GOP Nominee 2012 - Who Will It Be?, Pt. 4 - Page 17 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-10-2012, 10:15 PM   #321
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:59 AM
Quote:
I'm fairly certain Mitt Romney does in fact have a chance at getting the majority of delegates
I never said otherwise.

And "taking all into consideration" and "taken in proper context" is knowing that Santorum is not going anywhere. If you can't accept that much, maybe I shouldn't bother.

Quote:
While it is possible, it is almost improbable taken in proper context.
That's what I said.

Simply saying that something isn't feasible, means it is still possible. Those two ideas are not mutually exclusive. Of course it is mathematically possible. I am talking about a feasible assessment of the situation.

Quote:
"Anyone can win in Tampa if it gets there"
In 1984 Walter Mondale did not win enough delegates before the Democratic convention and yet he won the nomination on the first ballot without a "brokered convention". Ford did the same thing in 1976.

There are two instances of "before the convention"...
(#1) is while primaries are still occurring, say in April/May. And (#2) is after they've finished, say in July or August. I hope that clears a little bit up. Romney, as I said, "taking all into consideration", has an improbable path to getting the proper number of delegates during #1. The math doesn't add up, unless you start counting on improbable outcomes.

And he's going to have a very difficult time doing #2. What I am trying to say is that, if Romney get the nomination before the convention (during #2), it will be decided after all the votes have taken place in some horse-trading scenario. Just like Ford and Mondale.

That's what I was originally trying to say.
My next post will deal with the actual math of why #1 isn't feasible.
__________________

U2DMfan is offline  
Old 03-10-2012, 10:21 PM   #322
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
FWIW, the last brokered convention was the DNC in 1952, where the 2nd place candidate Adlai Stevenson won the bid in a 3rd round of voting.
.
I'm not certain about a brokered convention.
I am fairly sure that he won't have the first ballot votes.
Sorry for the confusion, I could have articulated it all better.

I said this:

Quote:
And therefore, it is going to be decided by politicking.
That's not a "brokered convention" AFAIK, that's just the process.
By "politicking" I am talking about the same thing that helped Gerald Ford in 1976, short of delegates before the convention (#1), maneuver to get them before the convention (#2).

I do understand that I mentioned not having enough on the first vote.
That's sort of 'mixing' two ideas there.

Two distinct arguments, really.
My fault.
__________________

U2DMfan is offline  
Old 03-10-2012, 10:33 PM   #323
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,305
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
I never said otherwise.

And "taking all into consideration" and "taken in proper context" is knowing that Santorum is not going anywhere. If you can't accept that much, maybe I shouldn't bother.
Umm... was that supposed to suggest that I am a fan of Rick Santorum or something?


Quote:
Simply saying that something isn't feasible, means it is still possible. Those two ideas are not mutually exclusive. Of course it is mathematically possible. I am talking about a feasible assessment of the situation.
It is indeed feasible that Mitt Romney gains support in order to avoid the thought of a brokered convention, and he walks out with the majority in delegates before the 2012 RNC in Tampa. I wouldn't bet on it, but it's possible.



Quote:
There are two instances of "before the convention"...
(#1) is while primaries are still occurring, say in April/May. And (#2) is after they've finished, say in July or August. I hope that clears a little bit up. Romney, as I said, "taking all into consideration", has an improbable path to getting the proper number of delegates during #1. The math doesn't add up, unless you start counting on improbable outcomes.
It's pretty improbable given the current situation, I completely agree. But given a swing in momentum, or god forbid a drop with a candidate, it's entirely possible that Mitt Romney gets that majority.

Quote:
And he's going to have a very difficult time doing #2. What I am trying to say is that, if Romney get the nomination before the convention (during #2), it will be decided after all the votes have taken place in some horse-trading scenario. Just like Ford and Mondale.
Okay and here is where I'm going to use the same point over again that I posted earlier. While Mitt Romney might have the largest delegate count, there's probably a majority in opposition to Romney. I really don't think the Republican National Committee will have the faith in Romney to try and convince the delegates to back Romney instead of somebody else.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-10-2012, 10:35 PM   #324
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,305
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
I do understand that I mentioned not having enough on the first vote.
That's sort of 'mixing' two ideas there.

Two distinct arguments, really.
My fault.
Okay well yes, I agree with most of what you were saying in that case.

But my original case was that if and when Romney doesn't have enough delegates and everyone stays as stubborn as they are right now and nobody budges in Romney's favor, if the convention is brokered, it's almost like the votes of the people didn't even matter.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-10-2012, 11:44 PM   #325
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Umm... was that supposed to suggest that I am a fan of Rick Santorum or something?
No? It just means that he isn't going anywhere before the convention.
And if he isn't going anywhere, then Romney likely has no feasible path to get the delegates before the convention. Because Santorum should have a decent stack of delegates and he'll know that, even more than ever, Romney-apathy will still exist. In other words, with Santorum simply still being in the race in June (or later) all by itself means that Romney-apathy didn't subside.

And it probably won't, but we shall see.

I skipped the other replies because we seem to be close to being on the same page. Right? Well, close enough anyway.

I have done some of the delegate math while I sit here and watch SNL.
I'm sure it will be interesting to a few people...maybe.
Will post soon...
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 03-10-2012, 11:58 PM   #326
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:59 AM
Using round numbers for ease...
Romney currently needs about 760 delegates to seal the deal.
His absolute, sunshine-pumping, IDEAL (remaining) delegate total is right about 900. I am talking pretty optimistic on that 900 number.

And here is how I arrived there:
Proportional States Romney should do well in
Hawaii 20
Illinois 69
New York 95
Pennsylvania 72
Rhode Island 19
North Carolina 55 (just to err on the idealistic side)
Oregon 28
New Mexico 23

I gave him 60% of all those delegates, even including Santorum's Pennsylvania just for the hell of it. So it is a total of 230.

All remaining Winner-Take-All States/districts
Yes, I gave him ALL of them, even those where only the congressional districts are WTA.

Puerto Rico 23
Maryland 37
DC 19
Wisconsin 42
Connecticut (congressional districts only) 28
Delaware 17
Indiana (congressional districts only) 46
California 172
New Jersey 50
Utah 40

For a total of 474

The Ten Proportional States where Not-Romney/Santorum should do well
Alabama 50,
Mississippi, 40
Louisiana, 46
West Virginia, 31
Arkansas, 36
Kentucky 45,
Texas 155,
South Dakota 28,
Nebraska 35
Montana. 26
I gave Romney 40% of these delegates for a total of about 200.


The three subtotals: 200, 474, 230, rounded off to a nice clean 900.


So the absolute ideal gives Romney about +140 more than he needs.
none of this includes Missouri, which I couldn't figure out how to count in.

He loses, California*, he doesn't have enough all by itself (even with the IDEAL intact otherwise). Another scenario is; He loses Indiana, and Pennsylvania (flipping that 20%), that knocks at least 60 off. He doesn't carry 40% of the delegates in the Deep South, in either MS, LA, AL, AR, let's say 30%. That's another 80 or so off. There's 140 right there (even with the IDEAL intact otherwise).

I could keep going and going. Because of the strange process, you can have committed/uncomitted bound/nonbound and all sorts of shit.

Think about momentum. 7 contests through the rest of March. Santorum should dominate. Over the next two weeks, there is Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri and Louisiana.
Then 8 more in April that should all be good for Romney. Then May 8th, Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia. After Oregon, then 'Not Romney' contests. Arkansas, Kentucky and the massive Texas (155 delegates).
Basically the point is, it will be swinging back and forth. And the media will PIMP this as a fight regardless.

Lastly*, Republicans in winner-take-all California may very well go for Santorum. Karl Rove thinks so. Because once you get outside of major metropolitan areas (as is true across the nation) the majority of vote determines it and has gone to Not Romney (Santorum). Moral to the story is, if Santorum is alive by California, he will have persevered through and continued to win (as opposed to tossing the towel in).

Romney can't get more than 28% anywhere in the South/Central/North states.
When the Gingrich Goose is finally cooked, look to see what happened in the one analogue that exists. In Missouri, when Santorum was still a fledgling 'Not Romney' he clocked Romney by 30 points w/o Newt on the ballot. If you know anything about Missouri, it's a fairly purple 'bellweather' state. But the Republicans there, as in California, are true conservative. Again...I could go all night saying, X, Y or Z. All you really need to know is that under the MOST IDEAL situation, California is a must win for Romney to seal the deal on his own. And then I would ask you to think about that Proposition 8 or whatever it was w/r/t to how conservative the whole of California is.

EVEN AFTER ALL THAT...it doesn't figure any growing voter apathy towards Romney at all. Buyers remorse will either set in or disappear. I typed all this over commercial breaks and weak sketches during 90 minutes of SNL. I hope someone found it useful.
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 03-11-2012, 12:36 AM   #327
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,305
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Ah, excuse me. I thought you were saying he's not going anywhere as in the presidency. I was wondering what you were getting at in that case...

But yes, we're on the same page.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-12-2012, 09:17 PM   #328
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:59 AM
I'm suffering through GOP debate withdrawl.



Ok, I feel better now.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 03-12-2012, 09:20 PM   #329
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,390
Local Time: 04:59 AM
I'm watching "Game Change" again.

Julianne Moore is genius.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-12-2012, 09:29 PM   #330
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 64,498
Local Time: 01:59 AM
I'm watching it right now.

Totally agree.
corianderstem is offline  
Old 03-12-2012, 09:40 PM   #331
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,390
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
I'm suffering through GOP debate withdrawl.



Ok, I feel better now.


this is pretty great too.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-13-2012, 08:08 PM   #332
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 04:59 AM
anitram is offline  
Old 03-13-2012, 08:20 PM   #333
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,305
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Bias



Not funny.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-13-2012, 08:23 PM   #334
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,305
Local Time: 04:59 AM
For the sake of not being completely obnoxious, I could've made that look like the Bush era 'towered' Obama.

Oh, and I'm no Bush supporter.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-13-2012, 08:43 PM   #335
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 04:59 AM
I think the point is that today, the market surged, and generally the markets have been on a remarkable recovery.

Which is pretty impressive for businesses operating in socialism.
anitram is offline  
Old 03-13-2012, 09:07 PM   #336
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 04:59 AM
I love me a good market surge.
Canadiens1131 is offline  
Old 03-13-2012, 09:11 PM   #337
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Mitt is looking pathetic again tonight.
anitram is offline  
Old 03-13-2012, 09:12 PM   #338
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,305
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
I think the point is that today, the market surged, and generally the markets have been on a remarkable recovery.

Which is pretty impressive for businesses operating in socialism.
Well I mean at least justify your posting or something. If that's your point, please say it.

I'm just not a fan of the ridiculous bias that image presents, let alone the absence of a delivery.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 03-13-2012, 09:17 PM   #339
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Well I mean at least justify your posting or something. If that's your point, please say it.
It was a fly-by post. Though if we're now going to insist on people justifying every post, I look forward to this development.
anitram is offline  
Old 03-13-2012, 09:23 PM   #340
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,305
Local Time: 04:59 AM
Every post? No, just the ones that insinuate something quite relevant but don't actually say anything.

Anyways, Mitt Romney projecting two third place finishes today. Good for Santorum, good for Gingrich, good for Paul. Good for the world.
__________________

LuckyNumber7 is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×