On Tuesday, May 29, 2012, Texans held their Republican primary.
Voter turnout was low, about 10%.
Associated Press (AP) announced a projection indicating that Romney had secured at least 97 delegates, bringing him up to the 1144 delegates needed to win the Republican nomination.
Romney made an acceptance speech.
President Obama telephoned Romney to congratulate him.
Assocciated Press Projected a Romney Win; Most Media Sources Parroted the Report
The picture from AP's perspective: Orange=Romney, Green=Santorum, Yellow=Paul, Purple=Gingrich. However, this map neglects the delegates reclaimed recently by Ron Paul's "delegate strategy."
The mainstream and liberal media flocked to repeat and report the AP projected result:
Associated Press Yahoo ABC news
USA Today
CNN news made an independent estimation (independent of the Associated Press report) indicating a similar conclusion, using the words “unofficially clinched the Republican presidential nomination” Huffington Post
Even some Conservative News sources such as Fox and The Blaze proclaimed the AP estimate, indicating a Romney win.
Other Media More Cautious
The Conservative Drudge Report was strangely silent. Wall Street Journal reported cautiously that “Mitt Romney Tuesday night claimed(my italics) his win in the Texas primary gives him the requisite number of delegates to clinch the Republican presidential nomination.”
Some Reports Question Romney’s and Associated Press’ Claims of Victory
Ben Swann, a Fox News anchor from Cincinnati, Ohio, produced a segment of Reality Check, explaining why he believes that internal tension within the Republican Party may be undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory.
According to Ben Swann’s Reality Check from last week, The Liberty Movement (conservatives who support Ron Paul) is taking over the GOP. On Tuesday, a new segment of Reality Check suggests that the Republican Party might be winning the Texas battle at the moment, but could actually be losing the primary war to conservatives.
More details on Reality Check’s claims will be discussed below; some claim that Ron Paul may have as many as 1,000 delegates going into the Tampa convention, compared with Romney’s present 1,081 delegates (the number of Romney delegates is under dispute, more below).
Fox’s Reality Check is not alone in their suspicions.
Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingrich also acknowledged just last week that Ron Paul is the “biggest danger” for Romney in Tampa. Gingrich pointed out that Paul supporters have gathered an unexpected number of delegates at state Republican conventions recently in Alaska, Colorado, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri and Nevada. Apparently, the number of delegates acquired by a candidate continues to change after the primary, with delegates changing allegiance, and Ron Paul is raking them in.
My previous calculations, based on Associated Press data (obtained from Wikipedia through USA Today), indicated that Mitt Romney could not possibly claim the nomination before the Texas primary, and even then, he could only claim it if he got almost all 155 delegates.
Since then, quite a few things have changed, including the fact that Ron Paul is converting delegates who were previously committed to Romney to his own side.
According to present Wikipedia delegate counts (based on month-old AP projections, plus Texas numbers from a website called The Green Papers) , Mitt Romney is still short of 1144 delegates. He has only 1081. The Wikipedia report also neglects the reduction in Romney delegates that would result from Ron Paul’s amassing of delegates.
Where is AP getting it’s most recent numbers from? Why are the new numbers contradicting AP’s numbers from one month ago?
What are AP’s most recent numbers? Wikipedia does not use AP numbers for its Texas update; it is using The Green Papers numbers instead, and AP’s numbers are not in evidence.
How is it possible that Ron Paul seems to be reversing primaries that are already over, and seems to be wining delegates who were previously counted as Romney voters?
Conflicting Reports; Who’s Right and Who’s Wrong?
Media Research Center's Times Square Billboard in New York City
So which is it?
Are Associated Press (and the mainstream media quoting them) and CNN wrong in their projections? Are they trying to influence the election by bluffing?
Does Ron Paul pose a serious threat to Romney as indicated by Fox’s Reality Check, Gingrich’s interview, Wall Street Journal’s caution, Drudge Report’s silence, and my humble calculations?
Is somebody lying and spinning, or is the primary election system so complex that nobody can project results accurately?
Catholicism is the largest religious denomination in the United States. 25% of Americans are Catholic. The Catholic Church has accused the President’s administration of violating the First Amendment. Yet the mainstream media is silent.Most Americans do not know that this has happened.
Stand Up For Religious Freedom Rallies to Be Held in 140 Cities June 8, 2012. Will the media report?
This news blackout included total silence by ABC and NBC, and only one 19-second report by CBS, covering the historic “Legal Armageddon.” Instead, the mainstream media focused on smaller events in an attempt to damage the Church’s image, such as dated stories on “predator priests” and reports on the Pope’s valet leaking documents to the press. Twenty Catholic and evangelical leaders joined the Media Research Center (MRC) this week in calling out the networks for ignoring the Obama administration trampling on the First Amendment.
The news blackout appears to be aimed at protecting the Obama administration, while continuing attempts to discredit the Catholic Church.
Aside:Thus continues the now decades-long misrepresentation of the Catholic Church abuse sandal. In actual fact, the Catholic Church has the lowest frequency of offense towards children on earth. Children are at greater risk of abuse in their own homes and in public schools than they are, or have ever been, in the Catholic Church.
Credibility of the Mainstream Media
Back to the point – should we be considering an Associated Press and mainstream media attempt to spin reporting on the Republican primary?
Do liberals have a preference for running against Romney, versus running against one of the more conservative alternative candidates?
What is AP’s history on the Republican primary?
Has AP been wrong before?
The answer to all of these questions is yes.
Liberals do have a preference for running against Romney, they believe he is easier to defeat than the other candidates.
AP has called results prematurely in the Republican primary
AP has been wrong before
Most importantly, the media has even shown a willingness to participate in a news blackout, when that is advantageous to the far left and to the Obama administration.
Now, the Associated Press is making projections that do not jive with the estimates of others, nor with their own previous estimates. They seem to be favoring Romney.
Fox’s Reality Check (quoted below) seems to believe that AP estimates of Romney’s delegate counts are wildly misleading.
Even Wikipedia’s charts of delegate counts don’t seem to be updated to reflect conservative changes that have occurred during the past month. Additions to Romney’s delegate count acquired in Texas are updated on Wikipedia, quoting the amateurish The Green Papers website’s numbers, but whole statemajorities acquired by Ron Paul and acknowledged by Newt Gingrich are absent from the Wikipedia charts.
Considering the total news blackout last week, in which ABC and NBC failed to mention the story of the decade (concerted legal attack on the Obama administration by Catholic organizations), the mainstream media can no longer be relied upon to give unbiased facts on the 2012 election. We, as citizens, are back to knowing very little about what is going on in our nation—two hundred years ago this was limited by the speed of the pony express; today, this is due to intentional news blackouts and manipulation of information by radical media.
Fox’s Reality Check, Gingrich, and Ron Paul’s people – Ron Paul is Still Collecting Delegates at a Striking Rate
The fact is, this is a remarkably unusual election. Our nation is divided, not by economic status, not by gender or by race, but we are divided by philosophy. Liberal versus Conservative.
And the balance between liberals and conservatives is changing.
This trend has been evident for a very long time. The closeness of the 2000 election with counting of chads, as well as the unexpected unseating of Hillary Clinton by Obama were indications of division and of close competitions which are full of surprises. Wisconsin’s going Republican in 2010 was an indication that shift toward conservatism may be occurring. Recent Gallup polls confirm this shift.
The two positions, Liberal and Conservative, are stalemated on several issues for which it is difficult to imagine any compromise:
Economy: the liberal solution, spending, is not compatible with the conservative solution, cutting spending. A compromise, doing nothing, would (duh) do nothing while we watch our economy go down the tubes.
Abortion cannot be legal and illegal at the same time. It cannot be a “right” and murder at the same time.
Marriage cannot be between one man and one woman, while also being between two men or two women. A choice has to be made.
There are numerous additional issues on which now polarized liberal and conservative positions would struggle to find a middle ground.
According to Reality Check , even the Republican Party is now divided. There appears to be struggle between Republican National Committee (RNC) leadership and a collection of conservatives whom it is difficult to label, but who seem to be rallying behind Ron Paul. Ron Paul is amassing the support of delegates at a striking rate; there is reason to believe that Ron Paul has 1,000 delegates supporting him already. Reality Check calls these Ron Paul supporters the Liberty Party, but I suspect that this group includes a much wider spectrum of conservative people.
Ron Paul Supporters
Ron Paul
Ron Paul’s supporters have been dismissed in the past, because of his minority following and because of some extreme policies. But now the numbers of supports that Ron Paul is claiming are growing, and the RNC seems to be evading the obvious question; where are all these Ron Paul supporters coming from?
Previously, I was never a Ron Paul supporter. As a conservative I now support some of Ron Paul’s policies, but consider some of his positions as dangerously naïve; particularly his attitudes towards foreign policy, defense budget, and legalization of drugs.
However, the more I learn about Romney, I begin to see myself rallying behind Ron Paul in preference to Romney, when my top two preferences seem unlikely to be available (Santorum and Gingrich).
Why don’t some trust Romney?
Romney has no established philosophy driving his politics. His philosophy, if any, appears to be utilitarian; it changes according to convenience and to circumstances. His commitment to truth or to Judeo-Christian morality is not clear.
Journalist Daniel Gross sees Romney as approaching politics in the same terms as a business competing in markets, in that successful executives do not hold firm to public stances over long periods of time, but rather constantly devise new strategies and plans to deal with new geographical regions and ever-changing market conditions. Political profiler Ryan Lizza notes the same question regarding whether Romney’s business skills can be adapted to politics, saying that “while giving customers exactly what they want may be normal in the corporate world, it can be costly in politics”. Writer Robert Draper holds a somewhat similar perspective: “The Romney curse was this: His strength lay in his adaptability. In governance, this was a virtue; in a political race, it was an invitation to be called a phony.” Writer Benjamin Wallace-Wells sees Romney as a detached problem solver rather than one who approaches political issues from a humanistic or philosophical perspective. Journalist Neil Swidey views Romney as a political and cultural enigma, “the product of two of the most mysterious and least understood subcultures in the country: the Mormon Church and private-equity finance,” and believes that has led to the continued interest in a 1983 episode in which Romney kept his family dog on the roof of his car during a long road trip. Political writer Joe Klein views Romney as actually more conservative on social issues than he portrayed himself during his Massachusetts campaigns and less conservative on other issues than his presidential campaigns have represented, and concludes that Romney “has always campaigned as something he probably is not.”
Romney has changed his positions on abortion and on government health care. Both of these are major issues in this election, and both have a huge impact on the economy. Whether Romney’s changes in philosophy are genuine and permanent, or whether they reflect a willingness to alter his beliefs pragmatically over time, remains to be seen.
After four years of President Obama’s drifting and reversals, I would consider the choice of a Presidential candidate who has a history of flip-flopping, evolving, etch-a-sketching, or whatever you want to call it, simply irresponsible. There is a chance that Romney’s conversions (on ObamaCare and on abortion) are genuine, but the risk that they are not genuine is too large to take. Mitt Romney is still the only Republican candidate on the ballot who has refused to sign the Susan B. Anthony Presidential Pro-Life Pledge.
If we elect Romney, we could have another Obama on our hands, who promises one thing, then delivers something quite different.
Reversals on ObamaCare and on abortion by Romney would be catastrophic – not only on the “social” front, but on the economic front as well. Socialized medicine and the killing of future citizens by abortion would have an equally devastating effect on the economy of the nation as they would have on the nation’s morality.
Flip-flopping, evolving, and etch-a-sketchingare not the marks of a candidate for President of the United States.
Flip-flopping, Evolving, Etch-a-Sketching: not good marks of a President
They are the marks of confusion at best, and the marks of a liar, at worst.
Who Would Support Ron Paul over Romney?
Above were the reasons why I would support Romney only after every other possibility has been exhausted for Republican nomination. All three, Gingrich, Paul and Santorum, have established a more consistent conservative record of supporting Judeo-Christian morality (and the economic prosperity which this morality fosters) than has Mitt Romney. And I don’t think that I am so unique. In fact, although I have never joined the Tea Party or participated in their functions, I typify quite closely the average Tea Party member.
Many conservatives, whether fiscal, social, or religious conservatives, could conceivably be persuaded to support Ron Paul, or Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum for these reasons over Romney. Tea Party, Evangelicals, and Catholics are just a few of the conservative groups who might likely support Ron Paul over Mitt Romney.
If the eccentric and perseverant Energizer Bunny calling himself Ron Paul, the medical doctor who opposes abortion and who has personally delivered over 4,000 babies in his lifetime, continues to amass delegates to support him, and if he makes it to the Republican Convention in Tampa in August, there could be some big surprises occurring at that convention.
My knowledge of the very complex electoral process is not sufficient to forecast whether Santorum or Gingrich will go to the convention and be listed on the ballot as well as Ron Paul. But Ron Paul is now almost sure to be there. In fact, his supporters have already organized a massive 3-day party, to be attended by 40,000 to 100,000 people, including as much as 1,000 delegates supporting Ron Paul, in Florida immediately prior to the Tampa convention.
The RNC is Worried
Delusional speculations, you may be thinking?
Well, the RNC appears to be worried about these possibilities, too.
The Massachusetts RNC leadership is apparently sufficiently worried about Ron Paul’s growing popularity that it is threatening delegates that they must sign an affidavit that they will vote for Romney on the first round of the Republican National Convention in Tampa, or be charged with perjury. They would not be threatening delegates and creating last minute busy-work if there was no danger to their RNC establishment’s agenda.
Governor Romney is also concerned, and is creating a shadow party in some of the states at issue.
This does not make it look like Ron Paul is a harmless eccentric, or that Mitt Romney has the nomination bagged.
How Can Delegate Counts Be Reversed?
How can Ron Paul be reversing primary election results, and why is the media failing to acknowledge recent reversals?
Apparently, Ron Paul has discovered a strategy that circumvents the Republican establishment, and endeavors to facilitate a conservative takeover of the Republican party. The strategy is called the “delegate strategy,” it seems to be working. It involves focusing campaign efforts on the ability to win over state delegates, rather than winning the popular vote.
Instead of focusing on getting the votes of voters at primaries, Ron Paul focuses on getting the votes of the delegates who are elected at state conventions and caucuses, typically a couple of weeks after the primary.
Ron Paul supporters use an extensive grass roots campaign network to influence local officials, who then influence higher-up officials. Basically, delegates are persuaded to switch their vote to Ron Paul weeks after the popular vote at the primary, and this essentially reverses the effect of the primary.
For example, take the state of Massachusetts. Just like in Texas tonight, Romney won the popular vote there. But in the congressional district caucuses, where the delegates are actually chosen, Mitt Romney, despite having been Governor of that state, was embarrassed, when during the district caucuses, Ron Paul supporters took 16 of 19 delegate slots. In doing so, the Boston Globe reports that those Paul supporters, they beat out major names in the Massachusetts Republican Party. Including state house minority leader, Bradley Jones Jr., Kerry Healey, the former Lieutenant Governor, Sheriff Frank Cousins of Essex County, and Republican’s most recent nominee for governor, Charles D. Baker.
This strategy is discussed further by Chris Miles at policymic. Chris Miles concludes: “Boom, Ron Paul’s system looks like it is working.”
How Many States and How Many Delegates Does Ron Paul Now Have?
The Republican race is not won through a series of state primary contests. It’s won by accumulating delegates at state conventions, which typically occur a few weeks after the state primary contests.
In the states where the primaries are over, Ron Paul is winning large numbers of delegates, leading to massive fights at State Conventions across the country. It’s also leading to many new people taking over the GOP leadership in these states, and those people happen to be Paul supporters. That has also led to Governor Romney creating a shadow party in some of these states. This reflects the intensity of the competition that is raging in the Republican Party, all the while unreported by the liberal Mass Media, who would love to help push Romney as the candidate Obama will oppose.
What are the rules?
Are delegates in the Republican Party bound to vote for a specific candidate, as determined by the popular vote of the Primary?
Or is the popular vote an advisory one?
According to the 2008 Rules of the Republican Party, 25% of delegates are unpledged and are free agents at the convention (this year in Tampa) These include party officials such as the party chair or national party committee members. But 75% of delegates are pledged delegates, indicating that they are “bound” by the popular vote from the primary.
However, the Legal Counsel for the RNC made a ruling in 2008 that ‘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.’” This statement allows all delegates to be free agents, voting for whomever they choose.
So there is a contradiction.
It is not clear how this dispute will play out.
For comparison, Newt Gingrich’s delegates are still bound to vote for Gingrich in Tampa. Newt has the option to release his delegates to vote for Romney as he wishes. But his delegates will be bound to vote either for Gingrich or for Romney in the first two ballots of the Republican convention in Tampa. If there are more than two rounds, they are free to vote for any candidate. Incidentally, Newt Gingrich has not yet released his delegates to vote for Romney in Tampa.
SO: the rules are not yet clear. This is going to be an exciting summer and an exciting convention.
Has This Ever Been Tried Before?
I’ve discussed the Harding election previously, in which Harding went into the Convention with only 20% as many delegates as his opponent had. However, since no delegate had the required 51% (1144) at first, several rounds of voting took place. Eventually, Harding ended up winning the nomination and then winning the election to become President.
I am not sure how the details of the primary worked out, but the fact is that when candidates do not have the requisite 51% (today 1144) delegates before the convention, a brokered convention is held, and some big surprises can surface after several rounds of voting.
This system was wisely put in place to create a process of elimination, so that when there are numerous candidates, as there are in 2012, and not one of them gets 51% of the vote, a minority leader does not end up leading the United States as President. A “brokered” convention steers a process of repeated voting and elimination, which culminates in a candidate who is supported by at least 51% of the U.S.
At present, Romney is still short of 1144 delegates by many estimates. Even AP’s estimates make assumptions and guesses about delegates who are not bound (at least 25% or more of them are not bound), and then even bound delegates are no longer bound after two rounds of voting if more than one candidate enters the convention. With Ron Paul’s number of delegates rapidly growing (and thus Mitt Romney’s number of delegates rapidly shrinking, something that AP does not seem to have acknowledged yet), the numbers are in such a flux in 2012 that it is difficult to make any projections at all.
How Many Delegates Still Up For Grabs?
According to the Wikipedia charts (from USA Today, AP and The Green Papers), this is the present estimated delegate count:
Note: If Ron Paul continues to succeed in winning delegates who were previously though to be “bound,” all of the above AP numbers become meaningless. Note also, that the total of delegates still to be determined by the primary votes from the above table is 359, while the AP estimates from table before that listed 537 as still to be determined.
The Final Outcome
The outcome of this primary – Romney versus a much more conservative candidate like Gingrich, Paul or Santorum – could have a powerful impact on the future of the United States. There is reason for concern. Romney is not similar to the other 3 remaining candidates, and a Romney presidency could be much different than what the conservatives who elect him might imagine. In some ways, Romney has the potential to “evolve” or to reverse himself almost as badly as Obama has done during the course of the last four years.
If all this speculation by Fox’s Reality Check, by Newt Gingrich, by Ron Paul and his supporters, and by me turns out to be mistaken, Mitt Romney will have the nomination, and he will run against Obama for President. In that case, he will have my vote. That is the highest probability scenario.
But if reports of a power struggle in the RNC between moderates and conservatives are correct, there is not only a good chance that Ron Paul’s name will be on the ticket at Tampa, but there is also a good chance that a large number of conservative delegates (previously Santorum and Gingrich supporters) might join him. If Ron Paul’s “delegate strategy” turns out to be legitimate and successful, Ron Paul could even defeat Romney.
With the present NEWS BLACKOUT orchestrated by the liberal media, this primary may not be over until the Republican Convention in Tampa (August 27 – August 30, 2012) is over.
Is the Republican Primary Over?
No, it’s Not Over Yet
Does Mitt Romney Have the Nomination?
No, Mitt Romney Doesn’t Have the Nomination Yet
So I keep getting calls from what the caller ID identifies as “000-000-0000.”
After getting enough of them, I googled “calls from 000-000-0000,” and here is one suggestion that came up from Trencherman:
.
.“You were called from the Democrat Party National Headquarters, that’s their “prestige”phone number. It’s the same as both their IQ and the number of their supporters who really understand the consequences of their leaders policies…”
.
.
Thank you , Trencherman, whoever you are, for putting a smile on my face today!
May 8 – 132 delegates up for grabs, 55 from NC
May 15 – 63 delegates up for grabs, 35 from NE
May 22 – 81 delegates up for grabs, 45 from KY
If Romney got 100% of the delegates from May 8-22, the total would be 1120, still short of the 1144 he needs.
May 29 – 155 delegates up for grabs, all from TX
Jun 5 – 299 delegates up for grabs, 172 from CA
Jun 26 – 40 delegates up for grabs, all from UT
.
When will it be over?
Judging from the numbers above, at earliest it will be over on May 29, and only if Texas, which has winner-takes-all, goes for Romney. Previously, Texas was likely to lean toward a Tea Party conservative like Santorum.
More likely, it will not be over until Jun 5, when California votes.
It is still possible that that this could go to a brokered convention, although much less likely after Tue, Apr 24th.
Answer: It will not be over until May 29 or perhaps June 5th.
Unless Newt and Paul are persuaded to quit before then.
An Interesting Possibility:
Say Santorum has quit (so far, he has actually “suspended” his campaign).
Say Gingrich quits this week (the possibility has been mentioned).
Say Ron Paul sticks it out to the end, as he has promised.
Then, say Romney falls short of the 1144 delegates he needs for the nomination (we’ve calculated above that he is likely to struggle to get to that number soon).
Will Ron Paul single-handedly be able to force Romney into a brokered convention?
Somebody should be interviewing Ron Paul and reporting on his intentions.
President Harding had only 20% of the leading candidate’s votes in 1920, yet he ultimately became President.
This will be an exciting election to watch.
Is it to be President Romney, President Paul, or President Obama?
Or will Gingrich stay, and Santorum un-suspend, and all go into a very exciting brokered convention?
The Bottom Line
Of course, probability is on the side of a Romney nomination and a Romney-Obama fight.
In which case, I plan to put all my energies behind Romney.
Four Years Ago: Hillary, Like Romney, Was the Presumed Candidate
or
Where is This Election Headed?
Hillary for President
.
April 22, 2008:
In April of 2008, Hillary and Barak were neck-in-neck. Hillary won the Pennsylvania Primary. Then the Clinton campaign raised another $10 million.
Hillary and Barak continued to battle it out, about 1 percentage point apart, as they had been throughout the primary campaign. Hillary had been the presumed nominee for quite some time before the primary, and many believed that she could not lose.
TIME magazine
Obama was giving her a run for her money and edging her out, but only by about 1%, and neither Hillary nor supporters were ready to concede. The race was close. Estimated Delegate Score Card over time can be found here.
The media was not talking about the primary “dragging out,” or about any need to “coalesce behind one candidate” yet.
The battle continued until Obama had enough delegates to win the primary, and he only won by a very slim margin. Hillary only conceded on June 7, 2008, 4 days after Barak secured enough delegates to claim the nomination on June 3, 2008.
Who is Leading the Republican Primary Race Today?
Short Answer: Depends on who’s counting and depends on how you classify the votes.
Who’s Counting?
If the mainstream media and the Republican establishment are counting (Romney supporters), Romney is the leading candidate. If Conservatives,Tea Party, and evangelicals are counting, the race is way too young to call. 50-60% of the delegates have not yet been assigned, and anything could happen. It’s much too early to tell.
Mitt Romney vs Conservatives Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul
How Do You Classify the Votes?
If all four candidates attract a random segment of the American vote, and Santorum’s recent bowing out spreads the votes evenly among all candidates, then Romney is winning.
But if Conservatives are wedded to voting for conservatives like Santorum/Gingrich/Paul, and moderates are voting for Romney, then the exit of one conservative candidate will swing all the conservative votes to the next conservative candidate, and not to Romney. That is certainly the case with my vote: in the first place, my vote goes to Santorum. Failing that, to Gingrich. Failing that to Paul. Finally, failing that, to Romney. By this argument (see chart below), Romney has only 23-25% of the vote so far, and the Conservatives have 16-26% of the vote. Again, way too early to call. Conservatives and Romney neck-in-neck, and we have not even heard from 49-61% of America yet!
Uncertainty in the Delegate Counts
The Media has been very quick to assign delegates which are in any way uncertain, uncommitted or disputed, to Romney. Why? That will be discussed later below. Those mainstream media counts can be found at Wikipedia.
Conservative counts, on the other hand are made by more stringent criteria. The Santorum campaign count, for example, shows remarkably different numbers.
The bottom line is, however, that with 49 to 61% of the delegates still unassigned, and with conservative states like Texas (155 delegates available with winner-takes-all) still in the offing, the race if far from over, unless the media (and the Republican establishment) manages to convince everyone that the race is over before it really is.
Here is the range of numbers claimed by various sources, depending on your source of delegate counts and assignment of contested delegates:
Candidate
Number of delegates
Percentage of Total (2286) Delegates
Romney
536-571
23-25%
Santorum
202-342
9-15%
Gingrich
132-158
6-7%
Paul
26-91
1-4%
Conservative Total
360-591
16-26%
Delegates still unassigned
1124-1390
49-61%
.
Bottom Line Today:
Conservatives could be leading Romney by a much larger margin than Barak had on Hillary in 2008.
Lessons for us from 2008’s Democrat Primary
Why are some conservatives giving up?
Do they believe the media already?
Do they want to let the Republican establishment to steer the nomination, instead of the voters steering it?
It’s still early, and the race is far from over.
It’s not over until the fat lady sings (me). 🙂
Stay in there, Rick/Newt/Ron!
A conservative coalition (if you go by Rick Santorum’s numbers) is leading with a slight edge against Romney so far, just as Barak was leading against Hillary in April 2008.
If you guys stay in there, you can prevent Romney from getting the 1144 delegates he needs for the nomination. BTW, Rick’s suspended campaign could also be un-suspended at a later date.
Then, when nobody has the required 1144 delegates, the process starts again at the brokered convention. As the candidates with least delegates are eliminated, it will boil down to one conservative against Romney, and that conservative will have a great chance of defeating Romney. America is ready for a real change.
The delegate counts so far tell us that Americans are definitely waffling on Romney; they prefer a true conservative. Tea Party candidates, evangelicals, and many other conservatives are nervous about Romney’s liberal past and the reliability of his new found conservative “conversion.”
We’ve just had a taste of somebody who promises one thing but delivers quite another- Obama.
Not to say that Romney’s recent commitments to conservatism are not appreciated or are not genuine.
We’re just a bit nervous about how reliable Romney’s recent “conversion” to conservatism is, given his past.
Time to Put America Ahead of Personal Success
Rick/Newt/Ron should team up to stay in the race for the sole purpose of preventing Romney from acquiring the 1144 delegates he needs for nomination. In 1920, there was a brokered convention where the previous underdog candidate eventually won. There would still be hope of putting a true conservative in the White House. Even if a particular candidate is not that person, they will have contributed to the restoration of our great nation by contributing to the election of another conservative.
.
.
What Have You Got Against Mitt Romney?
Well, up front let us say that if Mitt Romney is nominated, we should all back him, campaign for him, and elect him as President of the United States.
Why? Because he has stated that he will oppose federal funding of abortion, that he will repeal ObamaCare, and that he will promote fiscal responsibility and limited government. As opposed to Obama, who has stated (and done) the complete opposite.
But given Mitt Ronmey’s past positions, I’m just a bit nervous about how reliable Romney’s recent “conversion” to conservatism is. In my mind, the Presidency should be given to someone we are very sure of. More discussion of Romney at Committment to Truth; Romney vs Santorum.
Why mention “social issues” before “economic issues?”
“Social issues” (morality) come before economic issues because common sense and wisdom tell us what God already knows: that social issues drive the economics of a nation, and are the springboard from which a stable economy develops. If you kill all your future citizens, your economy will not prosper. If you overspend on an inefficient blundering health care system which provides free abortion, contraception and sterilization, your economy will take a blow. If you deny citizens freedom of conscience, sweeping Catholic hospital closings may result. “Social issues” are the first domino with the power to take the entire economy down.
Judeo-Christian morality, on which conservatism and the Constitution of the United States are based, is a success manual given to us by a loving God, which provides the wisdom needed to avoid pitfalls both personal and national.
Why Would the Media or the Republican Establishment Want to Steer Us Towards Romney?
It’s pretty clear that Romney is much less conservative than the other Republican options. He has supported abortion in the past, as well as supported socialized medicine, which became a template for ObamaCare. Of course, the liberal media, as well as the liberal billionaires who fund the liberal media, would prefer Romney to the more conservative candidates, just in case Obama loses. Hard to imagine that billionaires like George Soros, who make a hobby of attempting to steer global values with their accumulated billions, would not at least cover their bets partially in both parties, Democrat and Republican.
As for the Republican establishment, there are some who are comfortably entrenched in the less-than-perfect Republican establishment and who fear the effect that too much change and too many cuts may have on their comfort. There are also those who fail to realize that the dynamics have changed in this election, that so many people are so much more committed and involved in this election. That a giant has awoken. They fear that they will lose voters in the middle if they offer a strong and principled candidate who has demonstrated a reliable track record of conservatism.
Where are We Headed?
Time, and American voters, particularly today in the pirmaries, will determine where we are headed.
It is my hope that we still have a chance to elect a conservative to defeat Obama at the end of the day.
If not, my efforts will shift to praying for Romney’s strength and his commitment to the Judeo-Christian values on which this nation was founded. Romney has not been vetted or even questioned on his support of Judeo-Christian values. See Committment to Truth; Romney vs Santorum .
If voters have already jumped on board with Mitt Romney tonight, it will be a (premature) victory for the media and for the Republican establishment. It will be a sad moment for those true conservatives who had hoped to return to the important “social issues” which determine the success of everything else.
May God bless and guide America!
May God bless and guide the Republican Primary winner!
President Barak Obama enlisted the Democrat swing votes for passing one of the largest and most far-reaching pieces of legislation in the history of the United States, ObamaCare, by assuring Democrat Congressman Bart Stupak and his Democrat allies in March of 2010, that federal funding of abortion (something opposed by 70% of America) would be barred from ObamaCare. As it turns out, the President of the United States was lying to his own party members, to manipulate them into passing legislation which the President misrepresented to them and to which the President later added autocratic mandates which wiped out all the promises he had made to Bart Stupak, to his allies, and to the American people.
ObamaCare was thus passed under false pretenses.
Stupak betrayed
Time was not allowed for anyone to read the (now 2,700 pages of) legislation; Congress was forced to vote on a bill they had not read.
And of course, not only abortion (abortifacient drugs), but also free contraception and free sterilization were later added to the services which taxpayers must fund under ObamaCare.
Religious exemptions were not given to those whose religious beliefs prohibited paying for abortion.
The ObamaCare budget was misrepresented; recent cost estimates are double those claimed in March 2010, and continue to grow.
The majority of states, as well as numerous organizations and individuals, have filed actions in federal court challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare.
ObamaCare alone, is sufficient reason to demand the removal of Barak Obama from the office of President of the United States.
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. – U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 4.
Felon
Definition of Misdemeanor
Dictionary.com: Misdemeanor:
1. A criminal offense defined as less serious than a felony. Examples of misdemeanors include traffic violations, disorderly conduct, trespass, reckless driving, public intoxication. Examples of felonies include perjury, check fraud, and tax evasion, in addition to treason, murder, assault, rape, and arson.
2. Any minor offense or transgression.
Barak Obama’s Offenses:
Lying to members of Congress during the creation of legislation (resembles perjury).
Interfering with the democratic process (resembles check fraud).
Defying the electorate in a democracy (resembles treason).
Lying to members of Congress to influence their votes on a piece of legislation which will affect the health and well-being of all the citizens of the United States, and inserting mandates into previously passed laws which violate the wishes (the votes) of 70% of the citizens in a democracy are more easily compared to felonies (perjury, check fraud, tax evasion) than to misdemeanors (traffic violations, trespass, reckless driving).
Either way, impeachable offenses.
The Most Recent Blitz of Crimes and Misdemeanors Committed by Barak Obama- just 4 weeks’ worth, due to space limitations:
Obama joking about the hot mic on which his treason was captured.
President Obama submitted such a pathetic budget that it was turned down by the House of Representatives by a completely unanimous vote of 414-0; a record vote of no-confidence in the President in which every single Democrat opposed the President — something which was not reported by many major media networks, which are liberal, biased, and not interested in reporting the truth. (Googling “Obama budget 414-0” turns up zero abc, nbc, msnbc, cnn reports. Wisconsin State Journal (Madison) buried the story with one sentence halfway through an article entitled “GOP-run House easily rejects bipartisan budget.”)
The President lied about the domestic oil supply, stating that the US has only 2% of the world’s supply of oil, when in actual fact the U.S. geological survey shows that the US may hold 25% of the world’s untapped, undiscovered oil supply.
Most of the above shockers were not reported by the “mainstream” (actually liberal) media.
For example, Obama’s budget was rejected unanimously by the House of Representatives, and the “mainstream” media did not deem this worthy of reporting. The “mainstream” media has, for the most part, become a radical arm of the Obama administration, which usually serves no purpose other than fanning Obama’s ego and promoting his reelection.
But today, the list of Obama’s recent crimes and misdemeanors has been topped by an item that even the uber-liberal New York Times and msnbc deemed worthy of reporting: the fact that Obama has been aggressively trying to circumvent Congress and to claim power for the Presidency– an executive unilateralism tactic which Obama himself had previously vehemently opposed.
Obama’s power grab and his disregard for the United States Constitution and for the will of the people has now become so noteworthy that even the liberal “mainstream” media has noticed.
Obama is either a madman, or a traitor. Either way, everyone is noticing.
Enough is Enough
Madman or Traitor?
Enough is Enough. The urgency of removing Barak Obama from Office of the President of the United States increases with each passing hour. He has reneged on virtually every promise he has made, he is discarding the Constitution which he had sworn to uphold and to protect, and he is rapidly steering us into a totalitarianism that makes the British rule of the 18th century pale by comparison. It bears repeating – Obama is either a madman, or a traitor.
Obama’s Approval Index has plunged from the initial +30 in 2009 to -19 today, according to Rasmussen reports. Today, 43% of Americans strongly disapprove of Obama (24% strongly approve), and 54% of Americans total disapprove (45% total approve).
Obama is on his way out. Despite the liberal media, the truth is getting through somehow, and Obama is on his way out.
Top Republican officials have decided they no longer want to wait around for an official nominee.
WHAT?!
Do radicals own the Republican Party, too?
What happened to the people’s vote?
With only 45% of the votes in, and the conservative candidate Santorum seriously gaining on the author of RomneyCare, Republican Officials are now issuing a mandate?
Rick Santorum Won Iowa on the Lowest Budget; He Will also Run the U.S. without Wasting Our Money
What to Do:
Vote for Rick Santorum, a conservative who still respects the Constitution and the will of the people.
There is still hope.
The people can still (just barely) recover control of this nation.
This is your day to call the shots, so you should.
O.K., if I had an ounce of self-restraint left before the Wisconsin primary coming up this Tuesday, this fortune cookie just eliminated it.
I’m going to call the shots.
What shots would I like to call today?
The 2012 Presidential election, of course.
Something I have little control over, so the results are bound to be amusing.
Calling the Shots
If you call the shots, you are in charge and you tell people what to do.
But calling the shots can also mean using a psychological trick: you “call the shot” in advance, forecasting a result, hoping to influence people’s choices, so that you encourage your favored result.
Calling the Shots in Advance
And that seems to be what the Republican Party is doing right now- calling the shots in advance.
The Republican establishment probably never planned that Mitt Romney would get serious competition from any of his running mates, and now that he’s getting some serious competition from Rick Santorum, they are scrambling to discourage that. They are bringing out the big guns, party leaders who are endorsing Mitt Romney prematurely, when Mitt has only 565 of the necessary 1144 delegates to win the primary.
Republicans have not bargained on an awakening of the American people, a scenario in which politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle would have to become more responsive to their electorates (and responsive to Tea Party supporters) than they previously had been. It’s a lot easier to sit in comfy chairs making small polite concessions to opponents followed by socializing after work, than to implement the big changes and make the big cuts that many Americans want in 2012, and which will cut some of the frills in Washington, too.
So many Republicans are rallying behind Mitt Romney prematurely, hoping to discourage Rick Santorum, and hoping that Rick Santorum will concede and quit. This would avoid a long, drawn-out primary, followed by a “brokered” or “contested” convention, during which the Republican establishment will have less control over the results, and the American people will have more control over the results.
Election 2008
Calling the shots in advance did not work so well 4 years ago, when everybody was forecasting that Hillary Clinton would be the nominee. Obama was a nobody. Yet we have President Nobody issuing mandates today, and the Supreme Court struggling to read the 2700 pages of his NobodyCares for ObamaCare. Calling the Shots in advance backfired on the Democrats in 2008.
Election 1920
President Harding
Then there was President Harding in 1920, who was a nobody with only 20% of the candidates compared with his opponent (General Leonard Wood) in the primary. If anybody were calling the shots in advance back then, he would have lost the primary. But what happened? Nobody won the initial race, and they went to a contested or brokered convention, where Harding got 70% of the votes and became President.
Election 2012
Now, for the first time since 1920, we could be heading for a contested or brokered convention again. Although Mitt Romney unquestionably has the most delegates at this time, it is not clear whether Romney will be able to reach the 1144 required to win.
Everybody wants to forecast events before they occur. I will join them.
Gallup Polls
Santorum is rapidly gaining on Romney: Gallup Polls indicate that Romney and Santorum are competing closely, and are alternating in the lead during the last two months.
Santorum plans to stay in the election. So, there could well be a brokered convention.
Santorum is a true conservative. Tea party likes him. Evangelicals like him.
Gallup also says that most Americans are conservative: 40% conservative, 35% moderate, and only 21% liberal. Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.
Romney is a question mark. Romney has a shifting record that does not guarantee his sticking to promises any better than Obama has done. He takes direction well and changes direction well. He would be better than Obama, but not better than Santorum.
too far for everyone. D’Souza has branded Obama as an anti-colonialist whose goal is to readjust America’s standing in the world – not in a positive direction. When the movie 2016 comes out this summer, Obama’s presidency will be over.
We will all celebrate the fact that our system of government did in fact protect the people of the United States as the Founding Fathers designed it to do.
If I am wrong, Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee.
If he beats Obama, since trying to prove why he is different from Obama on central issues like ObamaCare and Abortion will not be easy, he will do one of two things:
Fulfill all the promises he made during the election, unlike his predecessor Obama.
or
Change his mind and continue Obama’s policies, or something akin to them.
If you tell the truth you don’t have to remember anything.
Good advice for Presidential candidates this election year!
Truth can be, and has been analyzed both by me and by more noteworthy philosophers throughout millennia of history. Cultures have differing attitudes towards truth and toward its value.
Without embarking on a long philosophical discussion, suffice it to say that the foundations of European and United States governments rest on Christian principles; that Christ is the Word and the Truth; and that our innate common sense indicates the importance of truth during an election year. A vote is meaningless if it is cast for a lie.
Democracy does not work when candidates lie.
Election year compels us to question the trustworthiness, truthfulness, and dependability of political candidates.
Barak Obama
Our President Barak Obama is not famous for truthfulness. The issue under consideration by the Supreme Court today, the constitutionality of ObamaCare, is one prime example of Obama’s lack of commitment to truth. ObamaCare was passed only very narrowly, and only after Obama promised Stupak, who was holding out for the exclusion of abortion from ObamaCare, that abortion would be definitely be excluded from ObamaCare. 70% of Americans oppose federal funding of abortion, yet the Obama administration has included abortion in ObamaCare. That’s a pretty big lie, going back on a public promise, and railroading federal funding of something that half of America considers equivalent to murder and to the Holocaust, and something for which 70% of America opposes public funding.
Saying that 80% of Americans support higher taxes (actually 34% support)
Claiming his mother was denied health insurance (not true)
Pledging not to raise taxes on families making less than $250,000
Promising shovel-ready construction jobs with stimulus; later telling the NY Times there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.
Pledging that Americans would be able to keep their doctors under ObamaCare
Claiming he would not reward lobbyist with jobs
Making false statements about the involvement of foreign money in U.S. elections
Misrepresenting Arizona’s immigration law
Pledging transparency, then refusing 1/3 of Freedom of Information Act requests, failing to televise health-care negotiations on C-SPAN, and failing to wait 5 days so people could read the ObamaCare legislation online.
Violating his Oath of Office, by failing to protect the Constitution and ignoring the 10th amendment, which states that all powers, which the Constitution does not specifically allocate or prohibit, are reserved to the states (to the people). President Obama has claimed many powers for the Executive branch; primary example is ObamaCare.
With Obama, when it’s not lies, it’s disregard for and manipulation of the will of the American people, which is just as serious. In fact, today, President Obama was caught on a hot microphone betraying his electorate, asking Russian President Medvedev to put off discussions of nuclear defense reductions until after the November election, when Obama would have more “flexibility” (to disregard the will of the people). continue reading…
Syte Reitz grew up in Queens, New York, in a family of Lithuanian immigrants who fled Nazi and Soviet domination during World War II. Her education includes a Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and post-doctoral work at Princeton University. Syte left her job as an Assistant Professor at Oakland University, Michigan, to devote herself to raising her children, and ultimately homeschooled them through the end of high school. She is a member of Madison's Cathedral Parish.
Syte Reitz grew up in Queens, New York, in a family of Lithuanian immigrants who fled Nazi and Soviet domination during World War II. Her education includes a Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and post-doctoral work at Princeton University. Syte left her job as an Assistant Professor at Oakland University, Michigan, to devote herself to raising her children, and ultimately homeschooled them through the end of high school. She is a member of Madison's Cathedral Parish.
