Wyoming is funky even by caucus standards. Wyoming splits its delegate allocation (29) into three piles. Three delegates are the party leader delegates who go unassigned. The next 14 are decided at the state convention (April 14) and, to my knowledge, are not tied to any voting across the state. The last 12 are decided by county caucuses that run from February 9 to 29. However, the process for allocating these county delegates is curious.
There are 23 counties in Wyoming. Twenty-two of these counties are paired up, while Laramie County (where Cheyenne is located) stands alone (electing both a delegate and an alternate). The pairing doesn't change but the order of the pairing does as it alternates every presidential election. The reason this is important is that in each county pairing, one county elects a delegate while the other county elects an alternate. Thus, you could have two different candidates represented in the delegate/alternate pairing depending on who wins each county.
Delegates will be chosen on March 10 at the county conventions but one would expect the delegate selection to mirror that of straw poll (unless the vote was very close and someone switched). As such, we should expect the delegate selection to reflect the county poll winners as follows:
1. Laramie - Santorum
2. Natrona - Santorum
3. Carbon - Santorum
4. Lincoln - Romney
5. Sublette - Romney
6. Park - Romney
7. Washakie - Romney
8. Big Horn - Romney
9. Johnson - Paul
10. Weston - Paul
11. Niobrara - Paul
12. Platte - Santorum
This gives Mr. Romney 5 delegates, Mr. Santorum 4 delegates, and Uncle Ron 3 delegates. These however are soft allocations as all 29 Wyoming delegates are to be officially "unbound." How unbound they actually are is open for debate.
If the alternate counties are considered, Mr. Santorum would jump to 7 delegates while Mr. Romney falls to 3 and Uncle Ron would get only 1. Sweetwater County will decide today but their vote will not be enough to overcome Mr. Romney's win in the straw poll. Whether any of this will matter at the state convention in April is anyone's guess.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Romney Strikes Back
To no one's surprise, Mitt Romney easily won Arizona (47-27). Far more interesting is that he also won Michigan. Mr. Romney bested Mr. Santorum in Michigan by a little over 30,000 votes or around 3% (41-38). As I predicted yesterday, a low turnout benefited Mr. Romney. Whether Democrat chicanery added anything is impossible to tell at this point.
The delegate split is 50-50 as Mr. Romney has taken seven congressional districts for 14 delegates and Mr. Santorum has taken seven congressional districts for 14 delegates. Mr. Romney's domination of the Detroit area bagged him the majority of delegates, despite Mr. Santorum taking a larger percentage of the geography of Michigan. The last two delegates are split even between the two men as they both topped the 15% vote threshold.
Looking at things as a whole, Mr. Romney has a hard total of 117 delegates with another 32 as soft additions from the caucuses. Mr. Santorum has 18 hard delegates but an additional soft 40 from the caucuses. Either way, Mr. Romney is the solid front runner at the moment and he should stem the narrative that he's in trouble for the moment. That might change depending on what happens on Super Tuesday but that's a good week away.
BTW, Wyoming wraps up their county caucuses today and it looks as though Mr. Romney is going to win that straw poll. However, the delegate allocation is quite different in that state so I'll cover Wyoming in a separate post.
The delegate split is 50-50 as Mr. Romney has taken seven congressional districts for 14 delegates and Mr. Santorum has taken seven congressional districts for 14 delegates. Mr. Romney's domination of the Detroit area bagged him the majority of delegates, despite Mr. Santorum taking a larger percentage of the geography of Michigan. The last two delegates are split even between the two men as they both topped the 15% vote threshold.
Looking at things as a whole, Mr. Romney has a hard total of 117 delegates with another 32 as soft additions from the caucuses. Mr. Santorum has 18 hard delegates but an additional soft 40 from the caucuses. Either way, Mr. Romney is the solid front runner at the moment and he should stem the narrative that he's in trouble for the moment. That might change depending on what happens on Super Tuesday but that's a good week away.
BTW, Wyoming wraps up their county caucuses today and it looks as though Mr. Romney is going to win that straw poll. However, the delegate allocation is quite different in that state so I'll cover Wyoming in a separate post.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Arizona and Michigan Today
After a long hiatus, we are actually going back to voting today. Arizona and Michigan vote today.
Arizona is a complete non-story. Mr. Romney has been polling about 15 points ahead and has the backing of the senior Senator (John McCain) and the governor (Jan Brewer). Polls close at 7 pm MST (9pm EST) and I would expect the networks to all call it immediately for Mr. Romney. What's more, since it is winner-take-all, there's very little interest in seeing how the remaining candidates did or where they won their votes outside of national data miners.
Michigan, on the other hand, will be far more interesting. Polling has shown Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum running neck and neck for the past week or so. Mr. Romney has been shown to have a slight lead but that is within the margin of error. He also has a lead in those that have voted early. However, Mr. Santorum has been shown to be the choice of those planning on voting today. He also is polling higher among those Democrats who plan to vote in the Republican contest today. One can read whatever motive you want into that bit of information.
Polls close at 8pm EST for most of the state. However, the UP has polls open until 8 pm CST (9:00 pm EST) and that will prevent the networks from calling anything until then. Michigan will allocate two delegates to the winner of each Congressional District and then Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum will split the remaining two delegates as they will be the two top vote-getters. I would suspect that Mr. Santorum will do better in the more rural areas while Mr. Romney wins in the thumb and around Detroit. That will probably lead to a balancing of the delegate allocation (since there are more CDs around Detroit to make up the delegate count). In the end, I wouldn't be surprised to see a near tie in delegate allocation (15-15). As far as the overall win, if turnout is low, Mr. Romney should win. If turnout is high, I think Mr. Santorum wins.
Since Mr. Romney will take all 29 of the Arizona delegates, he will have a pretty good night for himself with a takeaway of between 40 and 45 delegates while Mr. Santorum only takes between 15 and 20 delegates. But its the grab for the headlines that is important. If Mr. Santorum manages to win Michigan (even if it is by one vote), he grabs the story about taking it to Mr. Romney in his birth state. If he follows that up with a win in the Washington caucuses on Saturday (where polls currently have him ahead), Mr. Santorum will be well poised to build a strong narrative going into Super Tuesday.
From a delegate standpoint, Mr. Romney will stay safely ahead even through Super Tuesday, no matter what the results. I think it is unlikely that Mr. Santorum will even come close to overtaking Mr. Romney in the delegate count until the middle to end of May. If the two men stay close, it will make the delegate feasts of Texas (155) and California (172) the potential deciding factors. It will be interesting to see how things play out going forward.
Arizona is a complete non-story. Mr. Romney has been polling about 15 points ahead and has the backing of the senior Senator (John McCain) and the governor (Jan Brewer). Polls close at 7 pm MST (9pm EST) and I would expect the networks to all call it immediately for Mr. Romney. What's more, since it is winner-take-all, there's very little interest in seeing how the remaining candidates did or where they won their votes outside of national data miners.
Michigan, on the other hand, will be far more interesting. Polling has shown Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum running neck and neck for the past week or so. Mr. Romney has been shown to have a slight lead but that is within the margin of error. He also has a lead in those that have voted early. However, Mr. Santorum has been shown to be the choice of those planning on voting today. He also is polling higher among those Democrats who plan to vote in the Republican contest today. One can read whatever motive you want into that bit of information.
Polls close at 8pm EST for most of the state. However, the UP has polls open until 8 pm CST (9:00 pm EST) and that will prevent the networks from calling anything until then. Michigan will allocate two delegates to the winner of each Congressional District and then Mr. Romney and Mr. Santorum will split the remaining two delegates as they will be the two top vote-getters. I would suspect that Mr. Santorum will do better in the more rural areas while Mr. Romney wins in the thumb and around Detroit. That will probably lead to a balancing of the delegate allocation (since there are more CDs around Detroit to make up the delegate count). In the end, I wouldn't be surprised to see a near tie in delegate allocation (15-15). As far as the overall win, if turnout is low, Mr. Romney should win. If turnout is high, I think Mr. Santorum wins.
Since Mr. Romney will take all 29 of the Arizona delegates, he will have a pretty good night for himself with a takeaway of between 40 and 45 delegates while Mr. Santorum only takes between 15 and 20 delegates. But its the grab for the headlines that is important. If Mr. Santorum manages to win Michigan (even if it is by one vote), he grabs the story about taking it to Mr. Romney in his birth state. If he follows that up with a win in the Washington caucuses on Saturday (where polls currently have him ahead), Mr. Santorum will be well poised to build a strong narrative going into Super Tuesday.
From a delegate standpoint, Mr. Romney will stay safely ahead even through Super Tuesday, no matter what the results. I think it is unlikely that Mr. Santorum will even come close to overtaking Mr. Romney in the delegate count until the middle to end of May. If the two men stay close, it will make the delegate feasts of Texas (155) and California (172) the potential deciding factors. It will be interesting to see how things play out going forward.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Oscar Opinion
Last night were the Oscars. If I hadn't been playing a computer game while watching, I may have actually died of boredom. Fortunately, Mrs. X and I were watching on recorded delay so we were able to fast forward through any speech we didn't want to see (which was most of them). Probably the best opinion of the Oscars is reflected here:
Friday, February 24, 2012
Kill Da Wabbit!
Trivia question.
What's the only episode of Merrie Melodies staring Elmer Fudd and Bugs Bunny where Elmer successfully gets Bugs?
Answer: What's Opera Doc?
What's the only episode of Merrie Melodies staring Elmer Fudd and Bugs Bunny where Elmer successfully gets Bugs?
Answer: What's Opera Doc?
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Glee and the Funkyverse
Last night's episode of Glee was rather up and down in terms of depression and euphoria. There always seems to be some sort of karma going on where anything good that happens has to balanced out with something bad. No more was this more pronounced than in the cliffhanger ending (I won't spoil it in case you haven't seen it).
This balancing out is good for storylines, but it also tends to produce a universe that is just barely missing out on soul crushing doom. In that, I was reminded of the universe of Funky Winkerbean (affectionately referred to by folks such as Josh as the Funkyverse). Funky Winkerbean used to be a funny comic strip, but ever since the creator got and recovered from cancer, the whole strip has taken a very dark turn. All events that produce happiness are balanced out by things that result in soul crushing depression.
I think the characters of Glee and the Funkyverse would get along quite nicely and be able to relate on how glimpses of happiness are destroyed because the universe has decided that you must be punished for your existence.
This balancing out is good for storylines, but it also tends to produce a universe that is just barely missing out on soul crushing doom. In that, I was reminded of the universe of Funky Winkerbean (affectionately referred to by folks such as Josh as the Funkyverse). Funky Winkerbean used to be a funny comic strip, but ever since the creator got and recovered from cancer, the whole strip has taken a very dark turn. All events that produce happiness are balanced out by things that result in soul crushing depression.
I think the characters of Glee and the Funkyverse would get along quite nicely and be able to relate on how glimpses of happiness are destroyed because the universe has decided that you must be punished for your existence.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Delegate Breakdowns
Michigan and Arizona will go to the polls a week from tomorrow. One week after that is Super Tuesday (with the Washington Caucuses in between the two). I figured this would be a good time to do a quick cover on the delegate standings and what's at stake over the next two weeks.
To recap, Mitt Romney currently has the lead both in actual delegates and projected delegates. Mr. Romney has 73 delegates locked in at the moment. He is generally credited with the two delegates that Mr. Huntsman won in New Hampshire since Mr. Huntsman endorsed Mr. Romney. Then the caucuses give Mr. Romney an additional 32 delegates. These are unreliable numbers but the general thought is that Mr. Romney has about 107 delegates.
Rick Santorum holds second place, although this is based on estimates. Mr. Santorum only has 3 hard delegates (from Nevada). But he is credited with 40 caucus delegates. The first of these states to turn soft numbers into hard delegates is Colorado on April 14. So Mr. Santorum's numbers are very sketchy at the moment.
Newt sits in third place with 29 hard delegates and an estimate of an additional 13 caucus delegates for a soft total of 42. Uncle Ron rounds out the field with 8 hard delegates and 28 caucus delegates for a soft total of 36 delegates.
Now, on to the contests.
Michigan and Arizona come first on the 28th. Arizona has 29 delegates and they go to whomever wins the state, period. Michigan is a little more complicated. Michigan has 30 delegates. Two delegates will go to whomever wins the overall state (assuming that candidate amassed more than 15% of the total vote) and two delegates will be awarded to the candidate who wins each congressional districts (Michigan has 14 CDs).
Washington state follows on Saturday, March 3. Washington has 43 delegates, but it is a caucus. The "winner" will be declared based on the straw poll, but the actual delegates won't be selected until June 2.
Then comes Super Tuesday with 10 states casting ballots.
Alaska has 27 delegates. Three are "leader delegates" who go to the convention as unpledged. These are the Republican equivalent to the Democrat superdelegates that caused so much fuss four years ago. The remaining 24 delegates are to be divided evenly based on the voting percentage that each candidate receives. This is a caucus but the delegates at this level are bound to a candidate so it's more like Nevada than other caucuses.
Georgia is largest delegate allocation of the day with 76 delegates. Georgia gives out three delegates per congressional district (42 total). If a candidate gets over 50% in a CD, they get all 3 delegates. If not, the candidate who gets the largest total in each CD gets 2 delegates while the runner-up gets 1. 31 delegates are apportioned out based on the overall results among the candidates who get more than 20% of the vote. Three additional delegates are given to the overall winner of the primary.
Idaho has 32 delegates. This might be my favorite method for choosing delegates. There is one caucus per county. The caucuses meet and vote by secret ballot. They vote in successive rounds, dropping the candidate who receives the least amount of votes each round, until either one candidate receives 50% of the vote or there are only two candidates left. If a candidate gets over 50% of the vote at that caucus (which should happen at almost all of them) that candidate will get the entire share of delegates allotted to that county. Else, the vote is split between the two candidates. Things are then added up and the delegates are apportioned out, rounding to the nearest whole number. If one candidate ends up with more than 16 delegates (50%), that candidate gets all 32.
Massachusetts has 41 delegates and 38 are apportioned strictly proportionally for those candidates who get more than 20% of the vote. The last three delegates are the "leader delegates" and go unapportioned.
North Dakota has 28 delegates and they are given out proportionally. I believe these delegates are bound like Alaska and Nevada, but I can't find confirmation on that.
Ohio has 66 delegates. Three are the "leader delegates" and go unassigned. There are 3 delegates per congressional district (48 total) and the winner of each CD will get all 3 delegates. 15 additional delegates will be apportioned out to those candidates who get over 20% of the total vote unless one candidate gets 50% or more of the vote. If that happens, that candidate gets all 15 delegates.
Oklahoma has 43 delegates. Three are the "leader delegates" and go unassigned. There are 3 delegates per congressional district (15 total). These will be split 2:1 between the top two candidates in each CD. 25 additional delegates will be apportioned out to those candidates who get over 15% of the total vote unless one candidate gets 50% or more of the vote. If that happens, that candidate gets all 25 delegates.
Tennessee has 58 delegates. There are 3 delegates per congressional district (27 total). These will be split 2:1 between the top two candidates in each CD (unless one candidate gets 67% of the vote, then that candidate gets all 3 delegates). 14 additional delegates will be apportioned out to the candidates based on the overall vote assuming they get at least 20% of the total vote. 14 more delegates will be given out
by the Tennessee GOP executive committee on April 7. Three additional delegates are "leader delegates" and unassigned.
Vermont has 17 delegates. Three are "leader delegates" and unassigned. Three more will go to the overall winner. The remaining 11 delegates will give given out proportionately to those candidates who get more than 20% of the vote unless one candidate gets 50% of the vote. Then that candidate will get all 11 delegates.
Virginia has 49 delegates (nearly all of which will go to Mitt Romney as only he and Uncle Ron are on the ballot). Three are "leader delegates" and will be unassigned. Three delegates are assigned per congressional district (33 total) and the winner of each CD will receive all 3 delegates. The remaining 13 delegates will apportioned between the candidates who receive more than 15%; unless one candidate gets more than 50%, in which that candidate will receive all 13.
To recap, Mitt Romney currently has the lead both in actual delegates and projected delegates. Mr. Romney has 73 delegates locked in at the moment. He is generally credited with the two delegates that Mr. Huntsman won in New Hampshire since Mr. Huntsman endorsed Mr. Romney. Then the caucuses give Mr. Romney an additional 32 delegates. These are unreliable numbers but the general thought is that Mr. Romney has about 107 delegates.
Rick Santorum holds second place, although this is based on estimates. Mr. Santorum only has 3 hard delegates (from Nevada). But he is credited with 40 caucus delegates. The first of these states to turn soft numbers into hard delegates is Colorado on April 14. So Mr. Santorum's numbers are very sketchy at the moment.
Newt sits in third place with 29 hard delegates and an estimate of an additional 13 caucus delegates for a soft total of 42. Uncle Ron rounds out the field with 8 hard delegates and 28 caucus delegates for a soft total of 36 delegates.
Now, on to the contests.
Michigan and Arizona come first on the 28th. Arizona has 29 delegates and they go to whomever wins the state, period. Michigan is a little more complicated. Michigan has 30 delegates. Two delegates will go to whomever wins the overall state (assuming that candidate amassed more than 15% of the total vote) and two delegates will be awarded to the candidate who wins each congressional districts (Michigan has 14 CDs).
Washington state follows on Saturday, March 3. Washington has 43 delegates, but it is a caucus. The "winner" will be declared based on the straw poll, but the actual delegates won't be selected until June 2.
Then comes Super Tuesday with 10 states casting ballots.
Alaska has 27 delegates. Three are "leader delegates" who go to the convention as unpledged. These are the Republican equivalent to the Democrat superdelegates that caused so much fuss four years ago. The remaining 24 delegates are to be divided evenly based on the voting percentage that each candidate receives. This is a caucus but the delegates at this level are bound to a candidate so it's more like Nevada than other caucuses.
Georgia is largest delegate allocation of the day with 76 delegates. Georgia gives out three delegates per congressional district (42 total). If a candidate gets over 50% in a CD, they get all 3 delegates. If not, the candidate who gets the largest total in each CD gets 2 delegates while the runner-up gets 1. 31 delegates are apportioned out based on the overall results among the candidates who get more than 20% of the vote. Three additional delegates are given to the overall winner of the primary.
Idaho has 32 delegates. This might be my favorite method for choosing delegates. There is one caucus per county. The caucuses meet and vote by secret ballot. They vote in successive rounds, dropping the candidate who receives the least amount of votes each round, until either one candidate receives 50% of the vote or there are only two candidates left. If a candidate gets over 50% of the vote at that caucus (which should happen at almost all of them) that candidate will get the entire share of delegates allotted to that county. Else, the vote is split between the two candidates. Things are then added up and the delegates are apportioned out, rounding to the nearest whole number. If one candidate ends up with more than 16 delegates (50%), that candidate gets all 32.
Massachusetts has 41 delegates and 38 are apportioned strictly proportionally for those candidates who get more than 20% of the vote. The last three delegates are the "leader delegates" and go unapportioned.
North Dakota has 28 delegates and they are given out proportionally. I believe these delegates are bound like Alaska and Nevada, but I can't find confirmation on that.
Ohio has 66 delegates. Three are the "leader delegates" and go unassigned. There are 3 delegates per congressional district (48 total) and the winner of each CD will get all 3 delegates. 15 additional delegates will be apportioned out to those candidates who get over 20% of the total vote unless one candidate gets 50% or more of the vote. If that happens, that candidate gets all 15 delegates.
Oklahoma has 43 delegates. Three are the "leader delegates" and go unassigned. There are 3 delegates per congressional district (15 total). These will be split 2:1 between the top two candidates in each CD. 25 additional delegates will be apportioned out to those candidates who get over 15% of the total vote unless one candidate gets 50% or more of the vote. If that happens, that candidate gets all 25 delegates.
Tennessee has 58 delegates. There are 3 delegates per congressional district (27 total). These will be split 2:1 between the top two candidates in each CD (unless one candidate gets 67% of the vote, then that candidate gets all 3 delegates). 14 additional delegates will be apportioned out to the candidates based on the overall vote assuming they get at least 20% of the total vote. 14 more delegates will be given out
by the Tennessee GOP executive committee on April 7. Three additional delegates are "leader delegates" and unassigned.
Vermont has 17 delegates. Three are "leader delegates" and unassigned. Three more will go to the overall winner. The remaining 11 delegates will give given out proportionately to those candidates who get more than 20% of the vote unless one candidate gets 50% of the vote. Then that candidate will get all 11 delegates.
Virginia has 49 delegates (nearly all of which will go to Mitt Romney as only he and Uncle Ron are on the ballot). Three are "leader delegates" and will be unassigned. Three delegates are assigned per congressional district (33 total) and the winner of each CD will receive all 3 delegates. The remaining 13 delegates will apportioned between the candidates who receive more than 15%; unless one candidate gets more than 50%, in which that candidate will receive all 13.
Friday, February 17, 2012
What If: President Burr
Mrs. X likes to refer to these type of posts as my nerd posts. She's right, but I still like to do them.
In 1800, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr (DR) defeated John Adams and Charles Pinckney (F). In the days prior to the 12th Amendment, the electors cast 2 votes for President and the runner up was supposed to be Vice-President. This was how Jefferson (a man of the opposite party) managed to be John Adam's Vice-President. In the election of 1800, the electors were supposed to game the system so that Aaron Burr received one less vote than Thomas Jefferson. Someone screwed up though and Jefferson and Burr received the same number of electoral votes, throwing the election to the House to be decided.
Burr deferred to Jefferson but he refused to withdraw from the race and even stated openly that if the House somehow elected him, he would serve as President. The procedure in the House was that every state received one vote and that a majority of states were needed to produce a President. There were sixteen states then. Seven were controlled by the Democratic-Republican party, seven were controlled by the Federalist party and two were split down the middle. For 35 ballots, the DR states (and Georgia,although it was controlled by the Federalists) voted for Jefferson while the Federalists voted for Burr (mostly to spite Jefferson since Burr was also a DR, but still seen as less abhorrent than Jefferson), while the two spit states could cast no vote. Finally, on the 36th ballot, the Federalists in Maryland and Vermont opted to abstain from voting and the DR members shifted the two split states to Jefferson.
But what if they hadn't? What if several of the DR controlled states blinked first and voted for Burr to get the process over with? Jefferson would have been enraged (although he would never have shown it publicly). The state of Virginia would likely have put on some sort of public display of rage (they had been grousing about assembling the state militia to get things on). But Burr was fairly popular in the South outside of Virginia (his son-in-law was from South Carolina) and the elevation of James Madison (who met his wife Dolly though Burr and considered him a good friend) to the Secretary of State position. Burr's other cabinet positions would probably have not varied much from Jefferson's.
Once the political dust settled, President Burr's focus would have probably shifted almost immediately to Spain. In those days, Spain controlled Florida, the entire Gulf coast, and the Louisiana Territory in addition to Mexico. However, Spain's control of these territories was more though inertia rather than heavy military investment. Spain was at the end of it's empire days and France was pressing heavily on them in Europe (France would essentially conquer Spain that same year). Spain had allowed a limited amount of trade from the Western United States to pass down the Mississippi and through New Orleans but the economy of the West was stagnated unless free trade could be established through the port. What's more, the national debt was piling up and conquest and plunder of the rich Spanish lands was seen as an easy way to settle the debt.
Burr would likely have summoned the most prominent military leader to the White House at the time: General James Wilkinson, head of the US Army and a paid agent of Spain. Burr might have also invited one of the loudest agitators for war with Spain: Andrew Jackson (currently serving as judge on the Tennessee Supreme Court and Colonel in the state militia). Wilkinson would likely have flattered Burr but demurred against an actual war with Spain. In addition to having an agent of Spain at its head, the Army of the US was only about 6,000 men at the time. Jackson, on the other hand, would have likely been enthusiastic at the prospect and spoke eagerly about raising forces in Tennessee for invading Spanish Florida.
Burr would likely have planned out a two prong attack. Wilkinson would a western army (made of most of the forces of the United States) to seize St. Louis and then float down the Mississippi to take Natchez, Baton Rouge and finally New Orleans. Jackson might have been appointed to a US Army generalship and then tasked with raising an army from Tennessee, the Carolinas and Georgia to invade Spanish Florida and take St. Augustine. Then it would march West and take Pensacola and Mobile before linking with Wilkinson at New Orleans. From there it could be assessed whether to stop there or to push on either South to Veracruz or overland to Santa Fe.
Madison would likely have insisted that they try to negotiate with Spain first (this would also give Jackson and Wilkinson time to build and train their armies). Burr would likely have agreed and postponed invasion until Spring of 1802, while telling Madison that he was free to use the threat of war to push Spain into a deal. Spain, under threat of French claims to Louisiana, would likely have told the Americans to piss off. Spain may have even been hoping that an American invasion of Louisiana might prompt France to aid Spain in an American war to protect the territory that France was claiming. This is unlikely as France viewed the territory in the same light as Spain, large and expensive to garrison while not yielding much to the treasury.
With the failure of negotiations, the Americans would likely have gone ahead with the war and invaded Spanish territory in 1802. Wilkinson would likely have dallied and done very little beyond the occupation of St. Louis without significant prompting. He likely would have made complaints about logistics or supplies or the state of his men. Anything that would have slowed him and prevented him from moving against Natchez.
Jackson would likely have had no such limitations. The population of Spanish Florida was still very small and St. Augustine would likely have fallen very quickly. Needing very little garrison, Jackson would have likely marched overland to Pensacola in short order. West Florida was more restive than East Florida as the British settlers resented Spanish rule. Upon marching into East Florida, Jackson would likely have received support from the locals which would have made taking Pensacola and Mobile significantly easier.
At this point, things get tricky. Jackson might have become aware at this point that Wilkinson had not moved from St. Louis. Rather than waste men and material marching overland up to Natchez, Jackson would likely have enlisted the support of the locals in West Florida and marched straight for New Orleans. New Orleans would have had a significant garrison as well as some artillery. However, there would have likely been confusion as to whether the Spanish or French actually owned the city at that time. Dissension over control would likely have weakened the defenders. Things might have been bad enough that elements of the city would have simply invited Jackson in as a liberator from either side.
With these captures, Wilkinson would probably have given up on his Spanish masters and set down to take Natchez and Baton Rouge. If New Orleans had already fallen by this point, both cities might simply have surrendered rather than risk any loss of blood. Negotiations would have been reopened with Spain and France. Likely, the French would have said good riddance and just asked for some monetary compensation, likely in terms not that different from the actual Louisiana Purchase. Burr would also have probably instructed Madison to push for ceding of all Spanish territory North of the Rio Grande. Spain would have objected harshly but with an American army of likely over 10,000 men ready to march on either Santa Fe or even go down to Mexico City, there was little they could do.
Negotiations would have continued into 1803 but by then the United States would have been in control of nearly all the continental territory that it currently has. Only the disputed regions in the North with British Canada would have remained to be settled.
With all these feathers in his cap, Burr would likely stood for and easily won reelection in 1804. Although he would have burned in humiliation, Jefferson would probably have not bothered to challenge Burr for the party nomination off such a significant victory. On the Federalist side, Alexander Hamilton would likely be operating heavily on the sidelines to try and undermine Burr. He likely would have thwarted Burr in some aspects, although not directly since Hamilton was out of the government and barred from running for the Presidency himself. However, because of the prominence of the position and because of the work involved, it is unlikely that Burr would have had a chance to engage in a duel with Hamilton (at least until after his term as President was over).
One other thing that might have changed historically is the War of 1812. British impressment and seizure of American ships was becoming more and more of an issue. In 1807, the USS Chesapeake was fired upon by the HMS Leopard when she failed to submit to being searched for British deserters. If Aaron Burr were President at the time (and especially if he was being harried by Hamilton's Federalist Party) Burr might have mobilized General Jackson and his army (which would have still be seeing to the establishment of American sovereignty over the vast reaches of former Spanish territory) to march North and lay waste to Detroit and other parts of Canada in retaliation for British attacks on American interests.
Because the British were so heavily tied down with Napoleon in Europe, the British would probably never have been able to do more than the same modified defensive strategy they did in the first two years of the War of 1812. It is not impossible that the British might have simply settled things with a minor treaty in 1808 or 1809 simply to get the Americans off their back while they were fully invested in Europe. It is unlikely that the Americans would have gained more than pushing out British influence from Michigan (although some areas of Ontario might have been taken as well), especially if the British settled quickly. But the seeds would probably have been sown for a subsequent war after 1814 when the British were free to exercise their full strength.
Unless things were going badly with the war with Britain, Burr probably wouldn't have stood for the Presidency in 1808. Assuming the friendship with Madison had stood the test of the Presidency, Burr would probably have recommended that he be nominated in 1808.
The long term effects of a Burr presidency in this line are harder to surmise. The taking of Spanish territory north of the Rio Grande before the formation of Mexico would mean no war with Mexico in 1844. Indeed, Mexico might have declared her independence even earlier than 1810, once it was shown that the Spanish were impotent against a determined force. Mexico might have sparred a bit with the United States over the territory taken, but since it would have come directly from Spain and not from Mexico (and was very lightly populated outside of Santa Fe and a few California missions), Mexico would probably never bothered to risk all out war over territory that she had very little claim to either.
Settlement of the West would have probably continued at about the same pace. California might have been settled a bit sooner and that might have lead to the discovery of gold sooner and a stronger westward migration as much as 20 years earlier than the historical model.
Because there would likely not have been a significantly decisive engagement in the war between the United States and Britain (such as there was in the Battle of New Orleans) Britain and the United States would likely have renewed hostilities at some future date. The US would likely be feeling pompous and Britain would likely be feeling a strong disdain for the United States' uppity nature. Likely the conflict would have come over Oregon territory. In this case, the fight might have actually come in "54'40" or Fight."
The largest issue would have been slavery. The southern states would have pushed for slavery in all of the new territories but the same objections that were raised in the 1840's would probably be raised earlier. Burr was a known opponent of slavery (although he kept a few slaves himself) and would have respected the argument that the Constitution kept slavery out of the Northwest Territory. In the end, a form of Missouri compromise would likely have been settled on. But the settling of the American West earlier than in the historical model would have likely brought conflict and civil war sooner than 1860.
In 1800, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr (DR) defeated John Adams and Charles Pinckney (F). In the days prior to the 12th Amendment, the electors cast 2 votes for President and the runner up was supposed to be Vice-President. This was how Jefferson (a man of the opposite party) managed to be John Adam's Vice-President. In the election of 1800, the electors were supposed to game the system so that Aaron Burr received one less vote than Thomas Jefferson. Someone screwed up though and Jefferson and Burr received the same number of electoral votes, throwing the election to the House to be decided.
Burr deferred to Jefferson but he refused to withdraw from the race and even stated openly that if the House somehow elected him, he would serve as President. The procedure in the House was that every state received one vote and that a majority of states were needed to produce a President. There were sixteen states then. Seven were controlled by the Democratic-Republican party, seven were controlled by the Federalist party and two were split down the middle. For 35 ballots, the DR states (and Georgia,although it was controlled by the Federalists) voted for Jefferson while the Federalists voted for Burr (mostly to spite Jefferson since Burr was also a DR, but still seen as less abhorrent than Jefferson), while the two spit states could cast no vote. Finally, on the 36th ballot, the Federalists in Maryland and Vermont opted to abstain from voting and the DR members shifted the two split states to Jefferson.
But what if they hadn't? What if several of the DR controlled states blinked first and voted for Burr to get the process over with? Jefferson would have been enraged (although he would never have shown it publicly). The state of Virginia would likely have put on some sort of public display of rage (they had been grousing about assembling the state militia to get things on). But Burr was fairly popular in the South outside of Virginia (his son-in-law was from South Carolina) and the elevation of James Madison (who met his wife Dolly though Burr and considered him a good friend) to the Secretary of State position. Burr's other cabinet positions would probably have not varied much from Jefferson's.
Once the political dust settled, President Burr's focus would have probably shifted almost immediately to Spain. In those days, Spain controlled Florida, the entire Gulf coast, and the Louisiana Territory in addition to Mexico. However, Spain's control of these territories was more though inertia rather than heavy military investment. Spain was at the end of it's empire days and France was pressing heavily on them in Europe (France would essentially conquer Spain that same year). Spain had allowed a limited amount of trade from the Western United States to pass down the Mississippi and through New Orleans but the economy of the West was stagnated unless free trade could be established through the port. What's more, the national debt was piling up and conquest and plunder of the rich Spanish lands was seen as an easy way to settle the debt.
Burr would likely have summoned the most prominent military leader to the White House at the time: General James Wilkinson, head of the US Army and a paid agent of Spain. Burr might have also invited one of the loudest agitators for war with Spain: Andrew Jackson (currently serving as judge on the Tennessee Supreme Court and Colonel in the state militia). Wilkinson would likely have flattered Burr but demurred against an actual war with Spain. In addition to having an agent of Spain at its head, the Army of the US was only about 6,000 men at the time. Jackson, on the other hand, would have likely been enthusiastic at the prospect and spoke eagerly about raising forces in Tennessee for invading Spanish Florida.
Burr would likely have planned out a two prong attack. Wilkinson would a western army (made of most of the forces of the United States) to seize St. Louis and then float down the Mississippi to take Natchez, Baton Rouge and finally New Orleans. Jackson might have been appointed to a US Army generalship and then tasked with raising an army from Tennessee, the Carolinas and Georgia to invade Spanish Florida and take St. Augustine. Then it would march West and take Pensacola and Mobile before linking with Wilkinson at New Orleans. From there it could be assessed whether to stop there or to push on either South to Veracruz or overland to Santa Fe.
Madison would likely have insisted that they try to negotiate with Spain first (this would also give Jackson and Wilkinson time to build and train their armies). Burr would likely have agreed and postponed invasion until Spring of 1802, while telling Madison that he was free to use the threat of war to push Spain into a deal. Spain, under threat of French claims to Louisiana, would likely have told the Americans to piss off. Spain may have even been hoping that an American invasion of Louisiana might prompt France to aid Spain in an American war to protect the territory that France was claiming. This is unlikely as France viewed the territory in the same light as Spain, large and expensive to garrison while not yielding much to the treasury.
With the failure of negotiations, the Americans would likely have gone ahead with the war and invaded Spanish territory in 1802. Wilkinson would likely have dallied and done very little beyond the occupation of St. Louis without significant prompting. He likely would have made complaints about logistics or supplies or the state of his men. Anything that would have slowed him and prevented him from moving against Natchez.
Jackson would likely have had no such limitations. The population of Spanish Florida was still very small and St. Augustine would likely have fallen very quickly. Needing very little garrison, Jackson would have likely marched overland to Pensacola in short order. West Florida was more restive than East Florida as the British settlers resented Spanish rule. Upon marching into East Florida, Jackson would likely have received support from the locals which would have made taking Pensacola and Mobile significantly easier.
At this point, things get tricky. Jackson might have become aware at this point that Wilkinson had not moved from St. Louis. Rather than waste men and material marching overland up to Natchez, Jackson would likely have enlisted the support of the locals in West Florida and marched straight for New Orleans. New Orleans would have had a significant garrison as well as some artillery. However, there would have likely been confusion as to whether the Spanish or French actually owned the city at that time. Dissension over control would likely have weakened the defenders. Things might have been bad enough that elements of the city would have simply invited Jackson in as a liberator from either side.
With these captures, Wilkinson would probably have given up on his Spanish masters and set down to take Natchez and Baton Rouge. If New Orleans had already fallen by this point, both cities might simply have surrendered rather than risk any loss of blood. Negotiations would have been reopened with Spain and France. Likely, the French would have said good riddance and just asked for some monetary compensation, likely in terms not that different from the actual Louisiana Purchase. Burr would also have probably instructed Madison to push for ceding of all Spanish territory North of the Rio Grande. Spain would have objected harshly but with an American army of likely over 10,000 men ready to march on either Santa Fe or even go down to Mexico City, there was little they could do.
Negotiations would have continued into 1803 but by then the United States would have been in control of nearly all the continental territory that it currently has. Only the disputed regions in the North with British Canada would have remained to be settled.
With all these feathers in his cap, Burr would likely stood for and easily won reelection in 1804. Although he would have burned in humiliation, Jefferson would probably have not bothered to challenge Burr for the party nomination off such a significant victory. On the Federalist side, Alexander Hamilton would likely be operating heavily on the sidelines to try and undermine Burr. He likely would have thwarted Burr in some aspects, although not directly since Hamilton was out of the government and barred from running for the Presidency himself. However, because of the prominence of the position and because of the work involved, it is unlikely that Burr would have had a chance to engage in a duel with Hamilton (at least until after his term as President was over).
One other thing that might have changed historically is the War of 1812. British impressment and seizure of American ships was becoming more and more of an issue. In 1807, the USS Chesapeake was fired upon by the HMS Leopard when she failed to submit to being searched for British deserters. If Aaron Burr were President at the time (and especially if he was being harried by Hamilton's Federalist Party) Burr might have mobilized General Jackson and his army (which would have still be seeing to the establishment of American sovereignty over the vast reaches of former Spanish territory) to march North and lay waste to Detroit and other parts of Canada in retaliation for British attacks on American interests.
Because the British were so heavily tied down with Napoleon in Europe, the British would probably never have been able to do more than the same modified defensive strategy they did in the first two years of the War of 1812. It is not impossible that the British might have simply settled things with a minor treaty in 1808 or 1809 simply to get the Americans off their back while they were fully invested in Europe. It is unlikely that the Americans would have gained more than pushing out British influence from Michigan (although some areas of Ontario might have been taken as well), especially if the British settled quickly. But the seeds would probably have been sown for a subsequent war after 1814 when the British were free to exercise their full strength.
Unless things were going badly with the war with Britain, Burr probably wouldn't have stood for the Presidency in 1808. Assuming the friendship with Madison had stood the test of the Presidency, Burr would probably have recommended that he be nominated in 1808.
The long term effects of a Burr presidency in this line are harder to surmise. The taking of Spanish territory north of the Rio Grande before the formation of Mexico would mean no war with Mexico in 1844. Indeed, Mexico might have declared her independence even earlier than 1810, once it was shown that the Spanish were impotent against a determined force. Mexico might have sparred a bit with the United States over the territory taken, but since it would have come directly from Spain and not from Mexico (and was very lightly populated outside of Santa Fe and a few California missions), Mexico would probably never bothered to risk all out war over territory that she had very little claim to either.
Settlement of the West would have probably continued at about the same pace. California might have been settled a bit sooner and that might have lead to the discovery of gold sooner and a stronger westward migration as much as 20 years earlier than the historical model.
Because there would likely not have been a significantly decisive engagement in the war between the United States and Britain (such as there was in the Battle of New Orleans) Britain and the United States would likely have renewed hostilities at some future date. The US would likely be feeling pompous and Britain would likely be feeling a strong disdain for the United States' uppity nature. Likely the conflict would have come over Oregon territory. In this case, the fight might have actually come in "54'40" or Fight."
The largest issue would have been slavery. The southern states would have pushed for slavery in all of the new territories but the same objections that were raised in the 1840's would probably be raised earlier. Burr was a known opponent of slavery (although he kept a few slaves himself) and would have respected the argument that the Constitution kept slavery out of the Northwest Territory. In the end, a form of Missouri compromise would likely have been settled on. But the settling of the American West earlier than in the historical model would have likely brought conflict and civil war sooner than 1860.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Reverse Operation Chaos
Back in 2008 Republicans, spurred on by Conservative Talk Radio, went to the polls registered as independents or Democrats and voted for Hillary Clinton in an effort to keep her in the race. This was known as Operation Chaos and the theory was that the two Democrats would tear each other down and expose weaknesses in whichever candidate won that Mr. McCain could exploit.
Overall it had mixed results. Mr. Obama did get more exposed than he probably would have had he finished off Ms. Clinton earlier in the season. But the process also toughened him and what weakness were exposed were not exploited by Mr. McCain, who seemed very reluctant to attack Mr. Obama at all.
Four years later, the shoe appears to be on the other foot. Liberal blog Daily Kos, has announced that they will engage in their own version of Operation Chaos (Operation Hilarity) but supporting Mr. Santorum in Michigan and other states where the process is open or allows same-day registration.
Their aims are obviously the same as those of Republicans four years ago. The perception being that either Mr. Romney will win but be made weaker by the long primary fight and easier for Mr. Obama to beat or that Mr. Santorum will actually beat Mr. Romney and that he is an easier candidate to defeat for Mr. Obama.
The first place this will be felt is Michigan. Michigan is a close primary but voter affiliation may be easily changed. Michigan is normally a strong Democratic state with its large union population. Any shift of these voters (no matter how small) could tip the balance rather significantly to Mr. Santorum. Arizona, on the other hand, is a closed primary with no easy method of changing voter affiliation. So it possible that if Mr. Santorum does win Michigan in a week and a half, he may have the Democrats to thank for it.
Overall it had mixed results. Mr. Obama did get more exposed than he probably would have had he finished off Ms. Clinton earlier in the season. But the process also toughened him and what weakness were exposed were not exploited by Mr. McCain, who seemed very reluctant to attack Mr. Obama at all.
Four years later, the shoe appears to be on the other foot. Liberal blog Daily Kos, has announced that they will engage in their own version of Operation Chaos (Operation Hilarity) but supporting Mr. Santorum in Michigan and other states where the process is open or allows same-day registration.
Their aims are obviously the same as those of Republicans four years ago. The perception being that either Mr. Romney will win but be made weaker by the long primary fight and easier for Mr. Obama to beat or that Mr. Santorum will actually beat Mr. Romney and that he is an easier candidate to defeat for Mr. Obama.
The first place this will be felt is Michigan. Michigan is a close primary but voter affiliation may be easily changed. Michigan is normally a strong Democratic state with its large union population. Any shift of these voters (no matter how small) could tip the balance rather significantly to Mr. Santorum. Arizona, on the other hand, is a closed primary with no easy method of changing voter affiliation. So it possible that if Mr. Santorum does win Michigan in a week and a half, he may have the Democrats to thank for it.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Sam the Eagle as Kurt Cobain
Some would think this sacrilege, but I like this version better than the original:
For the record, the members of the quartet are Sam the Eagle, Rowlf the Dog, Link Hogthrob and Beaker
For the record, the members of the quartet are Sam the Eagle, Rowlf the Dog, Link Hogthrob and Beaker
Monday, February 13, 2012
Romney Wins Maine... Sort of
On Saturday, it was announced that Mr. Romney won the Maine Straw Poll. This is being treated by the Romney camp and his supporters as a halt to his slide and a rise back to the top of the heap. It might be in terms of perception, but the actual results (meaning delegate count) from Maine might be quite different.
The Maine problem stems from two sources. First is that it's a caucus state and as with Iowa, Minnesota, and Colorado, no actual delegates are awarded based on this results. Only delegates to the state convention (May 5) are elected and the actual candidate delegates will emerge from that.
Second is that Maine's caucuses are not finished yet. Unlike every other state caucus which meets on one day or even one weekend, Maine's caucuses meet over six weeks. The first caucus met on Jan. 29 and the last will meet on March 3. However, most of the caucuses were scheduled to be done on Feb. 11 so the Maine GOP elected to call an end to the straw poll on this day and the "winner" would be announced based on these numbers. Even this wouldn't have been too bad if Washington county hadn't decided to postpone it's caucus meetings until the 18th due to weather. This dropped the completion percentage from the 95% expected, to 84%. What's more, Uncle Ron has a lot of support in Washington County so the lead of 194 votes (out of 5585 cast) that Mr. Romney has will certainly shrink.
We won't know until May what the real results are. At the moment, Mr. Romney is simply taking the ball and running with the victory, which is the correct thing to do. Public perception is 9/10th of the game as far as the later races are concerned and that's all the matters to someone shooting for the actual nomination. Uncle Ron is just hoping to get enough delegates to influence the party platform and get a little respect.
This should be a pretty dead week from a political standpoint. The next debate is the following week and the next races are not until the end of February. So we have very little except traditional campaigning and fundraising.
The Maine problem stems from two sources. First is that it's a caucus state and as with Iowa, Minnesota, and Colorado, no actual delegates are awarded based on this results. Only delegates to the state convention (May 5) are elected and the actual candidate delegates will emerge from that.
Second is that Maine's caucuses are not finished yet. Unlike every other state caucus which meets on one day or even one weekend, Maine's caucuses meet over six weeks. The first caucus met on Jan. 29 and the last will meet on March 3. However, most of the caucuses were scheduled to be done on Feb. 11 so the Maine GOP elected to call an end to the straw poll on this day and the "winner" would be announced based on these numbers. Even this wouldn't have been too bad if Washington county hadn't decided to postpone it's caucus meetings until the 18th due to weather. This dropped the completion percentage from the 95% expected, to 84%. What's more, Uncle Ron has a lot of support in Washington County so the lead of 194 votes (out of 5585 cast) that Mr. Romney has will certainly shrink.
We won't know until May what the real results are. At the moment, Mr. Romney is simply taking the ball and running with the victory, which is the correct thing to do. Public perception is 9/10th of the game as far as the later races are concerned and that's all the matters to someone shooting for the actual nomination. Uncle Ron is just hoping to get enough delegates to influence the party platform and get a little respect.
This should be a pretty dead week from a political standpoint. The next debate is the following week and the next races are not until the end of February. So we have very little except traditional campaigning and fundraising.
Friday, February 10, 2012
The Boat Rower's Song
Mrs. X and I have been reading Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to child X1.0. We actually just finished the dismissal of Violet last night. But reading the book always makes me think of the Boat Rower's Song. Very creepy and I can't help but sing it every once in a while when I'm either trying to freak someone out or seeing something freaky myself.
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Narratives
Much hooping and hollering has been going on lately over Mr. Santorum's wins on Tuesday (despite not actually earning any delegates out of it). The biggest reason for this is the fact that there's not going to be any story to fill the media vacuum for a couple of weeks. Yes, we have the Maine caucuses on Saturday, but Maine is one small state and is expected to be only a contest between Mr. Romney and Uncle Ron.
Regardless of what happens in Maine, there is a two-week lull where nothing happens except campaigning and fundraising until we get to the debate in Phoenix on Feb. 22. By that point, I'm sure the talking heads will be so starved for something new that they will take anything they can get out of the debate and make hay out of it. But until that time, the void will be filled with endless chatter of how Mr. Romney is not quite so inevitible now or whether Newt's southern firewall will hold, et cetera.
Speaking of Newt's Southern firewall, that raises an interesting question about how long he may choose to stay in the race. I think it unlikely that Newt will do well in Michigan, Arizona, or Washington so that will leave him desperate for any kind of win come Super Tuesday. There are three Southern states voting on Super Tuesday: Georgia, Virginia, and Tennessee.
Unfortunately, both Newt and Mr. Santorum made errors in their filing and will not be on the ballot in Virginia. I don't know if Virginia has a write-in policy but it seems likely that this kind of mistake will allow Mr. Romney to make nearly a clean sweep of the state.
Georgia, being Newt's home state, will go heavily for him so it's effects will be rather diminished (even though it gives the most delegates of any state on Super Tuesday (76). That leaves Tennessee (and maybe Ohio) to help Newt keep the narrative alive that he is still a viable candidate. If Newt loses Tennessee, especially if it's to Mr. Santorum, then he will probably receive even more pressure to drop out and make it a two-man race.
Of course, anything could happen. It could be revealed in the news tomorrow that Mr. Santorum serves barbecued puppies for Sunday dinner every week and that would both change the narrative and give Newt a third riser from the ashes. It is still early and I wouldn't want to denigrate any one's chances (except Uncle Ron who has no chance).
Regardless of what happens in Maine, there is a two-week lull where nothing happens except campaigning and fundraising until we get to the debate in Phoenix on Feb. 22. By that point, I'm sure the talking heads will be so starved for something new that they will take anything they can get out of the debate and make hay out of it. But until that time, the void will be filled with endless chatter of how Mr. Romney is not quite so inevitible now or whether Newt's southern firewall will hold, et cetera.
Speaking of Newt's Southern firewall, that raises an interesting question about how long he may choose to stay in the race. I think it unlikely that Newt will do well in Michigan, Arizona, or Washington so that will leave him desperate for any kind of win come Super Tuesday. There are three Southern states voting on Super Tuesday: Georgia, Virginia, and Tennessee.
Unfortunately, both Newt and Mr. Santorum made errors in their filing and will not be on the ballot in Virginia. I don't know if Virginia has a write-in policy but it seems likely that this kind of mistake will allow Mr. Romney to make nearly a clean sweep of the state.
Georgia, being Newt's home state, will go heavily for him so it's effects will be rather diminished (even though it gives the most delegates of any state on Super Tuesday (76). That leaves Tennessee (and maybe Ohio) to help Newt keep the narrative alive that he is still a viable candidate. If Newt loses Tennessee, especially if it's to Mr. Santorum, then he will probably receive even more pressure to drop out and make it a two-man race.
Of course, anything could happen. It could be revealed in the news tomorrow that Mr. Santorum serves barbecued puppies for Sunday dinner every week and that would both change the narrative and give Newt a third riser from the ashes. It is still early and I wouldn't want to denigrate any one's chances (except Uncle Ron who has no chance).
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Santorum Sweep
In a bit of a surprise, Rick Santorum swept the three contests last night. Missouri was not a surprise. Mr. Santorum was the only one that bothered to visit the state and Mr. Gingrich had not made the ballot, rendering it a genuine Romney vs. not-Romney race.
Minnesota was also not much of a surprise as polling had Mr. Santorum up in the state (33-24 over Mr. Romney). However his margin was a bit of a surprise (45-27-17-11 as of now) as well as who came in second: Ron Paul. I know caucuses can get skewed but a margin that dramatic is slightly eyebrow raising.
But the big surprise came in Colorado. Mr. Romney was leading in the polls by 10 (37-27) and now it appears that he has lost by 5. Interestingly, the percentage of Romney support stayed about the same (37 vs. 35) but Mr. Santorum surged from 27 points to 40 points. This suggests he took many of the undecideds as well as poaching from other candidates. Again though, it is a caucus and weird things happen at caucuses. Weather may also have been a factor as the heavy snow around Denver may have kept a number of more tepid Romney voters from going to the caucuses, giving Mr. Santorum's wins in the outer counties more weight.
The overall result tonight doesn't mean much. The base estimates from Colorado are that Mr. Santorum and Mr. Romney will essentially split the delegates (13-12) with the rest being passed out to Newt (4) and Uncle Ron (4). The same is done in Minnesota, giving Mr. Santorum 17 delegates to Uncle Ron's 10, with 6 to Mr. Romney and 4 to Newt. Missouri, of course, is not giving out anything until March.
A three state sweep however will give a boost to Mr. Santorum's fundraising and set up some interesting commentary leading up to the primaries in Michigan and Arizona (Maine does come up next but that's a two man race between Mr. Romney and Uncle Ron and those delegates aren't selected until May as well). Even though history has been on his side, Mr. Romney may start to see some hits in the polls in Michigan. I'm not sure about Arizona at the moment, although I know Mr. Romney is currently ahead there.
Probably the biggest question of the night won't be answered until Super Tuesday. Although he finished badly, I see no reason for Newt to drop out until at least after Super Tuesday. Newt is going to win Georgia as it is his home state. Newt and Mr. Santorum failed to get enough signatures to appear on the Virginia ballot so it is likely that Mr. Romney will easily take Virginia. That leaves Ohio and Tennessee as the really big prizes on Super Tuesday. If Mr. Santorum wins Ohio and Tennessee (or at least finishes better than Newt in those states) it essentially destroys Newt's argument of viability, even as a "Southern Candidate." It is possible that Newt might retire to allow a single candidate to become the focus of the "Not-Romney" support.
Of course, Mr. Santorum could flame out in the next debate and Newt could rise from the ashes a third time. We shall see.
Minnesota was also not much of a surprise as polling had Mr. Santorum up in the state (33-24 over Mr. Romney). However his margin was a bit of a surprise (45-27-17-11 as of now) as well as who came in second: Ron Paul. I know caucuses can get skewed but a margin that dramatic is slightly eyebrow raising.
But the big surprise came in Colorado. Mr. Romney was leading in the polls by 10 (37-27) and now it appears that he has lost by 5. Interestingly, the percentage of Romney support stayed about the same (37 vs. 35) but Mr. Santorum surged from 27 points to 40 points. This suggests he took many of the undecideds as well as poaching from other candidates. Again though, it is a caucus and weird things happen at caucuses. Weather may also have been a factor as the heavy snow around Denver may have kept a number of more tepid Romney voters from going to the caucuses, giving Mr. Santorum's wins in the outer counties more weight.
The overall result tonight doesn't mean much. The base estimates from Colorado are that Mr. Santorum and Mr. Romney will essentially split the delegates (13-12) with the rest being passed out to Newt (4) and Uncle Ron (4). The same is done in Minnesota, giving Mr. Santorum 17 delegates to Uncle Ron's 10, with 6 to Mr. Romney and 4 to Newt. Missouri, of course, is not giving out anything until March.
A three state sweep however will give a boost to Mr. Santorum's fundraising and set up some interesting commentary leading up to the primaries in Michigan and Arizona (Maine does come up next but that's a two man race between Mr. Romney and Uncle Ron and those delegates aren't selected until May as well). Even though history has been on his side, Mr. Romney may start to see some hits in the polls in Michigan. I'm not sure about Arizona at the moment, although I know Mr. Romney is currently ahead there.
Probably the biggest question of the night won't be answered until Super Tuesday. Although he finished badly, I see no reason for Newt to drop out until at least after Super Tuesday. Newt is going to win Georgia as it is his home state. Newt and Mr. Santorum failed to get enough signatures to appear on the Virginia ballot so it is likely that Mr. Romney will easily take Virginia. That leaves Ohio and Tennessee as the really big prizes on Super Tuesday. If Mr. Santorum wins Ohio and Tennessee (or at least finishes better than Newt in those states) it essentially destroys Newt's argument of viability, even as a "Southern Candidate." It is possible that Newt might retire to allow a single candidate to become the focus of the "Not-Romney" support.
Of course, Mr. Santorum could flame out in the next debate and Newt could rise from the ashes a third time. We shall see.
Tuesday, February 07, 2012
An Interesting Question
There are three contests today, none of which result in any actual delegates being awarded. There will be some assumptions for Colorado and Minnesota, much like Iowa so we will probably see the delegate summaries on the various news networks toggle in some fashion. Missouri is a complete beauty contest so even less attention will be payed to that.
The one interesting thing that will come out of today will be how the spin goes. If polling is to be believed, Mr. Romney will win Colorado while Mr. Santorum will win Minnesota and Missouri. If you are keeping score, that means that Mr. Romney will have won four contests (New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, and Colorado) while not-Romney has also won four (Iowa, South Carolina, Minnesota, and Missouri). In the four contests that Mr. Romney has won, it's been a complete blow out, usually with saturation bombing of negative advertising. However, turnout was down a bit in Florida, significantly down in Nevada, and only up a slight amount in New Hampshire. Conversely, turnout was significantly up in Iowa and South Carolina (even though SC was a blowout for Newt).
The turnout numbers will likely be skewed from four years ago as Mr. McCain was starting to settle in on his victory tour by this point but I would still be interested to see if the idea of a proper contest between Mr. Romney and those opposed to him generate higher turnout. If the turnout is low in Colorado (or if Mr. Santorum finishes closer than the 10 point margin he is behind) and turnout is up in Missouri and Minnesota, there could be some discussion among the various talking heads that Mr. Romney hasn't quite sewn this thing up yet. We shall find out tonight.
The one interesting thing that will come out of today will be how the spin goes. If polling is to be believed, Mr. Romney will win Colorado while Mr. Santorum will win Minnesota and Missouri. If you are keeping score, that means that Mr. Romney will have won four contests (New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, and Colorado) while not-Romney has also won four (Iowa, South Carolina, Minnesota, and Missouri). In the four contests that Mr. Romney has won, it's been a complete blow out, usually with saturation bombing of negative advertising. However, turnout was down a bit in Florida, significantly down in Nevada, and only up a slight amount in New Hampshire. Conversely, turnout was significantly up in Iowa and South Carolina (even though SC was a blowout for Newt).
The turnout numbers will likely be skewed from four years ago as Mr. McCain was starting to settle in on his victory tour by this point but I would still be interested to see if the idea of a proper contest between Mr. Romney and those opposed to him generate higher turnout. If the turnout is low in Colorado (or if Mr. Santorum finishes closer than the 10 point margin he is behind) and turnout is up in Missouri and Minnesota, there could be some discussion among the various talking heads that Mr. Romney hasn't quite sewn this thing up yet. We shall find out tonight.
Monday, February 06, 2012
Then the Game
For a totally bleh match-up, it was quite a good game. I didn't particularly care who won (I was slightly leaning toward the Giants) but was hopeful that it would be an entertaining game. In this, I was not disappointed.
The Patriots were clearly a little off in the beginning as the nerves about the Giants defensive line was obvious. However, they settled down quickly and the Patriots offensive line handled the Giants defensive line well. Brady was under some pressure, but it never got to the point where you could see him getting happy feet. In fact, more pressure seemed to be applied to Eli, who was sacked more and getting whacked a lot more than Brady was.
In the third quarter and early in the fourth quarter, I though the Patriots were going to pull away and win the game. The Giants weren't getting good pressure and they were consistently giving up the check down pass which the Patriots used to march down the field. Two specific plays cost the Patriots a chance to ice the game. Brady got greedy and threw his deep pass to his injured tight end. If he were healthy, it would have been at worst knocked down and may have even been caught. Instead it was intercepted. The following drive, Wes Welker dropped a pass that was a bit overthrown, but still catchable. Had he caught that, the Patriots would have been at the 20 with less than four minutes to go and up by 2.
The Giants drive that won them the game was impressive but the Patriots secondary had been weak all season and it didn't surprise me that the Giants were able to drive down the field. I was rather amused when the play that Cris Collinsworth mentioned two plays earlier (taking a knee at the one yard line) actually happened. In this case, the running back was so surprised by the parting of the sea, he couldn't stop his momentum.
The praise of Brady was as over the top as I expected. It was quite obvious that since Brady had won his first two Super Bowls on game winning drives, this would be no different. There were two very big differences in those though. In the first two, the game was tied. The game is very different when all you have to do is lead your team into field goal range than when you have to get a touchdown. Second, the Patriots were not operating with the full complement of weapons that they had in previous Super Bowls. They only had two decent wide receivers and one tight who was healthy enough to make the cuts needed. Still, the Patriots did manage to get to mid-field and did come surprisingly close to making the hail mary. The initial receiver was triple covered but the tight end was lurking below and came very close to catching the ball as it was knocked down.
So a good game. Kind of a meh season overall, although at least the Bengals did make the playoffs. Maybe they'll actually manage to be better next year.
I offer no opinions on either the halftime show or the commercials this year. Mrs. X and I were folding laundry during the halftime show and the music was barely registering to me in the background. The commercials were meh at best and all very predictable. I must say that I was slightly amused at the dog bribing the man about his wife's cat with Doritos. I know a few people that could easily bought for that price.
The Patriots were clearly a little off in the beginning as the nerves about the Giants defensive line was obvious. However, they settled down quickly and the Patriots offensive line handled the Giants defensive line well. Brady was under some pressure, but it never got to the point where you could see him getting happy feet. In fact, more pressure seemed to be applied to Eli, who was sacked more and getting whacked a lot more than Brady was.
In the third quarter and early in the fourth quarter, I though the Patriots were going to pull away and win the game. The Giants weren't getting good pressure and they were consistently giving up the check down pass which the Patriots used to march down the field. Two specific plays cost the Patriots a chance to ice the game. Brady got greedy and threw his deep pass to his injured tight end. If he were healthy, it would have been at worst knocked down and may have even been caught. Instead it was intercepted. The following drive, Wes Welker dropped a pass that was a bit overthrown, but still catchable. Had he caught that, the Patriots would have been at the 20 with less than four minutes to go and up by 2.
The Giants drive that won them the game was impressive but the Patriots secondary had been weak all season and it didn't surprise me that the Giants were able to drive down the field. I was rather amused when the play that Cris Collinsworth mentioned two plays earlier (taking a knee at the one yard line) actually happened. In this case, the running back was so surprised by the parting of the sea, he couldn't stop his momentum.
The praise of Brady was as over the top as I expected. It was quite obvious that since Brady had won his first two Super Bowls on game winning drives, this would be no different. There were two very big differences in those though. In the first two, the game was tied. The game is very different when all you have to do is lead your team into field goal range than when you have to get a touchdown. Second, the Patriots were not operating with the full complement of weapons that they had in previous Super Bowls. They only had two decent wide receivers and one tight who was healthy enough to make the cuts needed. Still, the Patriots did manage to get to mid-field and did come surprisingly close to making the hail mary. The initial receiver was triple covered but the tight end was lurking below and came very close to catching the ball as it was knocked down.
So a good game. Kind of a meh season overall, although at least the Bengals did make the playoffs. Maybe they'll actually manage to be better next year.
I offer no opinions on either the halftime show or the commercials this year. Mrs. X and I were folding laundry during the halftime show and the music was barely registering to me in the background. The commercials were meh at best and all very predictable. I must say that I was slightly amused at the dog bribing the man about his wife's cat with Doritos. I know a few people that could easily bought for that price.
First Nevada
I don't know if it was because of the Super Bowl, but Clark County (where Las Vegas is located) took two full days to finish counting the caucus ballots. In the end, it didn't matter much. Mitt Romney took the state handily with 50% of the total votes. Newt took 21% for second place in what had to be a disappointment for Uncle Ron. Uncle Ron fell to third with 19% of the vote and Rick Santorum rounded out with 10%.
Unlike most caucus states (such as tomorrow's Colorado and Minnesota), delegate allocations are awarded at this level. The individual delegates won't be selected until the state convention, but the awards have been decided. Mr. Romney will receive 14 delegates, Newt gets 6, Uncle Ron 5, and Mr. Santorum 3. That brings the hard total up to 73 (81 soft) for Mr. Romney, 29 (33) for Newt, 8 (14) for Uncle Ron, and 3 (9) for Mr. Santorum.
There are three contests tomorrow: the aforementioned Colorado and Minnesota Caucuses and the Missouri primary. No delegates will be awarded at any of these contests, although they will probably have influences on the state conventions and the actual Missouri Caucuses that will be held on March 17. At the moment, Mr. Romney has a strong lead in Colorado with Mr. Santorum holding the second spot (mostly due to his support from former congressman Tom Tancredo). Mr. Santorum has a very narrow lead in Minnesota as well over Mr. Romney, but I think Minnesota could swing wildly during the actual caucuses. Mr. Santorum is also leading in Missouri (helped strongly by the fact that Newt failed to get on the ballot). In terms of actual delegate allocation, tomorrow won't matter for much. However, if things break for Mr. Santorum as much as they seem to be, it would provide him with a much needed surge in momentum and a revaulting back into the primary "not-Romney" position.
Unlike most caucus states (such as tomorrow's Colorado and Minnesota), delegate allocations are awarded at this level. The individual delegates won't be selected until the state convention, but the awards have been decided. Mr. Romney will receive 14 delegates, Newt gets 6, Uncle Ron 5, and Mr. Santorum 3. That brings the hard total up to 73 (81 soft) for Mr. Romney, 29 (33) for Newt, 8 (14) for Uncle Ron, and 3 (9) for Mr. Santorum.
There are three contests tomorrow: the aforementioned Colorado and Minnesota Caucuses and the Missouri primary. No delegates will be awarded at any of these contests, although they will probably have influences on the state conventions and the actual Missouri Caucuses that will be held on March 17. At the moment, Mr. Romney has a strong lead in Colorado with Mr. Santorum holding the second spot (mostly due to his support from former congressman Tom Tancredo). Mr. Santorum has a very narrow lead in Minnesota as well over Mr. Romney, but I think Minnesota could swing wildly during the actual caucuses. Mr. Santorum is also leading in Missouri (helped strongly by the fact that Newt failed to get on the ballot). In terms of actual delegate allocation, tomorrow won't matter for much. However, if things break for Mr. Santorum as much as they seem to be, it would provide him with a much needed surge in momentum and a revaulting back into the primary "not-Romney" position.
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Delegate Challenge
In another sign that you can't trust any of the delegate counts yet, the news has surfaced that Newt intends to challenge Florida's winner-take-all policy.
It seems that the RNC has a rule that states that no state may have a winner-take-all policy until after April 1. Florida got around this because they were already under sanction for jumping out of their place in line to the end of January. This sanction took half of their 99 delegates and reduced it to 50 delegates. It is unlikely that the RNC will opt to impose two rounds of penalties on Florida (which is what forcing proportionality would do since it would upend what the state voted on) but this is still a good idea for Newt.
Based on what happened in the Democrat 2008 primary (and especially considering that the Republican convention is in Tampa this year) it is highly unlikely that the RNC will actually refuse to seat the removed 49 delegates from Florida. This has the net effect of the RNC punishment to be zero. So, knowing that Florida will probably get it's full 99 delegates anyway, why not challenge for proportionality. The RNC might see this as an easy opt-out situation. They agree to give Florida their full delegate roster in exchange for the proportionality agreement. Florida won't care because the full seating of their delegates is what they really want. Who they actually vote for is irrelevant.
The RNC will probably not act to vote on this until May or June, by which time, all of this might be irrelevant. If the rules are changed to the above scenario, Mr. Romney would actually lose 4 delegates to give him 46. Newt would then get 32 delegates, while Mr. Santorum gets 13 and Uncle Ron gets 7. That would leave one additional delegate to be assigned and I would guess that would go to Mr. Romney as winner of the primary.
All this would change the delegate totals somewhat, although things are still so much in flux that it's hard to see it that much. Mr. Romney's current hard total of 59 would be reduced to 56 while Newt's hard total would increase to 55. Uncle Ron would bump up to 10 while Mr. Santorum would actually get on the board at 13. All of these candidates will be getting more delegates from Iowa later but since nothing will be set until mid-June, speculating about totals doesn't help much.
More of interest will be gained with the contest in Nevada on Saturday and in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri on Tuesday.
It seems that the RNC has a rule that states that no state may have a winner-take-all policy until after April 1. Florida got around this because they were already under sanction for jumping out of their place in line to the end of January. This sanction took half of their 99 delegates and reduced it to 50 delegates. It is unlikely that the RNC will opt to impose two rounds of penalties on Florida (which is what forcing proportionality would do since it would upend what the state voted on) but this is still a good idea for Newt.
Based on what happened in the Democrat 2008 primary (and especially considering that the Republican convention is in Tampa this year) it is highly unlikely that the RNC will actually refuse to seat the removed 49 delegates from Florida. This has the net effect of the RNC punishment to be zero. So, knowing that Florida will probably get it's full 99 delegates anyway, why not challenge for proportionality. The RNC might see this as an easy opt-out situation. They agree to give Florida their full delegate roster in exchange for the proportionality agreement. Florida won't care because the full seating of their delegates is what they really want. Who they actually vote for is irrelevant.
The RNC will probably not act to vote on this until May or June, by which time, all of this might be irrelevant. If the rules are changed to the above scenario, Mr. Romney would actually lose 4 delegates to give him 46. Newt would then get 32 delegates, while Mr. Santorum gets 13 and Uncle Ron gets 7. That would leave one additional delegate to be assigned and I would guess that would go to Mr. Romney as winner of the primary.
All this would change the delegate totals somewhat, although things are still so much in flux that it's hard to see it that much. Mr. Romney's current hard total of 59 would be reduced to 56 while Newt's hard total would increase to 55. Uncle Ron would bump up to 10 while Mr. Santorum would actually get on the board at 13. All of these candidates will be getting more delegates from Iowa later but since nothing will be set until mid-June, speculating about totals doesn't help much.
More of interest will be gained with the contest in Nevada on Saturday and in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri on Tuesday.
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
Five Percent
To no one's surprise, Mr. Romney did win Florida. The one surprise was by how large a margin he won (14 points). To a significant degree, this was a two-man race. Neither Uncle Ron nor Mr. Santorum had the money to do any ad buys in the expensive state and only spent a little money on organization offices and some tours around the state. Their 7 and 13% showings tend to reflect this lack of attention.
Mr. Romney was heavily buoyed by the early voting. The early numbers that went up over the networks were all due to early voting and Mr. Romney consistently held around 50% of the vote in those cases. His percentage steadily went down as the actual election day votes came in (even more so as the panhandle votes came in, which Newt won).
As noted in yesterday's post, all four men are soldiering on. For three of them, it's going to be nibbling at Mr. Romney's heels until Super Tuesday. He will be favored in most of the states but none are winner take all and I think there is enough dissatisfaction with Mr. Romney that there will be delegate allocation to other candidates.
February hands out 196 delegates as opposed to the 115 that were handed out in January (although this is theoretical as caucus state do not award delegates until their state conventions which are held later). The hard count stands at 59 for Romney, 23 for Gingrich, and 3 for Paul. Santorum has been credited in most standing with anywhere between 6 and 12 delegates for Iowa, but he won't know how many he's actually getting until mid-June. Likewise with Mr. Romney who gets anywhere from 6 to 12 Iowa delegates and is generally awarded Mr. Huntsman's 2 delegates from New Hampshire. So, given how you slice it, Mr. Romney has anywhere between 5 and 6.5% of the delegates he needs to win the nomination (1144).
Nevada theoretically gives out 28 delegates on Saturday (although they won't actually be allocated until the state convention on May 6) with Colorado and Minnesota giving out an additional 76 theoretical delegates on February 7 (state conventions are April 14 and May 5 respectively).
Mr. Romney was heavily buoyed by the early voting. The early numbers that went up over the networks were all due to early voting and Mr. Romney consistently held around 50% of the vote in those cases. His percentage steadily went down as the actual election day votes came in (even more so as the panhandle votes came in, which Newt won).
As noted in yesterday's post, all four men are soldiering on. For three of them, it's going to be nibbling at Mr. Romney's heels until Super Tuesday. He will be favored in most of the states but none are winner take all and I think there is enough dissatisfaction with Mr. Romney that there will be delegate allocation to other candidates.
February hands out 196 delegates as opposed to the 115 that were handed out in January (although this is theoretical as caucus state do not award delegates until their state conventions which are held later). The hard count stands at 59 for Romney, 23 for Gingrich, and 3 for Paul. Santorum has been credited in most standing with anywhere between 6 and 12 delegates for Iowa, but he won't know how many he's actually getting until mid-June. Likewise with Mr. Romney who gets anywhere from 6 to 12 Iowa delegates and is generally awarded Mr. Huntsman's 2 delegates from New Hampshire. So, given how you slice it, Mr. Romney has anywhere between 5 and 6.5% of the delegates he needs to win the nomination (1144).
Nevada theoretically gives out 28 delegates on Saturday (although they won't actually be allocated until the state convention on May 6) with Colorado and Minnesota giving out an additional 76 theoretical delegates on February 7 (state conventions are April 14 and May 5 respectively).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
