Republican Primary Bound Delegate Count, page 8

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 18 times

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 04:33 PM by USXpat

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

The "unity slate" presented by Romney's team in Washington State is one good indication (in conjunction with Minnesota, Iowa, Nevada, etc.) that there is growing concern on Romney's behalf that Ron Paul's strategy has merit.

That is Romney is trying to get Gingrich and Santorum supporters to be on a "joint delegate ballot" for the sole purpose of keeping Ron Paul supporters out of the delegate count.

Why bother if he has such an overwhelming lead? Gasp!

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 04:46 PM by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by hoochymama
A link to a source does not mean its FACT. I tried to point out this to you earlier and every time someone has something to say you always refer to "wheres the source". What if someone here has some kind of an "inside source" and cant reveal it. Would you believe it then?? Of course not. So, dont be naive to the fact that the source you decided to link may not have the most accurate numbers and may not be FACT.

I prefer to wait until this actually shakes out. That is a FACT and you can be sure this thing aint over yet and that is a FACT. No source but its pretty reliable.

If you think the numbers are not accurate...please give a detailed account as to how they aren't.

Others have made claims, but it is just their misunderstanding of the process and ignorance of the states own rules.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 04:48 PM by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by USXpat
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

The "unity slate" presented by Romney's team in Washington State is one good indication (in conjunction with Minnesota, Iowa, Nevada, etc.) that there is growing concern on Romney's behalf that Ron Paul's strategy has merit.

That is Romney is trying to get Gingrich and Santorum supporters to be on a "joint delegate ballot" for the sole purpose of keeping Ron Paul supporters out of the delegate count.

Why bother if he has such an overwhelming lead? Gasp!

Just because you are in the lead, doesn't mean you stop trying to win every delegate you can.

The sooner he officially clinches the nomination, the sooner he can get on with the general election.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 04:57 PM by hoochymama

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

Plenty of others have given you a detailed account of mistakes and you refuse to look it and only site your source as fact.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 05:08 PM by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by hoochymama
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

Plenty of others have given you a detailed account of mistakes and you refuse to look it and only site your source as fact.

I have looked at each claim made by others in this thread.

I have given them a detailed response as to why the counts are right including links to other sources, many times the state GOP's own website that confirms the numbers they are questioning.

Again...if you see numbers that are inaccurate, show them to me and I will look into them. But at least have the decency to come back and say that you were wrong...something the others haven't been man enough to do.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 05:13 PM by gwydionblack

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

For lack of a group source, all I can give is Wikipedia. State delegate counts are towards the bottom.

Republican Party presidential primaries

However, to confirm such data, you only need to check each state individual to check how much delegates they have. They check out. Allow me to list the data here.

State / Bound Delegates / Unbound Delegates / Total

Louisiana / 15 / 31/ 46
Indiana / 27 / 19 / 46
North Carolina / 52 / 3 / 55
West Virginia / 28 / 3 / 31
Oregon / 25 / 3 / 28
Arkansas / 33 / 3 / 36
Kentucky / 42 / 3 / 45
Texas 152 / 3 / 155
California / 169 / 3 / 172 (Winner take all)
New Jersey / 50 / 0 / 50 (Winner take all)
New Mexico / 20 / 3 / 23
South Dakota / 25 / 3 / 28
Nebraska / 32 / 3 / 35
Montana / 0 / 26 / 26
Utah / 40 / 0 / 40 (Winner take all)

Seems my original math was wrong, there are even less than I said, and that is because the Kentucky totals were 3 off for bound delegates on Wikipedia.

Totals are as follows:

Bound Delegates: 710
Unbound Delegates: 106
Total Delegates: 816.

If you feel like going through thegreeppapers.com, your original source, you will find as I did that these numbers are indeed accurate and their math is either off, or they are feeding you a line of BS. I of course, took the time to go state by state... I'm sure you did the same, no?

You can't make a statement like this without proof. Please show me proof that he has won nearly all the unbound delegates.

Are you intentionally ignorant of the news the past few days and months about Ron Paul's strategy, or are you still in denial about it? Even the MSM is now admitting that he is getting majority of delegates in states that he did not even come close. C'mon man, you can do better than this.

The remaining winner take all states are Indiana(46), California(172), New Jersey(50), Montana(26) and Utah(40). If Romney wins all of those, he gets 334 delegates. Added to his hard count of 724, that is 1058. He would only need 86 more to clinch the nomination. So if Ron Paul can't outright win one of those states, then it is all but over.

Montana and Indiana are negligible at best to anyone who does their research. Montana's delegates are not required to be bound unless specifically done at the Montana convention. Which means that if Romney wins regardless, they are not required to vote for him.

Indiana is very similar. The delegates are not bound in the conventional way like other states and thus do not have to vote for the winner come the conference.

Therefore, to me and any other reasonable person - the only winner take all states that matter are California, New Jersey, and Utah. But there you go AGAIN including the unbound delegates in the winner-take-all scenario. As few as their may be, those unbound delegates are STILL not required to vote for the winner of the state. Which takes 3 away from that California total, 19 away from Indiana, and as I said - ALL 26 away from Montana since they are not bound by the convention by default.

edit on 28-4-2012 by gwydionblack because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 05:28 PM by gwydionblack

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

And since you have been begging for proof, I figured I would go ahead and look up Montana's delegate laws just for your convenience so you don't have to waste your time arguing about "Source this and source that".

Under section B. Conventions in the delegate selection process taken from the Montana GOP official website.

Source: www.mtgop.org...

3) The results of any presidential primary election held in the state shall be advisory only and not binding upon delegates, unless otherwise provided by state law.

Nevada's GOP convention rules are conveniently missing online, or I would scan them as well to help my fellow posters out.

edit on 28-4-2012 by gwydionblack because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 05:29 PM by fockewulf190

I just can't understand why most republicans would ever support Romney. Seriously, who is this dude? I don't know shinola about him other than he has been rich his whole life, was a Governor of a liberal state, flip flopped a bunch of times, and wants to attack Iran. As with Obama, he isn't willing to make the draconian cuts needed to save this country, he just says that he knows business and knows how to fix our economy. The last thing we need is another change jingling, teflon suited, political breeze measuring, status quo loving, super-pac backed plastic man. What is so crazy about RP? Is it his views on drugs? Stopping the wars and pulling our troops home? Auditing the gold in Fort Knox? Going to cut too much spending? Ending the Fed? Polls show he can beat Obama, and everyone I believe would acknowledge he would destroy Obama in a debate, so what's up?

edit on 28-4-2012 by fockewulf190 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 05:51 PM by pegasi51

reply to post by schuyler

I would not call RP supporters "Delusional". I am one and I am in no way Delusional...I am however hopeful that maybe one day people will wake up and see that the two party system is infiltrated and broken. Optimistic that although Mr. Paul's chance of grasping the nomination is slim to none he has maybe started a fire in the bellies of many americans who see our obvious faulting system of government. I am also quite disappointed that the american people have not caught onto the fact sooner, that we need real change. Not the kind that is sold as being able to "believe in" but the kind that is in your face truth. No I'm not delusional... I am just waiting for all the others to catch up.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 07:00 PM by Mythology

Originally posted by fockewulf190
I just can't understand why most republicans would ever support Romney. Seriously, who is this dude? I don't know shinola about him other than he has been rich his whole life, was a Governor of a liberal state, flip flopped a bunch of times, and wants to attack Iran. As with Obama, he isn't willing to make the draconian cuts needed to save this country, he just says that he knows business and knows how to fix our economy. The last thing we need is another change jingling, teflon suited, political breeze measuring, status quo loving, super-pac backed plastic man. What is so crazy about RP? Is it his views on drugs? Stopping the wars and pulling our troops home? Auditing the gold in Fort Knox? Going to cut too much spending? Ending the Fed? Polls show he can beat Obama, and everyone I believe would acknowledge he would destroy Obama in a debate, so what's up?
edit on 28-4-2012 by fockewulf190 because: (no reason given)

Word.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 07:10 PM by MsAphrodite

reply to post by fockewulf190

That's exactly what's up. That's why certain Obama fans are so frantically posting in every single Ron Paul thread.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 07:13 PM by Lukku

If the Republicans didn't change their policy of "winner take all" after 2008, we wouldn't even be having this discussion!!

I also remember the last minute Super Delegate battle between Obama and Clinton. Delegates are the meat of the Primary.

Projection: Clinton Wins Popular Vote, Obama Wins Delegate Count

That's a pretty interesting article, now that we can view it in the rearview mirror. I think it was the Paul campaign strategy all along.

It's only April 28th, anything can happen between now and the convention. Looks to me like Ron Paul is gaining momentum against all odds.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 09:08 PM by rival

How many delegates is ATS sending...?
and are they bound or unbound?

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 09:34 PM by satron

Who is getting Santorum's and Gingrich's delegates?

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 10:07 PM by jlm912

Santorum has "suspended" his campaign as opposed to dropping out, therefore his delegates are not unbound. Gingrich will probably do the same. I don't think RP supporters are hinging hope on getting majority count in delegates, rather it seems the part of the strategy is the possible Paul-favoring delegates that are bound to Romney may abstain from voting altogether if they can't vote otherwise. Dirty tactics, I admit, but we'll see how it all plays out. If they abstain, they might well get kicked altogether, so even in the case of a brokered convention following, there would be that many less delegates for RP.

edit on 28-4-2012 by jlm912 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 10:36 PM by cenpuppie

reply to post by schuyler

I'm a RP supporter and i know he can't win the republican nomination. But i'm thinking bigger, run against Romney and Obama and crush them both.

reply posted on 28-4-2012 @ 10:55 PM by Rockpuck

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

You don't need to win the "hard delegates" or even the majority to become the candidate nominee. All you need is a specific number of votes to get to the Convention. If you don't drop out before the Convention the delegates at the Convention can sway the course of the nomination. So for instance if Ron Paul wins half the delegates in 3 more states, which he is projected to do, he automatically is on the ticket for the Convention in Tampa. There, if he can, he can sway the Delegates to vote for him instead of Romney which would give him the nomination. The last time that was done however was in 1920.. so it doesn't seem entirely likely..

The delegates specifically that promised to vote for candidates no longer running (Cain, Santorum, Gingrich etc) can freely move to Paul in protest of the RINO nominee presumptive.

reply posted on 29-4-2012 @ 12:48 AM by 0mage

Havent went through all the posts.. but for all who really dont have a clear picture of the situation.. let's hope that this explanation helps. First off all those delegate counts you got there are wrong. RP is winning the nomination.

In all the early caucuses Ron Paul delegates were focussed on becoming elected and put on the slates for the convention. While Romney was chasing poll numbers, RP supporters were fighting for delegate and chair positions. this was completely successful in almost all early caucuses.. making it that RP delegates were in the severe majority. The poll numbers didnt matter as long as RP took a share in the polls no matter how small.

With this strategy, because Romney took the numbers in the polls it turns out that some of Ron Paul's delegates get bound to Romney from every state where it is said that they must vote for the candidate they are bound to in the FIRST round of voting. However thiey can 'abstain' from voting for the candidate they are bound to!

Puts a new and exciting twist to this story doesnt it?

reply posted on 29-4-2012 @ 01:14 AM by brettrix

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

Are you aware of the RNC rule stating that any candidate that has won more than 5 states will be on the nominating ballot for the first round of voting... meaning even if Mitt "clinches" before the convention it seems inevitable that RP will be on the ballot for the first round of voting (He has won Iowa, Minnesota and Washington and seems sure to win in Maine and North Dakota - plus a few others)

That being a possibility, as a potential delegate to the RNC in Tampa from the great state of Arizona, I can tell you one thing is certain.... If i go as a delegate, I will cast my vote for RP on the first round even though Mitt won our state... and it won't be illegal or immoral in any way. It is within the rules of my state party and I love to play by the rules.. especially when it comes to throwing Goldman Sachs out of the White House...

I am sure many other ''hard' bound delegates have similar rules in different states.... and I know there are many delegates like myself who know that Liberty isn't anything people vote for.. Freedom doesn't mean anything to most people in America these days... but it's okay. It means a lot to me!

We're All for Paul!

reply posted on 29-4-2012 @ 01:20 AM by hoochymama

reply to post by 0mage

Mr Outkast needs a source that a bound Romney Delegate can abstain from voting in the first round which in effect can give RP the chance for a vote in the second round. Now, the difference in the second round is that those same voters who obstained can now vote on who they want which in essence could give RP the nomination.

Sources???

Trying to help you out Outkast and others here. If no one can come up with a source that a First Round Bound Delegate can "abstain" from there vote than you have a case. If someone can come up with this source, than what??

edit on 29-4-2012 by hoochymama because: for Outkast and others