7 votes

True or False? Barring the unforseen, Romney has the delegate count wrapped up.

True or False? Barring the unforseen, Romney has the delegate count wrapped up.

I'd like to know if fellow Daily Paulers believe this is true or false, and why?

Thanks!

Comment viewing options

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

Ya

Ya

According to Ron Paul..who

According to Ron Paul..who knows FAR more about it than anyone here...true.

FALSE!

How many will vote aginst "binding" or abstain? Romney has 100% of nothing wrapped up"

Label Jars, Not People!

False

The rules rule! And Romney's delegates can always vote their concious.

False

I can foresee the reason that Romney does not have the delegate count wrapped up.

Ben Swann Confirms: Delegates Are NOT Bound, Anywhere! New Reality Check
http://www.dailypaul.com/232543/ben-swan-confirms-delegates-...

“[The] RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.” And, “The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.” ~Jennifer Sheehan, Legal Counsel for the RNC
http://utahcountygop.com/blog/mr-jenkins-goes-to-st-paul/

How many times...

...does this need to be said before it sticks?

That letter DOES NOT say that all delegates are unbound. You have to understand the CONTEXT in which it was written.

In 2008, Romney won all Utah delegates, they were all bound to him. He dropped out - making them free agents. The Utah GOP then tried to bind them all to vote McCain. The letter is in reference to this, it is saying that the attempt by the Utah GOP was against the rules, and that all the delegates are free agents BECAUSE ROMNEY DROPPED OUT.

It is not saying that all delegates everywhere are unbound.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Do they place a gun to your

Do they place a gun to your head when you vote? If not, then you can vote your conscience. Get a grip. The issue is - there are consequences to not following states binding rules. You could be fined, thrown out of the GOP (club), etc. So if you are willing to take the "punishment" for not blindly following "rules" written in a state you currently are not standing in - then you can vote for whomever you want. If we have enough to stop the nomination on the first ballot..is it worth it? Even if we won't have enough to win on later ballots?? Up to the people there to make their own decisions. People always have choices but they have to also face the consequences.

"If you put a gun to my head and said vote Romney/Gingrich/Santorum...I would say pull the trigger!"

Response:

"Do they place a gun to your head when you vote? If not, then you can vote your conscience."

No, they do not place a gun to your head. What they will do is simply not count your vote, and cast a vote for you the way you were supposed to vote per the rules, and then disqualify you from voting later in the convention.

As you mention, there may ALSO be other consequences for delegates who break the rules. But don't get the idea that you can break the rules, have your illegal vote counted, and then suffer the consequences. Rather, you will break the rules, NOT have your illegal vote counted, AND also suffer the consequences. There's should be no weighing the options, deciding whether the consequences are worth it, because there is no "it," there is NOTHING to be gained from violating the rules and ignoring the fact that you're bound delegate.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

And moreover...

It turns out that the first sentence listed there wasn't actually in the letter from the RNC.

I think the "unforeseen" is

I think the "unforeseen" is the whole point -- and that's what the last two days have been about.

no such thing as "bound"

not likely, see here: http://www.dailypaul.com/233859/for-the-real-ron-paul-suppor...

a nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat

True

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/R-HS.phtml

According to these figures, Romney currently has 970 delegates.

Let us go through these figures, correct any errors, and see where we end up with Romney's delegate count.

IA: The listed figures for IA are still just the original media estimates based on the popular vote. This estimate gives Romney 6 delegates. Let's assume for the sake of argument that we deny Romney all delegates in IA, and subtract 6 from his total.

That brings Romney down to 964 delegates.

PA: There are 72 delegates from PA listed as uncommitted which have NOT been counted toward Romney total. Technically, they are uncommitted, but there is every indication that they are Romney people who have simply not come forward to declare themselves as such. I'm from PA. We had a list of all Paul delegates throughout the State. Only five of them won. These 72 uncommitted delegates are definitely not Paul delegates. I expect they are all Romney, but maybe some are Santorum, so to be safe let's not count any of them towards Romney's total.

So Romney is still at 964 by our count.

Now, I've been following every State, and I do not see any other errors in the figures. If you see any errors, where you know the number cited is incorrect, then please comment and correct the error.

But for now, I'll go ahead using the 964 number we have so far and make some projections.

TX and CA combined have 327 delegates at stake. I project that Romney wins 90% of the delegates from TX and CA (90% x 327 = 294), or 294 delegates.

964 + 294 = 1258

Other remaining States include: UT(40), NM(23), NJ(50), NE(35), MT(26), KY(45), SD(28) and AR(36).

UT and NJ are winner-take all primaries.

AR, KY, SD and NM are proportional primaries.

NE and MT are caucuses.

Now let's grant Paul 100% of the delegates from the caucuses in NE and MT.

I project Romney will win UT and NJ, adding 90 to his count, for a total (90+1258 = 1348) of 1348.

I project that Romney will win AR, KY, SD and NM. Even though the winner will actually take much more than 50%, let's be conservative and say Romney only takes 50% of the delegates (50% x 132 = 52), bringing his total to (1348 + 52 = 1400) 1400.

Conclusion: As of right now, Romney has 964 delegates*, and using very conservative projections, he will have 1400 delegates by the National Convention at the end of August.

*This number may contain minor errors, which I encourage you to find and correct. However, it also does not give Romney 72 delegates from PA, which are almost certainly his delegates. It also does not include any delegates which Romney may win from upcoming State Conventions. It also does not include many "superdelegates" who have not pledged, but who are party hacks and will almost certainly vote Romney. Therefore, if anything, I would say that 946 is a low estimate.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Hmmm....

...several downvotes but no one took me up on my offer to point out the actual errors in the count I presented.

Guess you just "know" that these figures are wrong...did it come to you in a vision?

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

You're not going to get

You're not going to get anywhere with them by presenting math. That's only proof, and proof isn't good enough.

Unfortunately, True

Mitt Romney is going to be the nominee of the Republican Party and the message above lays out the cold hard truth of it while at the same time giving Dr. Paul the benefit of the doubt in the scenarios.

Nothing the poster said is untrue.

This nomination isn't going to be won by hijacking state conventions. If you believe it is then you are quite dense to the world of politics; with all due respect.

Does that mean we should quit? Hell no. But we should be realists moving forward. We will accomplish a lot more by being realists and working within the system in furthering our cause.

I worked for this campaign in 2007 and it's amazing how far we have come. I hope we continue to make our gains but I think it's essential that we realize what's truly ahead of us instead of being blinded with optimism and making our cause look bad in the process.

SteveMT's picture

False. Politics is a dirty business with dirty people involved.

Anything is possible. Case in point:

Romney & Son Investigated For 8 Billion Ponzi Scheme
http://www.dailypaul.com/230720/romney-son-investigated-for-...

HEHE ;)

We are thinking on the same line again Steve!!

wake up sheeple

Mittens will need 1400 to 1500 delegate count using the MSM count, not happening,

Gold standard: because man can not be trusted to control his greed

True, just do the math.

Count the states remaining, count the automatic delegates that a win gives you, and there it is, over 1143.

If this is wrong, please break it down by state for me.

Now will those Tampa delegates abstain from voting on the 1st ballot or what, remains to be seen

Thanks.

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

ConstitutionHugger's picture

TRUTH!!!

Because he said, "barring the unforseen," he isn't lying through his teeth. And the statement is indeed true. We foresee the delegate count not going Romney's way and instead going our way. But the great masses and the media does not foresee this event. Ha Ha sounds like a white flag but it's not.

UNFORSEEN

Unforseen by whom?

THAT, my bretheren, is the REAL question.

=-O

False....

fffalse

Does this include all the stealth delegates?

False. He does not have it wrapped up.

False

FALSE

Absoulutely False!

Ron Paul will be the next President of the United States of America!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~