The Delegate Fight: 2012

[Minnesota Mike]

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.

[Joe Biden 2020]

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.

[© tweed]

are there any issues with allocating delegates by congressional districts in primaries in states where the districts have yet to be drawn/finalized?

[Bacon King]

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).

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

Where are Romney, Santorum, and Perry's 'unpledged' delegates in your count coming from, Bushie?

[Erc]

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.

[Lief 🗽]

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

[Erc]

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 (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.

[argentarius]

AP are now saying that it's Romney 13, Santorum 12.

[California8429]

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.

[Joe Biden 2020]

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

[California8429]

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

[Joe Biden 2020]

We won't get that many delegates added to the total from New Hampshire as it only has 12 delegates.

[Erc]

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.

[Erc]

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.  This agrees entirely with the Green Papers description, which I outlined earlier.  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.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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 and some comments from the same process in 2008.

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.

[Minnesota Mike]

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.

[Erc]

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.

[Landslide Lyndon]

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?

[Erc]

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.

[Joe Biden 2020]

Current NH delegates are Romney 5, Paul 3, Hunstman 2 with 2 still on the table.

[Erc]

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).

[Erc]

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.

[minionofmidas]

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.

[Erc]

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).

[Erc]

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.