Mitt Romney for President My Man Mitt: Louisiana Caucuses tonight


	18 Comments: I'm not seeing any results on Louisiana. Anyone else? By Anonymous, at January 22, 2008 at 9:53 PM I found this link, but isn't the Louisiana contest really on 2/9/08? By Anonymous, at January 22, 2008 at 10:27 PM I found this link: http://www400.sos.louisiana.gov:8090/cgibin/?rqstyp=elcms2&rqsdta=020908 but isn't the contest on 2/9/2008? By Anonymous, at January 22, 2008 at 10:28 PM Yeah, I'm not seeing anything either. The MSM probably knew Mitt was gonna win it so they won't report it. ha. By KoolJeffrey, at January 22, 2008 at 10:38 PM I haven't seen anything either. Please post if you find something. By Anonymous, at January 22, 2008 at 10:41 PM I read a few of reports tonight. If anything I say is incorrect I will refund all the money you paid me for this info. I am really somewhat confused about this whole thing, but this is how I see it. Tonight a group of 105 delegates were selected for the Louisiana Republican convention. On Feb 9th Louisiana has a primary. If 51% or greater of the primary vote goes to one candidate then 20 delegates are bound to support that candidate. If not, then the Louisiana delegates are not bound (but I presume the somehow represent the will of the folks who voted on Feb 9th???). On Feb 16th the 105 delegates are paired down to 44 who will go to the national convention (3 more will go representing senior GOP leadership in the state). Various folks were out supporting their candidate. A Romney supporter would offer a list to delegates to select as part of the 105. A group of pro-life folks offered a list of delegates to select as part of the 105. Some folks came with list already and were uninterested in discussing with the campaigners. Some delegates will likely be selected for their own credentials (a former Republican candidate) even though they are undecided as to who the will support on the 16th. According to the I think two sources I found through Google, turnout was higher than normal and Romney/Paul supporters were the most vocal. I think however that means that Romney and Paul sent folks to influence the caucus goers as they entered their caucus sites. According to another source some folks already had a delegate list and mostly ignored the campaigners. The above comes from 3-4 sources I found through Google. None seems authoritative. This is the state of the Louisiana race as I see it. I do not think the media has avoided Louisiana because Mitt is going to win (that’s an accusation that is so frequently true we can bypass it here). Romney’s website has nothing to say about Louisiana tonight (that I found) so I think the issue is that Louisiana’s actions tonight are less than decisive. I hope there is something from Romney to brag about tomorrow (gold medal), but I think it will be even less brag-worthy than the Wyoming win. I think it quite possible that the “results” will be so inconclusive that nobody with have anything to brag about. The only way this would be picked up be the news in a major way (IMO) is if Ron Paul has something to brag about tomorrow. I lean toward the thought that whatever happened behind the caucus doors is so non-conclusive that not much bragging will happen and not much influence will be had on contests in Florida and on Super Tuesday. Thanks, TOm By Anonymous, at January 23, 2008 at 12:24 AM Yeah, the MSM is so mean to Romney, and so nice to Ron Paul, hahahaha. It seems like Ron Paul wins the day in La. As the last conservative in the race, hopefully people will start to see that Paul is our last change to elect a small government conservative for the GOP. By hahajohnnyb, at January 23, 2008 at 2:24 AM Good article by Brent Bozell on the McCain media bias. http://www.creators.com/opinion/brent-bozell/mccain-again-a-media-darling.html By Anonymous, at January 23, 2008 at 6:12 AM I read that Louisiana has both a caucus and a primary. In that case, how much does the caucus count? By www.jsayreallen.com, at January 23, 2008 at 8:26 AM The Louisiana Caucus is indeed on February 9. If this link doesn't work. Go to www.realclearpolitics.com and look for the link under "NOMINATION CALANDER" on the left. It will be under the heading "Republican Schedule." http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/republican_delegate_count.html#upcomingstates By Judicial, at January 23, 2008 at 9:45 AM Aww crap the Ron Paul nuts have found this website. Do us a favor and troll other forums, ok? I like some of Ron's ideas, but honestly the way that people attach themselves to him with seeming religious zeal is much more of a detriment to his cause than a help. Mitt is a true conservative, AND is also completely electable. He doesn't give off the "I am a wacky nut job who only has a fringe base" vibe. By Steve-O, at January 23, 2008 at 10:36 AM Hey, this site's own Jeff Fuller, MD, is on the list of delegates to vote for. See here. Jeff!!! Hey, Jeff!!! Can you please let us know how it goes for you and your fellow delegate candidates? By Anonymous, at January 23, 2008 at 12:03 PM I hope Jeff Fuller would forgive me for copying and pasting his reply from other blogger. He indeed did share his observation. He said [brackets are mine]: Kavon [who made a post concerning how Mitt will win LA], Were you there? This post is absurd. Romney has one paid staffer in LA. He started organizing for this just a couple of weeks ago. The lack of organization is/was saddening to me. As evidence check out the hand-written modification to the ballot you show [the ballot was scanned and shown at that post]. How can you assert that Romney “bought” this? You’ve got nothing to back that up. [Kavon was claiming Mitt has bought the state caucus] You should have seen the McCain ballots (PS, you can see me on the Romney ballot! The Romney organizer told me to put the MD on there just in case some people want more MDs in politics and I might pick up some extraneous votes). McCain had a former governor of LA greeting people as the walked in and handing him their sample ballots. No Romney surrogates at all. McCain was far more organized statewide than anyone else. There were 15 delegates and 15 alternates suggested by the McCain sample ballots for EVERY congressional district. http://www.redstate.com/blogs/vladimir/2008/jan/21/la_caucus_why_should_i_bother This link shows that this LA voter was called TWICE by the McCain campaign . . . but by no others. By contrast there were several districts that the Romney sample ballots only had 4-6 people on it . . . and no alternate delegates. Additionally, two nights ago, the Romney people decided to have a phone bank to call people out to the caucuses for Romney. I showed up along with 5 other people. I got called into the hospital after only making 10 calls and didn’t get anyone to come out for Romney. Ron Paul had the most visible supporters there. I’ll be shocked if Romney wins this thing (sadly). Look for McCain to win, or Ron Paul, with Romney coming in third or worse. It was a weird system. [Jeff, I hope you forgive me for sharing your LA caucus experience here] By Anonymous, at January 23, 2008 at 12:14 PM Yea, Mitt doesn't have any religious fringe base supporters. Good call!!! By Anonymous, at January 23, 2008 at 12:15 PM The Louisiana caucuses were last night, it is the primary that is 2/9. Yes, confusing. The caucuses were just for repubs, to elect the delegates to the state convention. The primary on 2/9 is for both parties, and if one candidate wins more than 1/2 the vote then they automatically get a certain number of delegates. The local media here is reporting nothing about last night. Then again, it's kind of hard to interpret anyway since you are electing delegates and not a candidate. By Anonymous, at January 23, 2008 at 12:56 PM The Caucuses were indeed last night, and they are exactly as conclusive as either Iowa's or Nevada's caucuses. Almost exactly the same process happens there - delegates to the county or state conventions are selected who then pick delegates to the national convention. There are two major differences - 1) in Iowa and Nevada it doesn't seem there was a predetermined slate/ballot of potential delegates. You could show up and have a good chance of getting yourself elected with no prior involvement. LA seems to be tighter controled on that front. 2) There doesn't seem to have been a highly organized straw poll like there was in Iowa and Nevada. That's what the widely reported results from those states were - just straw polls, with no binding effect. The real power lies with those selected to be delegates to the state conventions. National delegate counts from caucus states reported by the media are simply estimates based on the straw poll results. Finally, on the Louisiana Primary. Yes, that is on the 9th. Louisiana has BOTH a caucus and a primary. However, the primary is odd. In order to get any pledged delegates, a contender must get 50% + 1 of the vote - not just a simple plurality. If no candidate gets 50% + 1, the 20 delegates associated with the primary are "unpledged," but since the individuals are selected at the state convention, they will likely support whoever "won" the caucus (meaning stacked the state convention in their favor). Let me repeat, ALL caucuses work the way outlined above. NO DELEGATES are guaranteed based simply on the poll of caucus attendees, it's all about the state convention delegates. Louisiana was just especially confusing because of the predetermined ballots/slates of delegates, and the primary later. Washington also splits the system, with a caucus on the 9th and a primary on the 19th, but there are no delegate slates in Washington. By Unknown, at January 23, 2008 at 2:03 PM so, uh, I see you are censoring responses/comments? Deleted some, even? Is this how Mitt Romney operates? Fucking shmucks. By Anonymous, at January 23, 2008 at 2:37 PM People like you, moron, should be censored. If you have something intelligent to say, then do so without showing the complete lack of intelligence that resorting to profanities shows. Honestly, if I could work my will, people like you would be barred from the elective process in general, as those with the intellectual capacity of mayonnaise shouldn't have a say in who gets to lead the free world. By Steve-O, at January 23, 2008 at 4:30 PM Post a Comment