30 votes

New ACTUAL Delegate Count Map

_______________________________________________________________________
IF YOU HAVE CRITICISM, PLEASE MAKE IT PRODUCTIVE BY TELLING ME WHAT TO FIX.
_______________________________________________________________________

After really struggling with the actual delegate count I decided to make my own map. I think this is an improvement over the "Real 2012 Republican Delegate Count" and allows for more transparency. I used Wikipedia's secured numbers as a base then modified them based on posts at the Daily Paul. My thought is to have 2 scenarios: (1) What the delegates look like under the state binding rules, and (2) what the count looks like with unbound delegates.

This is a first round pass and I'd be happy to make changes based on your feedback and ground level knowledge. For the unbound scenario, I did not remove any Mitt Romney or Ron Paul "secured" delegates because I wasn't sure if they would switch sides. I moved all the Newt and Rick delegates to "unknown".

I also think I may add an "upcoming state conventions" section to show the dates of the next 5 conventions.

There are two versions:
* Portrait (good for embedding in blogs via code in the share link at bottom left of visualization): http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/TheACTUALRepublicanD...
* Landscape: http://public.tableausoftware.com/shared/DZS5QDNSP

-----------
UPDATE #1: Cut the delegates in half for the following states due to holding early primaries: Florida, Arizona, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Michigan.

UPDATE #2: Had to reverse update #1 because my original numbers were correct. Florida is down from 99, Arizona down from 58, New Hampshire down from 23, South Carolina down from 50, and Michigan down from 59.

UPDATE #3: Added a list of upcomming final events and added a category for states that have final results, but are still unclear based on unknown delegate preferences.

UPDATE #4: Added results from binding primary states and moved a bunch of Mitt Romney delegates to the "unknown" category in the unbound scenario.

UPDATE #5: Updates to unbound scenarios for New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Oklahoma. I also tried to make the scenario drop down easier to see. I kept the default as "bound" because my primary audience is Paul supporters and my intent is to help delegates formulate their strategy. If Romney gets to 1,144 bound delegates, then the choice to invoke rule 38 is obvious. If that happens, I'll change the default to the unbound scenario.

UPDATE #6: Added results from May 19 conventions: Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Vermont.

UPDATE #7: Added primary results for Texas, Arkansas, and Kentucky. Switched the default to unbound since the media is declaring Romney the winner (even though my binding count still doesn't get Romney to 1,144).

UPDATE #8: Added results from California, New Jersey, New Mexico, South Dakota, Missouri, Washington, North Carolina, and Louisiana.

UPDATE #9: Added results from Arkansas, Iowa, New Mexico, Indiana, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Texas and Kentucky.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Utah!!

Don't forget that Utah's primary is on June 26. The final primary of the Republican race. With only Ron Paul and Mitt Romney really competing, it should be interesting. It is the last chance for Ron Paul to carry the popular vote in a state. And why wouldn't he have a good chance to win? Nobody in Utah is going to vote for a Mormon who went to college at BYU and also ran the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. Ron Paul really has a chance in Utah, right??

Or maybe those 40 delegates should be moved from "unknown" to Romney.

.

.

Nice work

Very cool map, been wanting to see something like this... Although I'm not a fan of how many delegates Mitt has

Lawyers for Ron Paul

http://wtpnetwork.com/audio/listen/music_25/

Listen to this....These lawyers are suing the RNC. There is case law that supports them. they claim they are taking over campaign to win it! And they will take all Romney delegates...WOW Amazing

~Freedom needs to be guarded vigilantly~

get over it

I can not believe how some people just refuse to believe reality. 90% of the voters in the Republican primaries/caucuses voted against Ron Paul; 50% of them voted for Mitt Romney. Ron Paul has stated that he will not get the nomination. The delegates determined at the state and districts conventions give Romney more than 1144, enough for the nomination, but rather than concede, this ridiculous effort!!

It is over. Get over it. No judge is going to let some lawyers take over a candidate’s campaign. Even if a judge said all delegates are unbound, the reality is that more than half still would vote for Romney. They were selected as openly supporting Romney; they will NOT change.

Screw Goldman / Sachs / Romney.

.

Before August???

Do you think it will move fast enough in the courts?


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

What is the likelyhood that

What is the likelyhood that there are 146 delegates that are "Stealth" delagates for Ron Paul that refuse to vote Romney in the first round? Delegates that will Abstain? Take Massachusetts for example, IIRC we won ALL of the delegates even though some/all(?) are "bound" to Romney?

Mass. = Romney 25, Paul 16

Significantly less than the likelyhood that many Santorum and Gingrich delegates will vote for Romney instead of Ron Paul.

Face it, Romney will get the nomination. If Ron Paul did get nominated by this subversive strategy, most Republicans would stay home in November. Ron Paul would loose big time. At least Romney has a chance to win.

Even if you´re right

there's also enough Ron Paul supporters to be absolutely prohibitive for Romney to win the November election without acceptable deal with Ron Paul - which I think would be at least the VP slot for Ron Paul. At very least! The GOP knows it very well from the very beginning and repeats the question into oblivion - although apparently many still don't grasp it - that to accomplish Romney-out is for Ron Paul to say just two words - and this words are "third party" (and I would support it if the establishment goes wild at RNC, refuses to recognize the decisive strength of Ron Paul camp and disenfranchises its potential voters by not puting him on the ticket at least as VP). If you're right and Romney has enough delegates to win the nomination - which I agree he could have - because even if he doesn't win on first balot there anyway are still delegates of Santorum and Gingrich which can then vote for Romney - then OK, even perhaps many would say nothing was fair enough in this race the politics is nasty bussiness and such could be the numbers anybody can hardly do something about. Nevertheless there is clearly enough Ron Paul supporters to crucially change the game in the November election and if Romney is indeed in it to win it (without apostrophes) and not to secure Obamas second term by his inept unprincipled flip-flop unacceptability for independents traditionaly deciding the presidential race, then he must make a real deal with Ron Paul. The GOP cannot win the presidency without it, that's now pretty clear. If the GOP really wants to win presidency and not just make the dog and ponny side show for Obama reelection they must make a credible compromise with Ron Paul widely acceptable for Ron Paul supporters.

The Deal between Romney and Paul

I've been saying all along that if Ron Paul endorses Romney after the convention, he will be in the Cabinet. I think a position like Veteran's Affairs- who better the oversee the care of our vets than a doctor who served in the Air Force? VP is too much of a leap; Santorum and Gingrich got more of the popular vote in the primaries, more pledged delegates, and carried more states than Ron Paul, but neither of them is on the short list.

Going 3rd party would result in Ron Paul becoming the Ralph Nader of the right; despised and forgotten. Lets face it, the primaries are like the Sweet 16 and in November is the championship game. To go 3rd party is like starting a pick up game in the parking lot outside of the championship match.

I think Romney could actually win without carrying Nevada or Iowa. He won't carry Maine, Massachusetts, or Minnesota w/ or w/o Ron Paul. Romney will carry Louisiana and Oklahoma no matter what. Virginia will likely go for Obama I think. Mitt can take Florida, Ohio, Michigan, and possibly Wisconsin and those states would put him over the top. Ron Paul did not get a lot of support in those states, so basically, where lots of Ron Paul supporters are, won't matter too much. It would be nice to have you on board, but you are not as crucial as you think. But if Obama wins, he will not care about you or your ideal of Liberty. Romney on the other hand would offer him a seat at the table where he can have an influence on major policies. Remember that our Republic was founded by men who had firm convictions but also knew that they needed to meet each other somewhere in the middle- that is why the phrase "The Great Compromise" is used to describe the Constitution. A place in the Cabinet is the compromise, not the running mate spot.

where

you've been saying it?
Anyway, nobody in presidential race and especially not Ron Paul would accept position like Veteran's Affairs. No way. You must have been kidding all the time saying it all along.
Presidential candidates who end up with the second largest contingent of delegates (if unbound - as for the VP nomination vote) at the convention usually step back or demand VP if they have enough grassroots to be election game changer. In the case of Ron Paul the primaries results aren't too important, because anyway as it appears most of his supporters aren't registered republicans and there is enough of them to immediately form a national party, which would be immediately third strongest party in USA which would immediately deny Romney victory in the election, draining conservative/libertarian support out of GOP as the GOP did from Whigs after 1854. Let's face the possibility, although it is still not a choice now.
I especially don't much understand where from you get your guesses about the states. - Obamas 2008 electoral college swing was 113 electoral votes in this states: FL(27), OH(20), NC(15), VA(13), IN(11), CO(9), IA(7), NV(5), NM(5), + NE2(1), with 95 votes over tie - so Romney cannot win without NE or IA even if only VA goes to Obama (as you think) and rest goes all to Romney (which is not much sure in cases of FL and OH anyway).
I also very much doubt Romney can make MI or WI (and especially not without RP supporters) - in both Obama won by wide margin over 13% last time and polls there over Romney now again.
To sum up, your (quite wild) guesses surely don't persuade me that RP supporters aren't the potential game changer for the November election.

If Ron Paul endorses Romney,

If Ron Paul endorses Romney, you can bet that a deal acceptable to him has been made, even if it is the VA instead of VP. Hopefully you will trust him and not call him a sell-out.

Recent polls show Romney and Obama are within 1 or 2% of each other in states like OH, MI, and FL. WI looks interesting b/c of the win by Gov. Walker and the polls show the likely Republican nominee is favored over the Democrate, so it is tempting to think that may translate to into strenght for Romney, but only time will tell. Other polls have NC, IN, NE leaning strongly for Romney. The economy sucks and people are unhappy with Obama's vision for the future. He does not have as much support in swing states this time. I actually think it could come down to 269 to 269, with the House settling it.

I would support Romney compromise with Paul

But only in the case of a real deal - which is (at least) VP, because only in such a case you can expect Romney win over Obama - whether you admit it or not. (Ron Paul most probably would not accept a deal of any other position offer than VP in the cabinet for the endorsement of Romney as he already has other and in my opinion better option.) The largely unorganized independent voters and the anti-war message are the key.
I'm not a fan of Obama and I have never been for a moment - since I've analyzed his Iowa speech back in January 2008 as trained psychologist and working hard at the time as a political analyst for our senate and reelection of our conservative/libertarian president (who shares many principles with Ron Paul and he and Slovak Institute of Economic and Social studies invited Ron Paul back in 2006 to speak about Mises here in Europe) I immediately knew Obama is a really exceptionaly persuasive conman and fraud and I warned everybody I could not buy into his promises.
Already then I knew the reason has a limited power over mass hypnosis and that my and others warnings are in vain and that he will ultimately get the nomination and win the election, especially for one major reason - his in principle quite vague but into oblivion repeated antiwar message - which then unfortunately looked credible to decisive part of the voters and sufficiently polarized the voters against GOP.
That and almost only that was the decisive issue from Obama's campaign which made him win the presidency over the pathetic tandem of McCain/Palin by then almost landslide in the electoral college.
This domain of antiwar message was since then completely seized and developed into quite consistent complex with other major issues by Ron Paul Liberty movement and still binds, this time not just by means of mass psychology effects but by credible basic principles borrowed from libertarian philosophy the decisive part of the independent electorate with now way more genuine messenger from opposite side of the political spectrum.
You need this people to win the presidential election (the people who, btw, already experienced the major disillusion with Obama fulfilling promises in this domain and would be less prone to accept void promises). You need to offer them really credible compromise.
And here comes what Romney could have in it. In my opinion he is much better GOP candidate than McCain back in 2008, paradoxically because of his famous flip-flopping - he is not rigid-without-principle-hawk as McCain, politically adaptabile and so better able of major compromises if they're inevitable. He has a respect for Ron Paul and he can make almost unbeatable running tandem with Ron Paul -with really wide spectrum support by the electorate and gradually restore the original pro-liberty politics of GOP against the corrupt establishment by getting many so far independents involved in the GOP politics - which is still the Liberty movement goal going far beyond 2012 presidential election.
If not, and the Liberty movement will be not allowed to vote for Ron Paul and his supporters so become effectively disenfranchised I'm afraid that not only Romney will lose the election and Obama gets reelected by combination of incumbent advantage +traditional democrats +democrat leaning independents +by major division on the republican and republican leaning independent side of the political spectrum, but moreover because the Liberty movement goal to restore GOP will no more seem viable it would then be very possible the movement will form a national party (they've everything needed: a leader they can believe, a strong platform, grassroot supporters in every major place able to immediately form the local chapters and with quite strong ability to rise money) which in my opinion due to very strong, principled and consistent message adressing all major issues in quite genuine manner could be able to send GOP into oblivion in a simmilar way as it happened with Whigs after 1854. This is in my opinion definitely better option for Ron Paul with his message and supporters all over the country then to accept a VA like position in the Romney's cabinet and get so then inevitably conceived as a pathetic sell-out by many. I would think only viable way how to get Ron Paul, though implicitely, endorse Romney is make him his running mate. There's too much at stake for Ron Paul to explicitely endorse Romney just for some relatively unimportant position in the cabinet and in my opinion to accept something like VA office would be a political suicide.

Troll Alert

Establishment Hack.

I`D RATHER TAKE A CHANCE WITH DR PAUL

AND HIS 30 YEAR CONSTITUTIONAL RECORD THAN A CHANCE WITH JUST ANOTHER STOOGE OF THE ROTHSCHILD DYNASTY AND THE WARMONGERS OF THE WORLD. INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND LIBERTY TRUMPS THE FOURTENITH AMENDMENT OF SLAVERY AND BONDAGE IN THEIR 'COLOR OF LAW COURTS' THAT STEAL THE LABORS OF WE THE PEOPLE SO THE BUSH`S AND ROMNEYS OF THE WORLD CAN LIVE THE LIFE OF THE RICH AND FAMOUS AT OUR EXPENSE. YOU KNOW THE QUEENS TWO BILLION DOLLAR CELEBRATION WHILE THE HUNGRY DIE OF STARVATION, AND THE MSM PROMOTES HER AS A gOD AND SERVANT OF HER PEOPLE. YA RIGHT, 10,000 ROMNEYS, BUSH A/H`s,or QUEENS WOULDN`T COMPARE TO ONE gandhi, RON PAUL, OR MOTHER TERESA`S.

Don Welser

My only concern

My only concern in your recording is what appears to be adding any delegates to Romney that are not Paul delegates, especially in the more recent conventions. In states like MN and IA, you can bet that there will be people who will vote for Santorum and Gingrich on the first ballot, even though he will not have a plurality of 5 states to be nominated.

Rick and Newt = unknown delegates

If you read the intro that explains the methods, delegates for Santorum and Gingrich are listed as unknown, not Romney.

What is your source for Georgia?

What is your source for Georgia?

A delegate from Dekalb made

A delegate from Dekalb made the claim on this site. Since comments aren't searchable, I'm having trouble locating it again.

Updates

Added results from Arkansas, Iowa, New Mexico, Indiana, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Texas and Kentucky.

At this point, assuming my count is relatively accurate, we need to focus on converting Romney delegates and ensuring all our delegates and alternates show up in order to win.

Correction / queries

Iowa was 23 for Paul (2 of the RNC delegates are Paul supporters).

For Illinois, Green Papers has 12 for Santorum, but you have all for Romney. Do we know those 12 support Romney now?

Green Papers is still missing info on Pennsylvania. But you have 66 for Romney?

We need this to be accurate as it can be...

I made a note to change Iowa.

I made a note to change Iowa. My understanding is that the Illinois delegates were chosen by central committee and therefore are all likely to be Romney supporters. Pennsylvania elected delegates directly on April 24. Business Insider stated that 5 were Paul delegates: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-27/politics/3141...

A lot has happened since my last update...

So if I missed anything, let me know.

Important Info

Thanks, this is very important.

Sorry

I'm falling behind in this. There are a lot of updates to be made, but things have been very busy lately. It will probably be next week before I can add the new numbers.

Also...

If anyone wants to help by listing the updates and sources, that would be greatly appreciated. =)

Thanks keep up the good work.

Thanks keep up the good work.

reedr3v's picture

bump

.

Last Updated

This map/count is awesome! It would be nice if it had a note at the top stating what date/time it was lasted updated.

Andrew Napolitano for President 2016!
http://andrewnapolitano.com/index

"Patriotism should come from loving thy neighbor, not from worshiping Graven images." - ironman77