posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 09:25 PM
I'm as likely to clinch the republican nomination on may 8th as Ron Paul.
There's so much misinformation about the Missouri delegates alone that I can't believe the delegate count that any RP supporter or his campaign
So frequently they trot out 152 delegates, without mentioning that it's 152 state delegates in a pool of over 2000. That pool of 2000 will select
the remaining 25 of Missouri's 52 delegates. 24 were bound and pledged at the congressional district level regional conventions. Despite the
campaign's claim that they won 20 out of 40 that day, only 24 were up for grabs. 12 went to Romney, 7 to Santorum, 4 to Paul, and 1 to Gingrich.
The 8 belonging to S/G are bound to S/G until released. I can't believe the RP campaign has a firm grasp on this delegate strategy when the
campaign chief isn't even aware that only 24 delegates were pledged, not 40, and RP got no where near 20. Or they have a firm grasp and they lie
about it. Take your pick I guess.
The congressional district that contained the 152 RP delegates? Yeah it went 2 for Romney 1 for Santorum. None for Paul. These bound congressional
district delegates are voted on by the county delegates. If those 152 from St. Charles County weren't successful as a 152 man block at the district
level, why is there any expectation that they will be any more successful at the state level, where they are an even smaller fish in a bigger pond?
Missouri is only one state but I have no reason to believe these types of mistakes and misrepresentations aren't happening in others. If you
consider he won 152 delegates that don't count, and 20 out of 40 that didn't even exist, maybe you can make it a close race and he'll clinch it may
Then there's the assumption that 100 percent of the Gingrich/Santorum delegates will go to RP when released and propel him to victory. I'll use
Santorum since he has the most. Do you really believe that delegates for a very socially conservative, somewhat fiscally liberal candidate will
switch over to the most socially liberal and most fiscally conservative? I just don't buy it, they're concerned about two totally different
spectrums and have two very different ways of getting there.