posted
That's not assured. Personally I think he'd lose. But it's a much harder race to try and parse out. It depends on how the campaigning goes, but for sure I think Romney assures a Democratic victory.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
California is not winner-take-all for Republicans, they award delegates according to a somewhat complex proportional system, so even if Romney ties or is slightly ahead of McCain, delegates will still be split between the two. McCain will likely win on the basis of other states that are winner-take-all where he is substantially in the lead. Even if McCain does not outright win enough delegates for the nomination, he may be so far ahead in delegate count after today, that Romney will face a hopeless prospect of trying to catch him. And McCain could always make a deal with Huckabee, offering him the veep position on the ticket, so they could combine their delegates and go over the top of what is needed for winning the nomination.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
McCain will not have the Magic Number, but he will have about 700 to Romney's 300, if my guesstimates are correct. My spreadsheet is in the Primary thread.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm praying that no one has enough for a first ballot. That's how we're going to get Ron Paul.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of my Republican friends didn't understand my claim that most Dems dream of a Huckabee win. Pretty much guarantees the White House with a nice big bow on top for whoever the dems pick.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's tacky in the extreme to express a wish for a win by somebody on the other side because you think they're a crappy choice.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, the whole conversation was probably pretty tacky. We are both very strongly on opposing sides on just about every issue. Yet, we are still best friends and can say tacky things (if Huckabee wasn't anti-Mormon, she would vote for him).
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think it's tacky in the extreme to express a wish for a win by somebody on the other side because you think they're a crappy choice.
why? This is all a game right? Are you saying strategy isn't important? Otherwise no one would worry about electability. No one would talk about how they're better suited to beat a particular opponent. People would solely vote for who they thought was the best candidate, and not who they thought had the best shot at winning.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's like hoping that the quarterback of the opposing team breaks his ankle, instead of hoping that you'll beat them because you'll play better than them.
It's tacky to wish ill upon others.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know that that's an apt analogy. It's not wishing ill onto others. I don't want harm to come to McCain. And so what if I hope that whatever candidate the dems face is weak? I'm sick and tired of our current administration, and I thoroughly dislike all the republican candidates. Yeah, it's selfish, but I want more than anything to see Obama, or a dem in power, so I'd like to see whatever gives them the best shot of doing that.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: I'm praying that no one has enough for a first ballot. That's how we're going to get Ron Paul.
McCain won't have the Magic Number today. He'll certainly have it by the end of March.
You sound just like the pundits the evening before the Iowa primary.
I too think that ultimately McCain will win over Romney in the winner takes all states. But it will be by very small to small margins. Yet those wins will be there.
But I would not say I am certain in this regard at all.
Elections like football games have shocking endings much of the time. I wish Huckabee had just dropped out days if not weeks ago instead of going into Super Tuesday like he is.
But I think he wants a veep nod, or possibly a cabinet position.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Not at all, really. And if it is, it's a game with only one team, whose players simply disagree on the best strategy to win.
It is better to have your candidate lose to a superior candidate than it is to have your candidate beat an inferior candidate - because we want the best President possible, even if it isn't "our" side that nominated him (or her).
quote:I don't know that that's an apt analogy. It's not wishing ill onto others. I don't want harm to come to McCain. And so what if I hope that whatever candidate the dems face is weak?
Perhaps a better analogy is hoping that the opposing coach puts in their crappy third-string quarterback instead of their star, thus torpedoing their chances of effectively competing before they ever get on the field.
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: I'm praying that no one has enough for a first ballot. That's how we're going to get Ron Paul.
Please take this as my ignorance of how the convention works and not a bash on Ron Paul, but how in the world would that work? Do you think Paul could somehow get the nomination even if he's not one of the top two or three in delegates? Or do you mean you'd get him as a VP because he'd be able to sway some delegates towards one of the leaders? *confused*
posted
I don't know how it works, but I've heard someone propose Dick Cheney as a fifth ballot. :shudder:
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: I'm praying that no one has enough for a first ballot. That's how we're going to get Ron Paul.
Please take this as my ignorance of how the convention works and not a bash on Ron Paul, but how in the world would that work? Do you think Paul could somehow get the nomination even if he's not one of the top two or three in delegates? Or do you mean you'd get him as a VP because he'd be able to sway some delegates towards one of the leaders? *confused*
Some delegates are pledged to certain candidates, and some aren't. For example, here in Illinois, I voted for the two Ron Paul delegates and the two Ron Paul alternates. I also voted for Ron Paul, but that made no difference whatsoever, because it's the delegates who count.
When the delegates get to the convention, pledged delegates are obligated to cast their votes for whoever they're pledged to -- on the first ballot. If that results in more than half of the delegates going to one candidate, that candidate wins. If not, they go to another ballot, at which point pledged delegates are allowed to vote for whomever they want.
Not all states are like Illinois, where there are specific delegates elected. Instead, there are delegates who are merely pledged to vote according to whoever they're assigned based on the state vote. Again, on the first ballot.
If there isn't a winner on the first ballot, it becomes a free-for-all, and even delegates from states where McCain or Romney won can vote for Ron Paul. Or vice versa, of course, but let's not think about that.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: Regardless... they are saying Huckabee has won West Virginia!
There's a shocker.
The shocking thing is Romney had a good lead. But after the first ballot, when McCain's people saw they couldn't win, they threw their support behind Huck to prevent Romney from winning. (I wrote more about this effect over on the primary thread).
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So if that happens do the candidates give speeches or something between the casting of the ballots? I imagine that's more useful than just giving the results and telling everyone to vote again.
Do you think it's likely that a second or third or etc ballot would actually go to Ron Paul, or is it more a matter of being pretty sure he's not going to get enough for the first ballot so that's the only chance left? I have to admit, I think it'd be pretty cool to see happen, if only for seeing pundits scramble after that kind of upset.
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: So if that happens do the candidates give speeches or something between the casting of the ballots? I imagine that's more useful than just giving the results and telling everyone to vote again.
From what I know, between the casting of votes there will be frantic horse-trading and arm-twisting to get delegates to pledge support for the various candidates. Kind of like what happens in close Congressional votes, but with more people changing positions. I'm not sure about speeches from the candidates.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My understanding (from reading descriptions of the process in the 1980s, so take it for what it's worth) is that the candidates do not give speeches between votes, but campaign staff are all over the convention floor schmoozing with the delegates, brokering deals, making promises, and generally trying to convince people to vote for their candidate.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
We are both very strongly on opposing sides on just about every issue. Yet, we are still best friends and can say tacky things (if Huckabee wasn't anti-Mormon, she would vote for him).
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
