OK folks, let me know what you think. I’ve done a little delegate math, and here is what I’ve come up with as far as the GOP delegate count when we wake up on 3/16…plus or minus 20 delegates:
Trump 659
Cruz: 424
Rubio 191
Kasich 159
The figures assume a Trump win in FL, and a Kasich win in Ohio. I think candidates will pick up at least some delegates in the other states, which can be a huge headache to predict given the complicated rules each state uses.
Does this sound in the ballpark? Let me know…this is non-partisan, and if you think I’m off the mark, I won’t mind anyone saying so.
Also, if this shakes out, Trump will only be 53 per cent of the way to 1237. How difficult will it be for him to get there?
Again, if you have different math, by all means feel free to post it.
It will be a whole lot easier for him than for anyone else. Cruz would have to get something like 2/3 of the remaining delegates - is that even plausible?
There is no reason to assume other candidates will win delegates in Missouri. It’s a hardcore winner take most. So far it only seems plausible that Cruz and Trump will win delegates, with one winning the bulk if not all.
And in your scenario, Trump will have “only” 53% of whats needed but that’s with about 50% of delegates assigned so far. So he just needs to stay on track to do it.
I have absolutely no idea who will win what on Tuesday (today). Or in the General election.
During this election cycle;
The polls have be wrong.
The pollster’s have been wrong.
The pundit’s predictions have been wrong.
The media outlet’s predictions have been wrong.
Elvis…I agree with your premise…the question is, if the delegate count tomorrow is in the ballpark of what I posted, will Trump be able to avoid a brokered/contested election?
Carnal: I think it will be difficult because he is well behind Romney’s pace of 2012.
Somehow, Trump has to be broken down. There is huge money being directed at campaigns against him. GOP politicians are lining up against him. Conservative magazines are almost unanimously opposed to him. Comedians and talk show hosts are ridiculing him.
The problem is that so far Trump’s supporters appear to be completely impervious to reason or shame. So I don’t know whether a more concerted attack will help, or whether it might even make him more popular by cementing his ‘outsider’ credentials. So far, everything he’s done that I thought would damage him turned out to help him, so God only knows.
What has to stop is the insane amount of free media he’s getting. Trump is going a long way on name recognition and bluster, and he’s being helped by the media, which has been treating him with kid gloves because he’s good for ratings (and in the case of the mainstream, I believe it’s also because they’re helping him win because they think Hillary would beat him).
Also, could some of you on the left start telling people on your side to stop crossing over and voting strategically for him? There’s all kinds of evidence that he’s attracting far more than the right-wing base, and that if he picks up the entire blue-collar demographic he could easily wind up the next President. He’s cutting right into Hillary’s core support. So be awfully careful with your attempts to engineer this election by supporting Trump.
All that said, the only good news from here on out is that he’s facing more closed primaries than he’s faced before, and he does not do nearly as well in closed primaries (due to the lack of crossover Democrats who are now pro-Trump, plus the elimination of the strategic voters who think they are being clever).
I think the problem for Trump in this scenario is that regardless of what happens, Cruz and Kasich will stay in…again, assuming a win for Kasich in Ohio.
With that in mind, if Trump does not win Ohio, he would need to win a large percentage of the remaining delegates to get to 1273 and that’s tough if it’s a three man race. There are still proportional states out there after today, a point which I think the media is missing. In addition, as Sam Stone points out, there are more closed primaries to come, and Trump’s record in those is spotty at best.
Meanwhile, if memory serves, Romney had most of his opposition all but out of the way by April, and that doesn’t seem to be in the cards this year.
Trump is all but certain to be the delegate leader after all of the primaries and caucuses, but the question is, can he wrap it up by convention time…or will he have to do some cajoling in Cleveland?
But… can three candidates pool all of their delegates and decide on one non-Trump nominee, complete with VP runningmate, without driving each other crazy…?
That also assumes that their delegates would agree to vote for the “unified” candidate. A delegate is either pledged to a particular candidate, or is unpledged and can vote for anybody. Rubio can’t make his delegates vote for Cruz, and vice versa.
If Trump can’t win outright on the first ballot (where the delegates have pledged to vote for their candidate), then the second ballot is a whole new election. Anyone can put their name in the hat, and all delegates have a free vote. That’s my understanding, anyway.
The GOP simply cannot let Trump win. I cannot imagine a convention where he comes out as the Presidential candidate. It would be unprecedented to have a Presidential candidate who lacks the support of the entire party leadership, and who has major figures in his own party yelling that he’s a con man.
I hear lots of people saying that a brokered convention would destroy the Republicans. Well, guess what? A Trump candidacy would not just destroy the Republicans, it would beclown the party. And if Trump beats Hillary, the United States would look like a banana republic. So Trump has to be stopped.
If he goes into the convention with a majority, I could see a boycott of the convention by large numbers of current Senators, opinion leaders, ex-Presidents, etc., and a very rapid 3rd party formation with a Republican heavyweight as the candidate. Someone like Romney, or Paul Ryan, or Rick Perry, or some ex-general or major CEO to oppose Trump. The Republican party itself will then be the de-facto third party - a rump party with its leadership missing.
Looked at this way, it might be a good chance for the Republicans to rid itself of the nativist/protectionist wing and re-invent itself under a new name as a more moderate party socially, but with more fiscal conservatism.
Quit kidding yourself. That’s a meaningless amount of his support and there is plenty of reason to think there is Dem crossover voting for Trump opponents as much as for him.
And while I know you are happy with the idea of a Cruz nomination, there are plenty of lefties who simply are not.
It doesn’t matter if comedians and talk show hosts are against a GOP candidate. Neither type of entertainer can be held accountable for what they say and their comments are only cleverly edited comedy shtick. Ha, ha, ha. they so funny.
As for the rest, the GOP, former Dems, and independent voters seem to be for Trump. Voters vote and there are more of them then there are old GOP politicians lining up against him. Romney? That’s one vote.
And who still reads magazines?
The Democrat collective certainly wants Trump broken down before Hillary has to face him mano a mano.
The GOP is most certainly not for Trump. He managed to get one Senator to endorse him, but many more have gone to the extraordinary step of saying that they would not support him in any way. Many more are just sitting on the sidelines waiting to see what happens, but none of them are happy with a Trump candidacy.
This Democrat wants Trump to win the Republican nomination, at least. And, anecdotally, it seems to me like I know more Republicans who want him out then Dems, but it’s pretty even.
I used to. Now I’m worried enough about Trump energizing his followers who would otherwise be apathetic that what I want is a brokered convention which is as rancorous and divisive as possible. If the Trump followers end up feeling screwed by the Republican party, all the better for the nation.
Yeah, as much as i want Trump to win because it would be an easy win having the GOP screw Trump out of the nomination to hand it to a party stooge would be way way better.
It depends on the state - California, for example, requires pledged delegates to vote for their pledged candidate on the second ballot unless the candidate withdraws or did not get at least 10% of the votes on the first ballot. However, I’m pretty sure that enough states release candidates after one ballot that, for all intents and purposes, it would be an open vote.
However, I doubt that there would be a brokered convention, as any signs of serious division within the party would come across to the public as a sign that the party can’t even agree on a candidate, so why should he be elected. If nobody has a majority after the last primary (I’m pretty sure it’s 6/7, when California and New Jersey have theirs), the Republican Party bigwigs will get together with the candidates and possibly whatever unpledged delegates the Republicans have, and try to work something out.
Then again, even this may not matter, since it would be public information that nobody had a majority, and the nominee was chosen in a backroom somewhere, and the Democrats would make this quite clear at their convention the following week (there’s an unwritten rule that the party not in power goes first).