The Delegate Fight: 2016

[Vosem]

Are 20 or 23 delegates being allocated by the NH primary? If it is just 20, then what happens to the 3 RNC members? Are they simply free to support whomever they wish?

[Vosem]

So, is the breakdown of delegates Trump:Rubio 11:2 or 10:3? The race is very close for the last delegate. The way I've calculated it, and what you have in this thread, is 11:2. But most of the media is 10:3...

[Vosem]

Kansas Results

At the last second, Kasich breaks the threshold and Rubio breaks into 2nd in CD 3, resulting in:

Cruz 24 - Trump 9 - Rubio 6 - Kasich 1

The last batch of results saw Cruz and Trump each lose 2 delegates, Rubio gaining 3, and Kasich gaining 1.

In the unlikely event the RNC members are thrown into the statewide pool, Cruz loses two and Trump and Kasich each gain one.

Why does Kasich only get 1? Shouldn't he get 0.107 of 25 delegates = 2.68 is rounded up to 3? I have the statewide ones breaking 12C-6T-4R-3K, with Cruz getting a bonus of 3 RNC members. What am I doing wrong?

[Vosem]

Your grand total for Cruz's delegates is correct, but in the state totals you have him earning just 10 in Mississippi, instead of 15

[Vosem]

Six of the nine uncommitted delegates from USVI were declared ineligible yesterday, so they've been replaced by the top six alternates; 2 more uncommitted, 2 Rubio delegates, 1 Cruz, and 1 Trump. So the new USVI total is 5U-2R-1C-1T (not sure about what happens to Rubio delegates from USVI -- perhaps they go to the uncommitted pile also? either way, Trump and Cruz have each gained a delegate).

[Vosem]

BREAKING: @tedcruz sweeps all 3 delegates, 3 alternates #RNC2016 at CO CD1 convention #copolitics
4:02 PM - 2 Apr 2016 · Columbine, CO, United States

3/3 for Cruz so far

[Vosem]

Looking forward to May 10:

West Virginia is the only state that directly elects its At-Large delegates and doesn't bind them based on the statewide vote.

This means that each voter will have to vote for 25(!) delegate candidates (22 At-Large and 3 in each CD).  Unlike in Pennsylvania, the delegates do have the candidate they are supporting next to them on the ballot, but it's still an arduous process for any voter, as the WV SoS warns.

Additionally, of the 22 At-Large delegates, there are some geographic restrictions (7 much be from each CD, and no more than 2 can be from each county).

All in all, this opens up the fun possibility that motivation gaps and weird geographic restrictions could deprive Trump of some delegates here despite a presumed win in the state.

I have a hard time imagining any stalwart supporter of any candidate wouldn't find a way to get all their 25 votes in for delegates only supporting their preferred candidate.

Oh, of course they will, but -- will they make sure never to cast more than 2 votes for candidates from a single county? If not, the person from that county with the least votes will get thrown out.  And will they make sure not to vote for more than 7 people from the same congressional district? And what if they behave like in Illinois, and refuse to vote for people who support their candidate but have names they don't like? What if they mistakenly vote for 26 people instead of 25? Their entire vote gets disqualified. Lots of people will probably simply may undervote if they can't find some final names who support their candidate (this will depend on how delegates are organized on the ballot; by candidate they support or by last name?), or they may vote for a few names they recognize who don't support their candidate. It'll be chaos.

[Vosem]

Results in ND are 19 from the slate recommended by Ted Cruz are elected, and the other 6 positions go uncommitted (so 9 uncommitted total when including the 3 RNC members). While none of the delegates are bound and there have been some reports of secret Kasich supporters in the Cruz slate (a fellow named Dick Dever, who was on the Cruz slate and was elected, apparently has very pro-Kasich social media), I think it's fair to count the state as 19C-9U, and to simply make a note that delegates from North Dakota are free to vote their conscience from the first ballot and so there could be some surprises.

[Vosem]

ERC, I am running the numbers and I don't see trump getting below 1237 if he gets all 95 NY delegates, which is huge possibility. In fact, he could lose California and MD and still get 1237 if all 95 NY dels go to him.

If we go by Sabato projections, _trump is failing to hit his post-Ides of March goals even if he wins every delegate from NY. (Assuming 0 from Colorado, he got an extra delegate in ND, 14 extra in NY (his goal there was 81), lost 24 in Wisconsin, and lost 2 from Rubio's action in AK.) He would then be 11 short of his goal...1226 would probably still be a _trump victory, of course, but it would still be "contested", and of course I've said many times that I expect Cruz to win California, and Sabato's projection includes a decisive _trump wins in California and Indiana, though it also assumes no uncommitteds from Pennsylvania go _trump, which is obviously naive but is outweighed by places they seem to've underestimated him.

[Vosem]

Actually, it seems Cruz had a rare loss in Michigan.

In terms of committee assignments, it seems Trump and Kasich prevented an attempt by Cruz to just take everything over, and themselves locked Cruz supporters out.  It doesn't seem like this extended to delegates, where at least on the At-Large level I believe each candidate got what they wanted.

In particular, and hilariously, this means Chuck Yob is now on the Credentials Committee that will be deciding the fate of his son's contested delegation from the Virgin Islands.

This all but affirms my prediction that the 3 from the Yob coalition, if they hold their delegate spots, will side with Trump.

You do know that Chuck Yob is a Kasich delegate and his son worked for the Rand Paul campaign, right? (Other candidates John Yob has worked for -- including McCain's presidential campaign, Santorum's presidential campaign, and Mark Neumann's 2012 Senate campaign -- have pretty much uniformly backed the #Never_trump camp). There's also the fact that the man who wrote the book on contested conventions (literally) might be disinclined to back someone who pooh-poohs the very idea and suggests the person who wins the most primary votes should automatically become candidate.

I think, considering his father and Mark Neumann are both Kasich supporters, John Yob is likeliest to be a quiet Kasich supporter than anything else. But it's very difficult to imagine him supporting _trump.

[Vosem]

Actually, it seems Cruz had a rare loss in Michigan.

In terms of committee assignments, it seems Trump and Kasich prevented an attempt by Cruz to just take everything over, and themselves locked Cruz supporters out.  It doesn't seem like this extended to delegates, where at least on the At-Large level I believe each candidate got what they wanted.

In particular, and hilariously, this means Chuck Yob is now on the Credentials Committee that will be deciding the fate of his son's contested delegation from the Virgin Islands.

This all but affirms my prediction that the 3 from the Yob coalition, if they hold their delegate spots, will side with Trump.

You do know that Chuck Yob is a Kasich delegate and his son worked for the Rand Paul campaign, right? (Other candidates John Yob has worked for -- including McCain's presidential campaign, Santorum's presidential campaign, and Mark Neumann's 2012 Senate campaign -- have pretty much uniformly backed the #Never_trump camp). There's also the fact that the man who wrote the book on contested conventions (literally) might be disinclined to back someone who pooh-poohs the very idea and suggests the person who wins the most primary votes should automatically become candidate.

I think, considering his father and Mark Neumann are both Kasich supporters, John Yob is likeliest to be a quiet Kasich supporter than anything else. But it's very difficult to imagine him supporting _trump.

Yeah but this is all before TRUMP bribes him.

Nah, the reason _trump isn't releasing his tax returns is he hasn't got money left. All the money, authority, and WINNING at the convention will be had and done by Ted Cruz, and it'll be glorious.

[Vosem]

Couldn't the Credentials Committee rule, based on California state law, that any delegates picked after May 7 are ineligible and therefore simply declare their positions vacant? I doubt they would do this unless it was totally necessary, but it seems like a very possible interpretation of the rules.

[Vosem]

Just had a very interesting thought: Is it within the power of the CA Republican Party to open up their primary and flood the zone with Hispanic Dems to stop Trump?

Too late for 2016. I'm assuming in 2020 we'll get to see lots more proportionality. Possibly lots more cauci, but perhaps they won't go for that -- in the long run the threat to the Republican establishment comes from socons and libertarians, not Trump types.

[Vosem]

How many delegates would Trump have to win to ensure that the majority would actually be pro-Trump delegates? 1400? 1500?

If he's at 1500 but a majority are pro-Trump, 82% of his delegates are loyal to him. Which the South isn't letting happen. Most of the indicators outside the Northeast are that Trump will be lucky to keep 1/3 of his support.

If we say he keeps 1/2 his support (generous, but not impossible), then he simply needs to win every delegate on offer since Iowa. Seems doable.