Ron Paul's Ninja Delegates

[Erc]

The abysmal turnout may play a role in all of this; if the number of delegates to the county/BPOU convention is of the same order of magnitude as the number of people who show up to the caucus in the first place, of course the more committed people (regardless of candidate support) are more likely to get selected as delegates.  This is more true of CO/MN than Iowa, of course.

As usual, my line is to simply ignore these reports until we get any solid press from the next round of conventions.

If Paul should manage to pull this off, though, it is only in 7 states: IA/CO/MN/ME/WA/MO/NE.  Of course, that is a maximum of 237 delegates at stake, plus whatever pittance he wins in other states.  Of course, that's over 10% of the delegates, which isn't an insignificant amount.

[Erc]

If Paul should manage to pull this off, though, it is only in 7 states: IA/CO/MN/ME/WA/MO/NE.  Of course, that is a maximum of 237 delegates at stake, plus whatever pittance he wins in other states.  Of course, that's over 10% of the delegates, which isn't an insignificant amount.

How are delegates chosen in the other caucus states, like Alaska or North Dakota? Is it similar to how NV does it, proportionally based on the straw vote?

Alaska allocates their delegates proportionally, though the percentage of the Tampa delegates each district convention gets to choose is ordained ahead of time (i.e. differential turnout doesn't matter). 

Idaho does a similar system, but has recaucusing at each precinct until someone gets a majority or there are only two candidates left.

Kansas allocates more like Tennessee (proportional to the vote, with a 20% cutoff), so Paul is probably completely screwed here.  Hawaii also does it proportionally, but with no cutoff.

North Dakota allocates delegates "in such a way so that they best reflect the presidential preference of the Caucus participants."  What that means is up to interpretation, and it's possible that a Paulite junta could interpret that very liberally.

[Erc]

Could someone clarify this for me? So is Paul trying to use these delegates to get more delegates than he was allocated from the votes he got?

He wasn't allocated any delegates in the Nevada "straw poll" that was held on caucus day.

Scratch that.  I'm not sure what I was thinking... Nevada's delegates ARE bound to the straw poll conducted on caucus day.

Then what is the point of them showing up at all these conventions if they can't change the delegate total for the candidates.

They could change the rules of the delegate allocation if they accumulate enough power.

Although, from my understanding, if they change the rules, that change can be challenged at the RNC level, correct?

Indeed.  And the challenge would likely succeed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Erc]

Any word on the counties and districts these were in? I wonder if Paul is taking all delegates from my district after all.

The unanimous Paul slates all appear to be from the Twin Cities area; the rest are randomly scattered in areas that voted for Santorum.

Paul had a plurality in CD 5 to begin with; given any motivation gap, it's not hard to believe he could dominate those conventions.  Outside, we have yet to see clearly the extent of Paulista control.

[Erc]

Even if crazy Paul antics could cause issues at the convention, no other candidate is going to try to depend on it; if Romney has the pledges (by whatever definition) of 1144 delegates in June, Santorum will drop out and endorse him.  Even if the Paulistas try to pull something, they'd still be a minority at the convention, and it would be a bit late for the Santorum folks to try to put together an effort at the convention several months after dropping out.