If this lasts until April 24th...

[Keystone Phil]

With the way this primary season is playing out, I honestly can't rule out the possibility of this going on until April 24th. If it gets to Pennsylvania, we might see an even bigger circus.

You guys may remember how we elect delegates separately during the Presidential primary. So the Presidential vote is actually just for bragging rights. Now I don't remember exactly how it worked but I believe that in 2008, Hillary and Obama had their delegate slates actually spelled out on the ballot. So, for example, Ed Rendell was a delegate for Hillary and next to his name it had (Hillary Clinton) to show that he was pledged to her.

I have since been told that delegates can't be pledged to someone on the ballot but don't know if that's true. If it was the case in 2008, I might be thinking of what the local machines had on their sample ballots (campaign lit given out at the polling place).

Since petition season begins on Tuesday and I know people running for delegate and alternate, I havent heard that they have to state their preference on the petition. That means this race is going to be even more insane with campaigns pushing the names of other people (some well known, others not) just as much or more so than their candidate's name in mailers, at the polls, etc.

Anyone familiar with a similar type of contest in recent history?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Oh man how awesome would it be if you ended up voting for one of those stealth Paul delegates if they infiltrate the Santorum camp.

[Keystone Phil]

Oh man how awesome would it be if you ended up voting for one of those stealth Paul delegates if they infiltrate the Santorum camp.

I'll know the Santorum delegates but the Paul delegate situation is awkward for me. Very awkward.

The faction with which I align on the local level is very, very diverse. We have Paul fans and Santorum fans and everything in between. I have many good friends that are with Paul and even though I have had quite a few heated debates with them, I'd still want to vote for them since they are friends and local allies. Still not sure what I'm going to do with some of my votes...

[Wonkish1]

With the way this primary season is playing out, I honestly can't rule out the possibility of this going on until April 24th. If it gets to Pennsylvania, we might see an even bigger circus.

You guys may remember how we elect delegates separately during the Presidential primary. So the Presidential vote is actually just for bragging rights. Now I don't remember exactly how it worked but I believe that in 2008, Hillary and Obama had their delegate slates actually spelled out on the ballot. So, for example, Ed Rendell was a delegate for Hillary and next to his name it had (Hillary Clinton) to show that he was pledged to her.

I have since been told that delegates can't be pledged to someone on the ballot but don't know if that's true. If it was the case in 2008, I might be thinking of what the local machines had on their sample ballots (campaign lit given out at the polling place).

Since petition season begins on Tuesday and I know people running for delegate and alternate, I havent heard that they have to state their preference on the petition. That means this race is going to be even more insane with campaigns pushing the names of other people (some well known, others not) just as much or more so than their candidate's name in mailers, at the polls, etc.

Anyone familiar with a similar type of contest in recent history?

Don't quote me on this, but I believe that is only true for caucus states *prior to* Super Tuesday to get around the RNC penalties for being earlier than the Super Tuesday deadline. So how those Caucuses work is that the initial vote is non binding. So its a combined straw poll and delegate selection. The delegates aren't forced to cast their vote for a particular candidate(and their vote isn't made for several months later hence the true binding "caucus" votes don't occur until after Super Tuesday so that they stay within the rules if I understand this correctly), but I believe the delegates still are on slate and have the candidates name next to them or something like that.

I believe after Super Tuesday the caucus system just reverts to the system that has existed prior to this year where delegates votes are binding based on the caucus day vote or something like that.

At least this is my understanding of the "non-binding" vs. "binding" denotation of caucuses before vs. after Super Tuesday.

[Keystone Phil]

No, I know for a fact that the contests are held separately.

[Wonkish1]

No, I know for a fact that the contests are held separately.

Please explain what you mean here. I've been a little curious as to the details of the caucus system this year myself, and that was my best stab at trying to give my limited understanding of what is happening.

[King]

Honestly, I think it will and really as long as Santorum keeps getting money from the churches he can stay in like Paul even if he's not doing much winning.  Frankly, from what I saw in SC, I don't think Newt needs Santorum's support to beat Romney in a lot of states.  And if Newt collapses, Rick will start winning.

This is really the Battle Royale for the GOP. The Final Four is an unbudging, uncompromising representation of the four wings of the GOP.  The winner won't be President, but they'll set the agenda and direction of the party.

[Keystone Phil]

No, I know for a fact that the contests are held separately.

Please explain what you mean here. I've been a little curious as to the details of the caucus system this year myself, and that was my best stab at trying to give my limited understanding of what is happening.

It isn't a caucus; it's a primary. We vote for President in a meaningless primary that doesn't award delegates and vote separately on the same day for delegates in a direct election.

[minionofmidas]

I want YOU to be a Santorum delegate.

[Yelnoc]

Honestly, I think it will and really as long as Santorum keeps getting money from the churches he can stay in like Paul even if he's not doing much winning.  Frankly, from what I saw in SC, I don't think Newt needs Santorum's support to beat Romney in a lot of states.  And if Newt collapses, Rick will start winning.

This is really the Battle Royale for the GOP. The Final Four is an unbudging, uncompromising representation of the four wings of the GOP.  The winner won't be President, but they'll set the agenda and direction of the party.

What wing does Gingrich represent?

[Keystone Phil]

I want YOU to be a Santorum delegate.

I'd love to, dude, but it would be impossible with my job.

[Mehmentum]

Honestly, I think it will and really as long as Santorum keeps getting money from the churches he can stay in like Paul even if he's not doing much winning.  Frankly, from what I saw in SC, I don't think Newt needs Santorum's support to beat Romney in a lot of states.  And if Newt collapses, Rick will start winning.

This is really the Battle Royale for the GOP. The Final Four is an unbudging, uncompromising representation of the four wings of the GOP.  The winner won't be President, but they'll set the agenda and direction of the party.

What wing does Gingrich represent?

Romney: Moderate Establishment
Gingrich: Conservative Insurgent (at least thats how he portrays himself)
Paul: Libertarian (as close as there is to a Moderate Insurgent in the GOP)
Santorum: Conservative Establishmnet (or he wants to be)

[King]

Gingrich is economically conservative, socially opportunist aka a great politician. 

Santorum is E:Moderate, S:Conservative.

Paul EC, SM.

Romney is useless, but we'll pretend he's a rounded moderate like his supporters.

[muon2]

IL uses a similar system with specific names on the ballot pledged to candidates and a beauty contest as well. In 2008 McCain won all the CDs, but due to the personal popularity of some of the delegates Romney won three delegates while McCain took the rest.

[minionofmidas]

Gingrich is economically conservative, socially opportunist aka a great politician. 

Santorum is E:Moderate, S:Conservative.

Paul EC, SM.

I shall pretend that this means "Economically crazy, sadist-masochist."

Since "Economically conservative, socially moderate" is Romney (insofar he has positions).

[You kip if you want to...]

Gingrich is economically conservative, socially opportunist aka a great politician. 

Santorum is E:Moderate, S:Conservative.

Paul EC, SM.

I shall pretend that this means "Economically crazy, sadist-masochist."

Since "Economically conservative, socially moderate" is Romney (insofar he has positions).

Romney is socially moderate, socially liberal and socially conservative.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Gingrich is economically conservative, socially opportunist aka a great politician. 

Santorum is E:Moderate, S:Conservative.

Paul EC, SM.

I shall pretend that this means "Economically crazy, sadist-masochist."

Since "Economically conservative, socially moderate" is Romney (insofar he has positions).

Romney is socially moderate, socially liberal and socially conservative.

Except when he's not.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Oh man how awesome would it be if you ended up voting for one of those stealth Paul delegates if they infiltrate the Santorum camp.

Hahahaha. Agreed.

[Brandon H]

Gingrich is economically conservative, socially opportunist aka a great politician. 

Santorum is E:Moderate, S:Conservative.

Paul EC, SM.

I shall pretend that this means "Economically crazy, sadist-masochist."

Since "Economically conservative, socially moderate" is Romney (insofar he has positions).

Romney is socially moderate, socially liberal and socially conservative.

Except when he's not.

Romney is SC: socially convenient.

[angus]

With the way this primary season is playing out, I honestly can't rule out the possibility of this going on until April 24th.

Hopefully it will go on at least till then.  Don't you want your vote to matter?  Don't you enjoy a good political fight?  Don't you see that the rough'n'tumble Clinton/Obama contest made Obama a stronger candidate?  Besides, it gives us so much more to talk about if it lasts a bit longer.  Who knows, your boy Rick may even pull out a surprise victory if Newt and Mitt demolish one another.

[Keystone Phil]

With the way this primary season is playing out, I honestly can't rule out the possibility of this going on until April 24th.

Hopefully it will go on at least till then.  Don't you want your vote to matter?  Don't you enjoy a good political fight?  Don't you see that the rough'n'tumble Clinton/Obama contest made Obama a stronger candidate?  Besides, it gives us so much more to talk about if it lasts a bit longer.  Who knows, your boy Rick may even pull out a surprise victory if Newt and Mitt demolish one another.

Part of me wants it to last but part of me dreads it. It will be horribly bloody if it goes that long. I guess it could make us stronger.

[Politico]

Honestly, I think it will and really as long as Santorum keeps getting money from the churches he can stay in like Paul even if he's not doing much winning.  Frankly, from what I saw in SC, I don't think Newt needs Santorum's support to beat Romney in a lot of states.  And if Newt collapses, Rick will start winning.

This is really the Battle Royale for the GOP. The Final Four is an unbudging, uncompromising representation of the four wings of the GOP.  The winner won't be President, but they'll set the agenda and direction of the party.

What wing does Gingrich represent?

Gingrich represents the wing of people who hate everybody, including themselves.

You cannot find another rational explanation for supporting one of the most vile, corrupt, despicable human beings of modern American political history. He is a moral degenerate, and South Carolina has a track record of unknowingly siding with people like that. After all, John Edwards also won the primary in South Carolina. Voting for people who cheat on cancer-stricken wives is a South Carolina thing, not a partisan thing.

[angus]

Gingrich represents the wing of people who hate everybody, including themselves.
You cannot find another rational explanation for supporting one of the most vile, corrupt, despicable human beings of modern American political history. He is a moral degenerate, and South Carolina has a track record of unknowingly siding with people like that. After all, John Edwards also won the primary in South Carolina. Voting for people who cheat on cancer-stricken wives is a South Carolina thing, not a partisan thing.

LOLOL.  and I thought I disliked Gingrich!

Dude, I think I'm laughing with you, but I might be laughing at you.  Either way, you definitely win anti-Newt contest.  I salute you!