vote would pass on the floor.
Actually, it would appear that WTA contests are against national RNC rules, so I think there's actually more chance that when it's all said and done that Willard will lose some from Arizona and Florida, rather than anything crazy happening with Texas.

WTA contests are only against the rules for contests going before a certain date (in March iirc)


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on April 10, 2012, 08:25:57 AM
A change in the delegate selection process this late in the game is very expressly against RNC rules.  While a vote at the convention itself (excluding Texas' delegates) could overturn that, there's no way that, if Texas were the deciding factor in stopping a Romney majority, that the vote would pass on the floor.
Actually, it would appear that WTA contests are against national RNC rules, so I think there's actually more chance that when it's all said and done that Willard will lose some from Arizona and Florida, rather than anything crazy happening with Texas.

WTA contests are only against the rules for contests going before a certain date (in March iirc)
And they already got penalized by losing half of their delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 10, 2012, 09:08:42 AM
http://www.gop.com/index.php/news/comments/republican_national_committee_approves_2012_presidential_nominating_process
Quote
(2) Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis.
As you can see in the rules, they got penalized for holding their primary too soon, rather than for non-proportional allocation of delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 10, 2012, 09:22:22 AM
http://rebelpundit.com/2012/04/washington-state-gop-skirts-rules-to-sabotage-santorum/

Looks like Rmoney is getting shut out and it's making his people mad!


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 10, 2012, 10:20:05 AM
Your caucus estimates are way off and favoring Romney while underestimating Paul.  There's nothing conservative about them.

Romney is likely getting zero delegates in Iowa and less delegates than Paul in Washington.  Paul also seems like he's going to win Maine by quite a bit.  The Paulites seem to think they have Colorado too but I find that hard to believe.  Minnesota looks like Paul probably will have more than Santorum though.

If I were to do this over again, I'd probably leave out the caucus states entirely; the overall format of this thread is a holdover from the 2008 Democratic process, which has strict rules to prevent these sorts of shenanigans.  That year, the only real uncertainty in caucus states like Iowa was what would happen once Edwards' delegates dropped out (and smaller versions of the 'enthusiasm gap' were concerns in states like Idaho)---you could pretty accurately project the final results based on the results of the caucuses themselves.

On the Republican side, of course the process is a lot more ugly.  I made projections based on the caucus results themselves, that for a variety of reasons, many of which you have listed (and more of which I've listed in the main post) are likely to be incredibly wrong.  My plan was to update these projections as the caucus/convention process continued in each state; however, there is very little centralized reporting, and I'm not going to take anecdotal reports by Paulistas as gospel.

So, we're going to have to wait until the CD and State Conventions in each state.  The only state that's held one so far is North Dakota, and there Romney (of all people) did better than anyone's original projections.

We'll see what happens in Wyoming (which I currently project to be swept by a Romney slate) and Colorado (Lord knows) this Saturday.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 10, 2012, 12:32:02 PM
We'll see what happens in Wyoming (which I currently project to be swept by a Romney slate) and Colorado (Lord knows) this Saturday.
I thought Wyoming was already decided, and Romney won most of the delegates.  I also thought each county picked a delegate and the state convention didn't pick the slate.  Maybe I'm wrong though, that's just from the back of my head.

Colorado seems like it will be Paul and Santorum shutting out Romney.  I'm guessing Santorum will get a few more than Paul, but Romney will probably be the loser.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook on April 10, 2012, 01:42:04 PM
Help m out: Since Saitly Rick droppd out, where are his delegates going?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 10, 2012, 01:54:45 PM
He didn't drop out.  He suspended his campaign, so all of his pledged delegates in primary states must still vote for him on the first ballot.  However, his unpledged delegates (mostly in caucuses) can vote for whomever they choose.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 10, 2012, 07:20:39 PM
What's going to happen to Santorum's delegates?

As America First mentioned, there is a difference between 'dropping out' and 'suspending a campaign'---but, more importantly, there are many differences from state to state as to how the pledges work.

Let's go through it state by state:

IA/CO/MN/ME/WY/WA:  Iowa-style caucuses.  Most of the delegates haven't even been chosen yet, and those that have are unbound.
North Dakota, Ohio, Illinois: delegates are unpledged.
Michigan, Alaska:  Delegates are released if the candidate suspends their campaign.

Nevada (3): ?
Georgia (3): Delegates are released if the candidate withdraws, releases their delegates, or receives less than 35% of the votes on a ballot, or after 2 ballots.
Oklahoma (14): Delegates are released if the candidate is no longer a candidate.
Tennessee (29):  Delegates are released after two ballots.
Vermont (4): Delegates are released if the candidate withdraws, is not placed into nomination, or after one ballot.
Kansas (33): Delegates are bound unless released by the candidate.
Alabama (22): Delegates are bound unless released by the candidate, or by the decision of two-thirds of the Santorum delegates.
Mississippi (13):  Delegates are bound unless released by the candidate.
Hawaii (5):  Delegates are bound unless the candidate withdraws, or after one ballot.
Louisiana (10): ?
Wisconsin (9):  Delegates are bound unless released by the candidate, or the candidate receives fewer than 1/3 of the votes in any ballot.

The exact definition of 'withdraw' may be open to interpretation. 

Of course, there is also the quite definite possibility that Santorum will not even be placed in nomination---you need the support of a plurality of delegates from 5 states in order to be placed into nomination.  At the moment, Santorum can really only count Kansas, Alabama, and Tennessee.  Although he presently has pluralities in Oklahoma and Mississippi as well, there are enough unpledged delegates to give someone else (Romney or Gingrich) a plurality there instead, so Santorum may not be able to have his name placed into nomination even if he wants to (and he probably won't have his name placed in nomination even if he could).

This, of course, skirts the entire question of how enforceable any of these rules are.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 10, 2012, 07:31:22 PM
TL;DR:

In caucus states, the process isn't over yet; Santorum dropping out means he won't get any delegates (unless some 'Unity Conservative' ticket is elected).

In many states, his delegates are unpledged already or were released the moment he suspended his campaign.

In other states, they are still pledged to him unless he actually withdraws or releases his delegates from their pledges.

It is not clear whether Santorum could get his name placed in nomination if he wanted it to be; it is not clear whether Santorum would want to get his name placed in nomination if he could.  I find it highly unlikely that candidates will be held to their pledges if Santorum's name is not placed in nomination.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on April 10, 2012, 07:41:27 PM
I knew he would loose Michigan's delegates. Romney lost them to McCain when he suspended back in 2008.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Unironic Merrick Garland Stan on April 10, 2012, 07:46:11 PM
We'll see what happens in Wyoming (which I currently project to be swept by a Romney slate) and Colorado (Lord knows) this Saturday.
I thought Wyoming was already decided, and Romney won most of the delegates.  I also thought each county picked a delegate and the state convention didn't pick the slate.  Maybe I'm wrong though, that's just from the back of my head.

Colorado seems like it will be Paul and Santorum shutting out Romney.  I'm guessing Santorum will get a few more than Paul, but Romney will probably be the loser.

Amazing how the Paul campaign works. So much for "Liberty".


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 10, 2012, 08:47:05 PM
I'll probably keep this going until this weekend's conventions and the first set of post-Santorum polls.

Unless Gingrich (or 'Uncommitted') shows signs of life, I'm going to start winding down the thread.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 11, 2012, 09:50:11 AM
Amazing how the Paul campaign works. So much for "Liberty".
So they should wave the white flag to the anti-liberty establishment?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on April 11, 2012, 10:29:17 AM
Amazing how the Paul campaign works. So much for "Liberty".
So they should wave the white flag to the anti-liberty establishment?
We're not saying that, it's just that for a candidate who prides himself on being the anti-establishment go-to guy, Paul's campaign seems to be very good at subverting the will of the people and stealing delegates from the candidates who actually won.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 11, 2012, 10:30:55 AM
We're not saying that, it's just that for a candidate who prides himself on being the anti-establishment go-to guy, Paul's campaign seems to be very good at subverting the will of the people and stealing delegates from the candidates who actually won.
Not really, if the other people had such a strong will, they'd be able to take advantage of it and win those states, but only the Paul people have that will.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on April 11, 2012, 11:20:09 AM
We're not saying that, it's just that for a candidate who prides himself on being the anti-establishment go-to guy, Paul's campaign seems to be very good at subverting the will of the people and stealing delegates from the candidates who actually won.
Not really, if the other people had such a strong will, they'd be able to take advantage of it and win those states, but only the Paul people have that will.
That's not the point. The point is that Paul is stealing delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 11, 2012, 11:49:30 AM
That's not the point. The point is that Paul is stealing delegates.
No, he's winning delegates that he rightfully deserves.  If it wasn't for the media and the GOP establishment, he would already be the nominee, so I'm not exactly concerned with him "stealing" a few delegates here and there.  It doesn't near make up for the disadvantage he finds himself in.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Zarn on April 12, 2012, 04:24:44 AM
We're not saying that, it's just that for a candidate who prides himself on being the anti-establishment go-to guy, Paul's campaign seems to be very good at subverting the will of the people and stealing delegates from the candidates who actually won.
Not really, if the other people had such a strong will, they'd be able to take advantage of it and win those states, but only the Paul people have that will.
That's not the point. The point is that Paul is stealing delegates.

You do realize that the nomination is not through any sort of popular vote?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY on April 12, 2012, 10:52:47 AM
We're not saying that, it's just that for a candidate who prides himself on being the anti-establishment go-to guy, Paul's campaign seems to be very good at subverting the will of the people and stealing delegates from the candidates who actually won.
Not really, if the other people had such a strong will, they'd be able to take advantage of it and win those states, but only the Paul people have that will.
That's not the point. The point is that Paul is stealing delegates.

You do realize that the nomination is not through any sort of popular vote?
A: That's not entirely true.

B: That's not my point. I'm simply saying that if Paul really wants to run against the establishment, he shouldn't be using dirty tricks to get more than his fair share of delegates. No one should.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 12, 2012, 03:45:32 PM
This evening features the first contest to occur after Santorum dropping out of the race: the 7th CD convention in Colorado.

I believe Santorum won the district in February, so this should be our first indicator of whether there is any remaining anti-Romney resistance.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: America First on April 13, 2012, 12:04:47 AM
A: That's not entirely true.

B: That's not my point. I'm simply saying that if Paul really wants to run against the establishment, he shouldn't be using dirty tricks to get more than his fair share of delegates. No one should.
So your point is that Paul should just sit there and let the establishment use dirty tricks against him and not fight back with any of his own?  The only way to fight the establishment is to attempt to beat it, and if you concede then you aren't accomplishing anything.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: firennice on April 13, 2012, 10:57:28 AM
I looked this morning and found results... nowhere on Colorado.  :(


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 13, 2012, 12:18:46 PM
I looked this morning and found results... nowhere on Colorado.  :(

The other 6 CDs have their conventions today, followed by the State Convention tomorrow.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on April 13, 2012, 12:23:58 PM
I looked this morning and found results... nowhere on Colorado.  :(

Kristen Wyatt ‏ @APkristenwyatt

From CD7: Pete Coors a pledged delegate for Romney. Other delegates: Anil Mathai (Santorum), Jeremy Strand (unpledged) #copolitics


CD7's alternates to the RNC: @libbyszabo (unpledged); Lloyd Garcia (unpledged); Robert Eskenberry (Ron Paul). #copolitics
13h Kristen Wyatt Kristen Wyatt ‏ @APkristenwyatt


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: firennice on April 13, 2012, 04:59:47 PM
I can see that happening.  It is too soon.  Until Santorum slaps Mitt or someone on the back in a photo opp, many will stay loyal to Santorum.

I have heard many Paul followers say that they have a majority in a number of states, do they?  Most are uncommitted it seems.  If Paul wants to be on the first round ballot at convention, don't they have to commit, or announce to have a plurality in at least five states?

2nd question If Santorum does not Submit his name, and he is not on the ballot of the first round, are his delegates free? Is there an option  "none of the above"?  or would they have to choose Mitt (assuming he is the only one with a plurality in five states)?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 13, 2012, 05:07:26 PM
There were still people who voted for Paul and Romney last time around, despite their names not being placed in nomination.  It may be more a matter off who gets to make nominating speeches, rather than who people can vote for?  I'm not sure.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: firennice on April 14, 2012, 11:28:35 AM
:P  It would not let me post a link to the gop site directly (too much lurking and not enough posting).

District assembly results

Santorum 6
Romney 5
Paul 0
Uncommitted 9

Though the alternates are majority Romney
Romney 10, Paul 4, Santorum 0, Uncommited 7

After listening to Paul supporters at work say they were going to claim a majority of the districts in Colorado, this has to be a setback.

Delegates to the Republican National Convention:
·         Congressional District 1
o   Nancy McKiernanm, Santorum
o   Celement Koerber Jr., Unpledged
o   Florence Sebern, Unpledged
·         Congressional District 2
o   Timothy Leonard, Unpledged
o   Sue Sharkey, Santorum
o   Solomon Martinez, Unpledged
·         Congressional District 3
o   Todd King, Unpledged
o   Luke Kirk, Unpledged
o   Frieda Wallison, Romney
·         Congressional District 4
o   Guy Short, Unpledged
o   Sean Conway, Santorum
o   Karen Pelzer, Unpledged
·         Congressional District 5
o   John Suthers, Romney
o   Robin Coran, Santorum
o   Kent Lambert, Santorum
·         Congressional District 6
o   John Carson, Romney
o   Ted Harvey, Unpledged
o   Erik Hansen, Romney
·         Congressional District 7
o   Pete Coors, Romney
o   Anil Mathai, Santorum
o Jeremy Strand, Unpledged

Alternate Delegates to the Republican National Convention:
·         Congressional District 1
o   Earl Bandy III, Unpledged
o   Elizabeth Buchanan, Unpledged
o   David Bittner, Paul
·         Congressional District 2
o   Jon Warnick, Unpledged
o   Bryce Carlson, Romney
o   Kaye Ferry, Romney
·         Congressional District 3
o   Nancy Carlson, Romney
o   Michelle Gilleland, Romney
o   Barbara Smith, Romney
·         Congressional District 4
o   Kendal Unruh, Unpledged
o   Jim Gaston, Unpledged
o   Justin Williams, Romney
·         Congressional District 5
o   Robert Balink, Romney
o   Charles Aligaen, Paul
o   Joseph Burke, Paul
·         Congressional District 6
o   Glenn Hagen, Romney
o   Ryan Massfeller, Romney
o   Jeff Wasden, Romney
·         Congressional District 7
o   Lloyd Garcia, Unpledged
o   Libby Szabo, Unpledged
o   Robert Eskenberry, Paul


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Minnesota Mike on April 14, 2012, 12:32:08 PM
:P  It would not let me post a link to the gop site directly (too much lurking and not enough posting).

District assembly results

Santorum 6
Romney 5
Paul 0
Uncommitted 9

Though the alternates are majority Romney
Romney 10, Paul 4, Santorum 0, Uncommited 7

After listening to Paul supporters at work say they were going to claim a majority of the districts in Colorado, this has to be a setback.

Delegates to the Republican National Convention:
·         Congressional District 1
o   Nancy McKiernanm, Santorum
o   Celement Koerber Jr., Unpledged
o   Florence Sebern, Unpledged
·         Congressional District 2
o   Timothy Leonard, Unpledged
o   Sue Sharkey, Santorum
o   Solomon Martinez, Unpledged
·         Congressional District 3
o   Todd King, Unpledged
o   Luke Kirk, Unpledged
o   Frieda Wallison, Romney
·         Congressional District 4
o   Guy Short, Unpledged
o   Sean Conway, Santorum
o   Karen Pelzer, Unpledged
·         Congressional District 5
o   John Suthers, Romney
o   Robin Coran, Santorum
o   Kent Lambert, Santorum
·         Congressional District 6
o   John Carson, Romney
o   Ted Harvey, Unpledged
o   Erik Hansen, Romney
·         Congressional District 7
o   Pete Coors, Romney
o   Anil Mathai, Santorum
o Jeremy Strand, Unpledged

Alternate Delegates to the Republican National Convention:
·         Congressional District 1
o   Earl Bandy III, Unpledged
o   Elizabeth Buchanan, Unpledged
o   David Bittner, Paul
·         Congressional District 2
o   Jon Warnick, Unpledged
o   Bryce Carlson, Romney
o   Kaye Ferry, Romney
·         Congressional District 3
o   Nancy Carlson, Romney
o   Michelle Gilleland, Romney
o   Barbara Smith, Romney
·         Congressional District 4
o   Kendal Unruh, Unpledged
o   Jim Gaston, Unpledged
o   Justin Williams, Romney
·         Congressional District 5
o   Robert Balink, Romney
o   Charles Aligaen, Paul
o   Joseph Burke, Paul
·         Congressional District 6
o   Glenn Hagen, Romney
o   Ryan Massfeller, Romney
o   Jeff Wasden, Romney
·         Congressional District 7
o   Lloyd Garcia, Unpledged
o   Libby Szabo, Unpledged
o   Robert Eskenberry, Paul


FWIW if you can believe anything on the internet about Ron Paul the Vast majority of uncommitted delegates are for Paul. Secret Ninja Delegates to the end I guess.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 14, 2012, 02:18:32 PM
That's a breakdown of

Santorum - 6
Romney - 5
Uncommitted - 10

I had predicted, based on the caucus results, a breakdown of

Santorum - 12
Romney - 8
Paul - 1

Overall, not such a great result for the presumptive nominee.  Presumably those 'unpledged' delegates will break overwhelmingly for him, and at least Gingrich is showing no signs of life.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 14, 2012, 02:46:39 PM
Of the 10 Uncommitted delegates, the Paul people are claiming at least 7.

Through the FEC, Facebook, and media reports, I can confirm that at least 5 are in the Paul camp:

Timothy Leonard
Todd King
Jeremy Strand
Luke Kirk
Florence Sebern

The Paul folks also claim:
Solomon Martinez (Chairman, Northern Colorado Hispanic Republicans)
Karen Pelzer (while definitely possible, she seems far more Tea Party than Paulista)

They think they may have Ted Harvey (though the media has quoted him as definitely being uncommitted), and they do not claim Guy Short (formerly in the Bachmann camp) or Clement Koerber.


All in all, relatively impressive showing by the Paul camp, considering I'd only predicted one delegate for them.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 14, 2012, 10:23:55 PM
Romney had a slightly better day today at the Colorado State Convention, picking up 8 out of 12 delegates.

Apparently, there had been significant Santorum/Paul collusion at the CD conventions, which took the Romney camp by surprise; they seemed to have recovered by today's convention, however.

In summary:

At the CD Conventions:

Paul: 9
Santorum: 6
Romney: 5
Uncommitted: 1

(This may overstate Paul's showing somewhat; some of them may be Santorum supporters who listed themselves as Unpledged instead)

At the State Convention:

Romney: 8
Others: 4

It's not clear who the other 4 are at the moment.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 14, 2012, 10:24:50 PM
As expected, Romney swept the Wyoming State Convention today.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 14, 2012, 10:41:03 PM
Although it's clear that Romney still has some work to do winning over the hearts and minds of the Republican base (as evidenced by his relatively poor showing in Colorado this weekend), it is also clear that Romney has no serious opposition in the remaining primaries.  Gingrich is showing no signs of life (having been relegated to 'joke candidate' status a while back and completely buried in debt), and Paul still has a pretty hard ceiling, even if he might pick up a few anti-Romney protest votes.

There may be some surprises left in store for us at future State Conventions, but, as in Colorado this weekend, they will be largely Paulista affairs.  While amusing, I have no particular interest in documenting those quixotic endeavors when the final outcome of the process is no longer in doubt.

As such, unless there is significant popular demand, I will no longer be maintaining this thread.  Congratulations to Mitt Romney on (finally) becoming the presumptive nominee.

The Delegate Fight will return for Season 3 in December 2015, (hopefully) featuring two exciting and competitive contests for the parties' nominations.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: jmc247 on April 14, 2012, 10:58:44 PM
Although it's clear that Romney still has some work to do winning over the hearts and minds of the Republican base (as evidenced by his relatively poor showing in Colorado this weekend), it is also clear that Romney has no serious opposition in the remaining primaries.  Gingrich is showing no signs of life (having been relegated to 'joke candidate' status a while back and completely buried in debt), and Paul still has a pretty hard ceiling, even if he might pick up a few anti-Romney protest votes.

There may be some surprises left in store for us at future State Conventions, but, as in Colorado this weekend, they will be largely Paulista affairs.  While amusing, I have no particular interest in documenting those quixotic endeavors when the final outcome of the process is no longer in doubt.

As such, unless there is significant popular demand, I will no longer be maintaining this thread.  Congratulations to Mitt Romney on (finally) becoming the presumptive nominee.

The Delegate Fight will return for Season 3 in December 2015, (hopefully) featuring two exciting and competitive contests for the parties' nominations.

I will give you a hand if you want to see it through to the end.

What state conventions awarding delegates are left for April and May?

As for Penn. when will the delegates be decided?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: firennice on April 14, 2012, 11:19:04 PM
I would like to know what is going on as well.  We get too much of nothing from many people.  Having a place to find the info is nice.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 15, 2012, 12:33:37 PM
In Minnesota, Paul has swept the conventions in CDs 3, 5, and 6, winning all 9 delegates at stake.  I had projected Santorum - 5, Paul - 3, Romney - 1 in those districts.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: jmc247 on April 15, 2012, 04:50:26 PM
In Minnesota, Paul has swept the conventions in CDs 3, 5, and 6, winning all 9 delegates at stake.  I had projected Santorum - 5, Paul - 3, Romney - 1 in those districts.

What state conventions in April and May are coming up where delegates will be decided?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Mr. Morden on April 16, 2012, 03:30:14 AM
Erc, if you like I can unsticky the thread.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 16, 2012, 03:19:46 PM
Erc, if you like I can unsticky the thread.


That'd probably be best.  I may still post in it from time to time, but the front page won't be updated.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 21, 2012, 10:49:35 PM
In Missouri's CD caucuses today, Romney won 12 delegates, Santorum 7, Paul 4, and Gingrich 1.  Three of the four Paul delegates came from CD 5 (Kansas City), where the Paulistas were apparently able to dominate; the other was from CD 1.

In Minnesota's CD conventions, which finished today, Paul all but swept, winning 20 of 24 delegates.  Of the four he did not win, 2 were in CD 7 (held before Santorum dropping out).

Details can be found on The Green Papers.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook on April 23, 2012, 10:11:22 AM
Why isn't this nailed to the top anymore?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 25, 2012, 12:31:23 PM
April 24 Results:

Connecticut

Romney won all 25 delegates.

Delaware

Romney won all 17 delegates.

New York

Romney won all 92 delegates.

Rhode Island

Romney won 12 delegates; Ron Paul, the only other candidate to meet the 15% threshold, won 4.

Pennsylvania

All delegates are unbound and presumably most will end up supporting Romney at the convention.  As for their personal preferences (as of March), I can confirm

Romney - 13
Paul - 3
Santorum -3
Gingrich - 3
Uncommitted - 37


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 25, 2012, 12:43:31 PM
With Gingrich soon to be out of the race, the only folks left tilting at windmills are the Paulistas.

Is there anything of any interest in the next month?

This Saturday features the Louisiana caucuses; if any results are reported, we should get some idea of how well Romney is shoring up support in a state he lost last month.

The following Saturday is the Minnesota State Convention, which will be entirely dominated by Paulistas.  Also that weekend is the Maine State Convention, where Paulista success is less certain.

The rest of May features many primaries, many of which are in states which would not favor Romney were this still an active race; it may be interesting to see how much of an anti-Romney protest vote is scattered among the candidates on the ballot.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Beet on April 29, 2012, 11:18:34 PM
Ron Paul claims 16 of 19 delegates in Massachusetts:

"Paul national campaign chairman Jesse Benton told The Daily Caller that Paul supporters occupy 16 of 19 delegate slots filled in congressional district selection processes.

“They are bound to Romney but support Ron,” said Benton. The effect of this coup isn’t immediately clear.

..

Policymic reports that at Massachusetts’ 1st Congressional District’s caucus this Saturday, Romney supporters “made emotional, often angry, and desperate pleas for party unity.”

“An older woman specifically called out the Ron Paul supporters, accusing them of undermining the democratic process,” according to Policymic."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/29/ron-paul-supported-by-16-massachusetts-delegates-says-campaign/#ixzz1tUhuXCPT"


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on April 29, 2012, 11:21:53 PM
Man, if this thing had gone to a second ballot, Paul might have actually had a chance of winning.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Beet on April 29, 2012, 11:33:51 PM
What if the bound delegates abstain? Does the candidate need only a majority of the delegates that voted, or a majority of all delegates present?


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: CatoMinor on April 29, 2012, 11:39:34 PM
I believe if enough the bound delegates supporting Paul abstain on the first ballot, which they should be allowed to, then it would go to the second where they are free to vote for whoever.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: tpfkaw on April 29, 2012, 11:42:30 PM
They won't do a roll-call vote, they'll have Romney "nominated by acclamation" and cut the audio from the floor.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Beet on April 29, 2012, 11:50:18 PM
They won't do a roll-call vote, they'll have Romney "nominated by acclamation" and cut the audio from the floor.

Ah, those sneaky bastards. Always out to undermine democracy.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on April 30, 2012, 09:50:53 AM
Ron Paul claims 16 of 19 delegates in Massachusetts:

"Paul national campaign chairman Jesse Benton told The Daily Caller that Paul supporters occupy 16 of 19 delegate slots filled in congressional district selection processes.

“They are bound to Romney but support Ron,” said Benton. The effect of this coup isn’t immediately clear.

..

Policymic reports that at Massachusetts’ 1st Congressional District’s caucus this Saturday, Romney supporters “made emotional, often angry, and desperate pleas for party unity.”

“An older woman specifically called out the Ron Paul supporters, accusing them of undermining the democratic process,” according to Policymic."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/29/ron-paul-supported-by-16-massachusetts-delegates-says-campaign/#ixzz1tUhuXCPT"

Well, we've only got ourselves to blame for this one.  Guess I shoulda tried to figure out the actual process here in Massachusetts and turned out for Mitt.

As for what happens at the convention...Paul (and Romney) did get a couple votes at the Convention in 2008; McCain wasn't nominated by acclamation.  Of course, it was only a handful for Paul last time, not O(100)...


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on May 06, 2012, 02:50:37 PM
NV: Paul 22, Romney 3, 3 RNC people, though they are bound to vote Romney 20, Paul 8.

Paul has also won a "majority" of Maine's 15 at-large delegates, but I don't know what the exact breakdown is.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Lief 🗽 on May 06, 2012, 05:00:38 PM
Reports (from Ron Paul people) is that they have in fact won all of Maine's delegates.


Title: Re: The Delegate Fight: 2012
Post by: Erc on May 07, 2012, 09:55:28 AM
Reports (from Ron Paul people) is that they have in fact won all of Maine's delegates.

Media reports indicate Paul won all (or all but 1) of Maine's delegates (excepting the RNC members); they may also throw out the State Chairman and pick up an additional unpledged delegate.

Contrary to what I thought, Minnesota's State Convention was not this past weekend, but is two weeks from now.  Not that the outcome (a massive Paulista majority) is at all in doubt.