blaen99

iTrader: (6)

You heard it here first, folks. This is a bit of an expanded post from the tidbit I gave in the current events thread. I've just seen the results in from Iowa, and it is....interesting.

Romney and Santorum tied for first, with Paul in a close second. However, it looks like Paul is going to get the most delegates from Iowa (98% or better chance), which means...

Paul WON IOWA

For those who are unaware: The delegates are what matter in the primaries. As an example, Obama got the democrat nomination not because of massive popular support, but because of delegate support (Yes, this is how he got the nomination over Hillary Clinton for those that remember that political drama). Paul's chances are looking extremely bright right now.

94mx5red

iTrader: (14)

How so? Are the delegates not bound by popular vote?

<< voting for Paul

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

No, some are not in the Republican primary. Some are. It's complex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republi...rimaries,_2012

This is an excellent source for information on Republicans and how their delegates work. Basically, Paul should, without seriously contrived scenarios, end up taking the most delegates from Iowa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_caucuses for more information about Iowa and how this happened.

hustler

iTrader: (6)

I like when people post things like "Ron Paul won" even though he didn't win. I'm going to start posting "I won TTB" when I get second.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

The fact that he got 22% is still pretty big. But let's see what happens when the current "candidate" that the news outlets have chosen to be in first wears off and we get the result from New Hampshire.


Yes, what I'm suggesting is that there's a new first place runner every week, and it's pretty much due to the news coverage that each gets. This week Santorum is popular, so therefore he's last on voter's minds and first in polls.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

I think it might be more accurate to think about "fastest lap time" versus "most points accrued." If I am understanding blaen's point, he is saying that Paul won the most number of voting delegates, despite losing in the main poll.

That is important because, at the end of the nomination process, it is the number of delegates that can dictate the final nominee. Said another way, if they were all set up like Iowa, you could place third in every poll but still take the nomination if you won the most delegates along the way.

Seefo

iTrader: (5)

how do the delegates determine who gets the vote? or who deteremines how many delegates does each candidate get?

bbundy

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/IA-R

Essentially it is a 3 way tie. But it is a tiered system of delegate selection, caucus, county convention, district convention, state convention, and national convention. Selected delegates at each phase are not bound by the popular vote they can vote however they want as yet to be decided. At the national convention all Iowa delegates will go to one candidate and which one that is will be skewed through the process by party politics and who gains popularity as other states have their primaries and caucuses etc might even be bribery involved yet. But at this point it is a 3 way toss up as to which way Iowa will go but most likely only the top three have a shot at Iowa for the Iowa delegation.

Bob

bbundy

At a caucus delegates are selected and proportioned out according to popular vote. Delegates aren’t bound to vote for the person they are elected to vote for. The number of delegates gets whittled down through a number of county, precinct, and, state conventions.

Some states use primaries instead of a caucus system in those states it’s more like popular vote winner takes all. Caucus states have a lot of room for party politics to override the popular vote in the nomination process. Honestly I don't think Paul has too many friends inside the republican party.

Bob

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

+1 to most of you guys explaining what a caucus is to Hustly, although from what I understand bbundy, Ron Paul has 7 "soft unpledged" delegates, to Romney and Santorum's 6 "soft unpledged".

http://conservativebyte.com/2012/01/...etly-won-iowa/ explains how.

hustler

iTrader: (6)

I cannot read. For the record, Santoum is Satan, 666.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

+1 to this, Hustly.

Santorum is a piece of Brainying santorum.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

are you suggesting I like him?

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

No. I have a "Filter" on my browser that replaces any curse words with Brainy ever since you guys started replacing any kind of curse with nothing.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

lol. we didn't reaplace all the shitty words.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Well, let's see: fuckity shitty shitting

(Edit) You replaced all the useful ones. :P

hustler

iTrader: (6)

You should work on being less annying and you'll be less of a virgin for the rest of your pathetic existence.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Sorry sweetie, my v-card was taken years ago. But if you are trying to flirt, it's appreciated!

bbundy

I think that is highly unlikely. Only 16 of Iowa’s 28 delegates can get elected starting from the caucus level the rest will be selected from party officials, at large party members, or special party friends. Most all the republican party establishment and insiders are too fascist to support Ron Paul.

Bob

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

It will be interesting to see how it plays out then. From what has been said, Paul focused a great deal of his strategy around that.