March 10 Kansas + miscellaneous islands primary/caucus **results thread**

[Torie]

I suspect Rick will break 50% in KS. It should be close to his best state in the nation. We shall see.

Happily for the Mittbots, KS does not have that if a candidate gets more than 50%, he gets all the at large delegates thingy (that rule is largely "reserved" for the Mittens states). It is all proportional, with any candidate getting 20% sharing in the spoils. Mittens should win KS-03 and get the 3 delegates there as well. So say Rick gets 52%, and Mittens gets 35% of the vote, that gives 15 at large delegates to Rick, and 10 to Mittens, and Rick gets 9 CD delegates, and Mittens gets 3 CD delegates, netting Rick 24 delegates, and Mittens 13, with 3 super delegates, more than likely going to Mittens, but say Rick gets 1, and Mittens gets 2. That gives Rick a net margin of 10 delegates over Romney (25-15) as a reward for one of his greatest triumphs.

Life is beautiful.  

[Torie]

The super-delegates are pledged to the winner of the state.

But I'm glad you find this sham democracy "beautiful." I'm sure the Republican base will as well when they don't turn out for your boy in November.

You are right about the super delegates Lief. Curious. So 27-13.  Think about it this way. Obama has his issues. The gas price thing strikes me as a particularly dangerous specter for him, feeding into the Pub fossil fuels narrative. So it is barely possible albeit quite unlikely that Rick could beat him, given the "right" chain of circumstances (without my vote of course, but whatever). Would you rather have Mittens or Rick as POTUS?  Just a thought.

[Torie]

I think Rick and Mitt would govern about the same as presidents. They'd appoint the same SCOTUS judges. They'd both be as dangerously belligerent towards Iran. If anything Rick Santorum might be willing to more often stand up to the Tea Party Congress, just because he actually has values and beliefs and potentially has some vague understanding of what it's like to worry about making ends meet deep down in him.

Well, Mittens is a bit more cautious about Iran, just saying that he would stop them from getting nukes, but not saying how. Rick is more into the bomb, bomb away narrative. But here is the thing.I think Rick might really believe what he says, while Mittens lately has said some things, that I don't really think he really believes, to get past the Pub post. I think Mittens in short would be smarter, more cautious and more pragmatic. Rick strikes as rather a hothead and impulsive. And on many policy issues, they will essentially be the same. But being a competent POTUS is more about policy positions in my view - a lot more. Issues and challenges and crises will come up, which we are not even discussing now. Whom do you trust most to come up with the most reasonable solutions?  

But this is hardly an objective exercise, so I understand where you are coming from.

[Torie]

I tend to disagree with you on this one Ernest. All else aside, at a minimum, it will truncate economic growth, increase unemployment over what it otherwise would be, slow down retail sales, and so forth. Even if it come down a bit later (how much?), damage will be done, and is being done as we speak, in the interim. It cost me $94 to fill my gas tank today. How many folks can afford that without having to cut back in a rather substantial way somewhere else? I remember listening to a speech by the CEO of Walmart during the last gas spike, and he said gas price increases really hurt Walmart sales. Folks buy gas to get to work and go to the supermarket, and cart the kids around, and cut back on buying underwear and T shirts.

I fear I may be hijacking this thread a bit. Sorry. I will cease and desist.

[Torie]

Gingrich promising that if he's elected, gas prices would drop to $2.50 was the most politically idiotic thing I've ever heard.  Part of me hoped he wins just so I could watch gas prices stay above that.  You can't promise a drop in gas prices.  The only way you could come close to doing that is ban exporting of oil, and that's not exactly a small government thing to do.

More nonsense has been said about gas prices, and energy, and the economic effect of the Keystone Pipeline, et al, by almost everyone in both parties (yes the Dems are worse here, but the Pubs are almost equally as delusional), in a shorter period of time, that is just flat out wrong and ignorant, economically and otherwise, than I can at the moment recall than about anything else, and I have been around a long time. Absent a lot of pot, I am in danger of turning into an irascible old man methinks. Hey maybe I will tell my pot doc next renewal time, that that is my medical issue for the year.

[Torie]

OK Ernest, but there has been quite a spike up, like 80 cents maybe in the past 3-4 months or something, and my guess/instinct, without having really dug into it, is that most of the uptick is not going to be reversed. That kind of hit has to be depressive, from whatever was anticipated before.

[Torie]

Everything in so far is where Rick should run best.



The island in the sea of grain:

[Torie]

The percentage in I think is based on percentage of precincts, most of which are tiny, so based on absolute votes outstanding, maybe only half is in. Topeka and the KC burbs are not in.

[Torie]

[Torie]

Yes, Mittens will need to rock in Johnson County to crawl up over 20%.

[Torie]

33 delegates to Rick, 7 for Mittens, assuming a 51% to 21.5% margin  (Mittens should creep ahead a bit more when Wyandotte and Douglas counties come in).  Rick got 6 more delegates than I had assumed (with Mittens underperforming my guess by a mere 14.5% or so, but hey I was right on for the Rick percentage!  ). Congratulations Phil!

[Torie]

We have learnt something from this Caucus. There are mormons living in Lane County.

They must be recent arrivals or converts.  

[Torie]

can someone explain how the delegates would be different if Romney goes under 20 vs if he goes over 20? Did Romney pull out of KS in hopes that he wouldn't break 20?

If you are below 20%, you lose your proportional share of the 25 at large delegates, so if Mittens were held below 20%, he loses his 7 delegates, which is a fair amount of change. If Mittens knew it was going to be this tight, he would have dropped by Johnson County for a visit I suspect.

[Torie]

can someone explain how the delegates would be different if Romney goes under 20 vs if he goes over 20? Did Romney pull out of KS in hopes that he wouldn't break 20?

If you are below 20%, you lose your proportional share of the 25 at large delegates, so if Mittens were held below 20%, he loses his 7 delegates, which is a fair amount of change. If Mittens knew it was going to be this tight, he would have dropped by Johnson County for a visit I suspect.

Not true. If Romney dropped below 20%, he would still get some at-large delegates, but so would Gingrich and Paul. With Romney above 20%, Gingrich and Paul don't get any.

Yup. "However, if only one candidate or no candidate receives the 20%, there is no threshold."  Odd little curveball. So 2 delegates were at stake for Mittens, and ironically, 5 for Rick, if Mittens fell just short of 20%, with those 7 lost delegates going to Newt and Paul. So maybe Rick is happy to give Mittens those two extra delegates.

[Torie]

Two counties left in Kansas, both on Colorado border.

Santorum country. So he may go from 51.2 to 51.5

Those 2 counties have about 100 times the number of cattle as people.

[Torie]

Nat Silver summed it all up. For Mittens to be in real danger of facing a brokered convention, about 5% of the Pub electorate needs to switch from Mittens to Rick. In other words, Mittens has about a 5% pad over and above the danger zone at the moment. Absent that 5% switch, it will be mathematically wrapped up when you count the supers after CA turns in its votes. What happened today changes nothing in that formula.  Mittens is right on track. And it looks like maybe he will be more than on track, if the current polls hold up in Alabama and Mississippi, and Mittens garners maybe 15 delegates or something like that that he (and Nate Silver for that matter) wasn't expecting two weeks ago.

[Torie]

A pretty much perfect result in Kansas. A disastrous result (though expected) for Romney's near candidate best friend. Hoping it affects MS and AL.

Bad? Certainly. Disastrous? That's pushing it. It's overshadowed by our ninja delegates.

You're a Newt supporter? Because he's to whom I was referring.

Really? I haven't heard Newt being called his best friend before. And I wouldn't call his showing disastrous either. He had no expectations and is focusing on the south.

He's his new best friend because he keeps the Anti Romney vote split.

Newt dropping out actually nets Mittens a few delegates per Nate Silver. Well, about 10 delegates net if Newt hadn't been in the race to start with, and not much if Newt drops out now. It is obvious when you think about it. If Mittens with everyone around is on track with the supers to get an absolute majority of the delegates, it doesn't matter who has the other 45% to 49% of them or whatever. In short, this whole if only one "conservative" were in the race meme against the suspiciously moderate Mittens (I have to laugh every time I hear that one - I'm a moderate - Mitttens isn't - period), has been and remains way over hyped. There is no there, there. It only matters in absolute winner take all states, like Florida, where Mittens on his own one on one would have won anyway, since he got 46% on his own, and gets about a quarter of the Newt votes to boot. Ditto AZ, where Mittens got 47% on his own.

If Rick had not screwed up the delegate thing in VA, along with Newt, along with the 14 Ohio zombie delegates due to the Rick cf there, the 5% pad would be thinner, but they did cf themselves.

[Torie]

A pretty much perfect result in Kansas. A disastrous result (though expected) for Romney's near candidate best friend. Hoping it affects MS and AL.

Bad? Certainly. Disastrous? That's pushing it. It's overshadowed by our ninja delegates.

You're a Newt supporter? Because he's to whom I was referring.

Really? I haven't heard Newt being called his best friend before. And I wouldn't call his showing disastrous either. He had no expectations and is focusing on the south.

He's his new best friend because he keeps the Anti Romney vote split.

Newt dropping out actually nets Mittens a few delegates per Nate Silver. Well, about 10 delegates net if Newt hadn't been in the race to start with, and not much if Newt drops out now. It is obvious when you think about it. If Mittens with everyone around is on track with the supers to get an absolute majority of the delegates, it doesn't matter who has the other 45% to 49% of them or whatever. In short, this whole if only one "conservative" were in the race meme against the suspiciously moderate Mittens (I have to laugh every time I hear that one - I'm a moderate - Mitttens isn't - period), has been and remains way over hyped. There is no there, there.

According to that same Nate Silver piece, Santorum would have gained 110 delegates relative to what he's currently got if Gingrich were not in the race, thus reducing the gap between him and Romney by about a hundred delegates. He would also, by Silver's argument, have won SC, GA, OH and AK.

No, those delegates just move from the Newt column to the Rick column, which is irrelevant to the Romney systems engineering delegate blueprint. Just add the Newt and Rick totals together and consider them one candidate. The only wild card delegates really are the Paul delegates in a brokered convention. Rick would just put Newt on his ticket if need be to get the Newt delegates. What a team! 

[Torie]

Yes, except that about half of the CA CD's have next to no Pubs in them, and the Pubs that are there, are not Santorum types. If Newt is gone, it might flip 2 or 3 CD's in the Central Valley, and maybe a couple in the inland empire. That is about it. CA is one state where the salience of economic issues for Pubs is very high - and for good reason. Also the primary is closed, so we won't have any mischief voters, like happened in Ohio and particularly Michigan.

Newt by the way says he is going to Tampa even if he loses both Alabama and Mississippi. I think he means it. He is not in this race at this point to win the nomination. He's in it for the klieg lights.