flymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7397 posts, RR: 6 Posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1255 times:
So 10 states up for grab. Georgia will go to Gingrich and Virginia To Romney. Nothing from the other 8 states yet. Should be interesting with Ohio. Is it win or go home for Santorum tonight? Does Newt stay in with only Gerogia? Can Romeny win Ohio and close it out? It may be a long night on CNN.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 13693 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1144 times:
I guess this topic didn't stir up much interest here.
Romney just barely beat Santorum in Ohio after out-spending him many times over, but beat him he did, and IMHO, inevitability is just, well, inevitable. However, I'd imagine the Dems don't want it to end nor does the media, for the same reason: the GOP candidates are spending bundles of money for TV ads and paying premium rates to get them. Thus, the show must go on!
Santorum's camp is sending open messages to the Gingrich camp to get out of the race so that there's a clear alternative to Milk Toast Mitt, and Newt won't leave for the same reason Rick won't leave (and for that matter, Mitt won't leave): like all politicians, he has a huge ego.
I guess Texas is the next state with a large number of delegates up for grabs. That might be the last interesting one. Is it "winner takes all"?
It just seems a foregone conclusion that Mitt will slog on and get his necessary delegate votes for nomination. The social conservatives that are backing Gingrich and Santorum are currenly splitting the vote. If Gingrich bows out, I think Santorum could make a strong arguement for beating Mitt down the line. There is strong resistance to Mitt, as evidenced by the 40% Ron Paul vote in Va.
The GOP is staring at a nightmare in terms of unifying the GOP platform that excites the establishment and the base when this is all over.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
einsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3766 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1134 times:
Well, Ron Paul should just bow out. Even during Super Tuesday, the only state he could have won was VA and it was because it was him with Romney on the ballot. As much as I would have supported him had I been a GOP supporter, Ron Paul simply is not appealing to the party. Gringrich will be the third wheel and will not get any other contests IMO. The real competition is between Romney and Santorum and if many contests are proportional awarding of delegates, I can safely say that the convencion may come without a clear winner, especially if Gringrich bows out as well.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2857 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1102 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 4): He was said to have thought he had a shot in Alaska, but he lost that one yesterday.
After all the drama over 'winning your home state', I doubt Paul will take Texas.
Looks like we won't find out about PA till April 24th.
I give Ron Paul supporters credit for being vocal about their candidate, but if Paul can't even win a state full of people that just want the federal government to leave them the hell alone like Idaho, he needs to hang it up.
I can't see him winning Texas either. As a congressman you only represent a fraction of the people in a state the size of Texas.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 13693 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1011 times:
Quoting Rara (Reply 7): So how does that work - if one candidate drops out, can he decide who his votes will go to? Could Gingrich and Santorum combine their votes?
The votes are in the hands of human delegates at the convention. They are merely "pledged" to vote for the candidate they are representing. By tradition, they always vote for their pledged candidate in the first round of voting. After that, it is more or less up to them, but they should heed any call from their pledged candidate to move their vote to someone else.
Quoting Rara (Reply 7): How does voting go at the convention - does a candidate need an absolute majority? Or just more votes than all the others?
The vote total they need is already known. I believe it is a simple majority, but it seems it might be a 2/3rds majority. They will make as many rounds of votes it takes to get to that total. In between each round, there will be a lot of "raw politics" going on.
However all of that is unseemly. Delegates do what they are supposed to do or they face severe criticism. Candidates know the vote totals up front, and if a first round victory is not possible, every effort is made before the convention to make the right threats/inducements so that a second round victory is highly likely.
This is especially true in the modern era where communication is so much easier. In the olden days, the convention was truly needed to determine the feelings of the party. Every one had to get into one room and sort things out. Now, with primaries and other polls, and instant communication, that is known ahead of time, and the convention is mainly a "made for TV" event.
There may be some wrangling over who the Vice President should be (although that too is usually sorted out first, because the favored candidate wants to pick the candidate himself), or over who gets to have a speech in prime time, or over "planks" in the party position, but all of that happens off-camera.
On-camera you will see smiling delegates waving signs for their candidate. The runner-up candidates will usually get a chance to speak (although when that happens is the subject of much politics) and their delegates will be shown on camera, sometimes crying.
The other speeches will be from up and coming politicians which can be quite significant. It is said Obama first got national attention due to his speech in 2004. Outside of that, you may see some "old favorites" trotted out to bless the favored candidate, and then the big speech by the candidate himself, followed by confetti and balloons falling from the ceiling.
ER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2771 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 959 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 8): In the olden days, the convention was truly needed to determine the feelings of the party. Every one had to get into one room and sort things out. Now, with primaries and other polls, and instant communication, that is known ahead of time, and the convention is mainly a "made for TV" event.
I miss those days - was actually worth watching the conventions. I haven't watch at all (either party) since the results were pre-determined by the primaries. This year's Republican convention could be interesting though if none of them have the required votes (1170 I think) heading in.
ouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4645 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 941 times:
Quoting Confuscius (Reply 9): I'm hoping for a brokered convention and Mama Grizzly as the handpicked nominee. It's a win-win for the GOP. They get a true conservative and assured of winning the largest state in the Union.
Very interesting, thanks. So since Romney is the only moderate candidate, the others might theoretically combine their votes against him and pick one of their own, or an alternative right-winger (Palin?). So Gingrich's progress does matter, in a way.
Interesting. U.S. politics do have something of an entertainment value built in.
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.