Apparently they tossed the six uncommitted delegates* for not following the rules, and then replaced them with alternates. 1 Cruz, 2 Rubio, 1 Trump, 2 Uncommitted. You should probably start caring about these stories, by the way: these days, every delegate is relevant.
*The other three were reserved for the USVI GOP leadership anyway.
…don’t bother looking into them before about 10 PM Eastern time at the earliest. As I understand it, Arizona counts for an hour before it releases any results; and Utah is giving all of the results directly to the AP. All of that translates to a rather late night before results start to pop in. And I have no idea when American Samoa is going to cook off.
March 22nd: American Samoa (I wonder if they’re gonna go uncommitted, because US Virgin Islands has a workable strategy, there), Arizona (that one is gonna be a fight), and Utah (that one will not). There’s also supposed to be a Fox News debate the night before in Salt Lake City, and I heartily encourage Donald Trump to follow through on his half-threat to embarrass Fox by not showing up. It’ll lock down Utah for sure and help a heck of a lot in Arizona, which is winner-take-all.
…What? Sorry, folks. This is where the slog really starts.
As I noted over at RedState, they need to start limiting the main debate to five or seven, and just stop the undercard debates altogether. Not that I’m kvetching on the undercard debates, per se: they turned out to be worthwhile. But it’s time to tighten things up. Iowa is in six weeks.
Gonna be a pretty truncated season this year: starts in February, and we’ll probably know the Republican nominee by March 15th and the Ohio primary. Should be a… thing. Yes. A ‘thing.’
Be glad when this particular primary season is over, honestly. I’ve been pushed to take sides in this one more than I’ve liked.
No, I don’t have any insider information, but the warning signs are there. I’m getting the distinct impression that somebody is starting the downward trajectory that ends with a candidate ‘suspending’ his campaign. When it happens, I suggest only this: let him down easy. If only for your own blood pressure’s sake.
Michael Barone: “…all, or almost all, of the Republican candidates in the prime-time debate seem to have advanced their cause, if only marginally. Which means, as I said, that there’s reason to expect that this contest is going to go on for months to come.” I think Michael Barone was being generous to some of the candidates – some people slipped last night – but we may end up being in for a bit of a long haul.
So it goes. I’d rather have our situation than the Democrats’.
The wagons are being circled: “Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz is closing the door on adding more Democratic presidential debates, and said a controversial clause penalizing candidates for participating in unsanctioned debates would stand.” The number will stay at 6, and never mind the complaints from inside the party. No, really, the Democratic leadership is determined to never mind them.
Before we go any further: that Hill article noted that there were two dozen or so primary debates in 2008, which does admittedly sound a bit high. Six, on the hand, is… well, if you weren’t really expecting to have a contested primary then I suppose six would have seemed like plenty. As it stands right now, though, the Democrats are perilously close to having a contested primary despite the fact that their only alternatives to Hillary Clinton are currently Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley. As a former Democrat myself, the idea of that is giving me sympathy heartburn despite the fact that I want to see such a glorious trainwreck happen. Continue reading DNC nervously refuses to host more debates.
Call me an optimist? Sure. It’s a fair cop. Still, here comes the war: “Minutes after [Martin] O’Malley’s appearance on “This Week,” former Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm, a top adviser to the Ready for Hillary PAC, said on the same program, “Martin O’Malley, he’s a very nice guy, and I was thinking he might make a nice member of a President Clinton administration, so he better watch it.”” Jennifer Granholm, for those of you who don’t remember, was the person that liberals used to get wistful about: she’s a naturalized citizen – and thus ineligible to become President. Well, to be honest about it Granholm would have been ineligible to become President anyway, given that she drove the state of Michigan into the ground so hard that it left an impact crater; but that is perhaps incidental to my point.
Moving along: streiff over at RedState takes O’Malley seriously as both a challenger to Hillary, and as a candidate for President. I share his opinion on the first, but not the second; the pathway for a Democratic victory in 2016 is through the difficult trick of simultaneously embracing Clintonism and rejecting Obamaism while at the same time being publicly seen to embrace Obamaism and reject Clintonism. It’s a devil of a problem, really. Democratic primary voters will be made up of bitter progressives who want to be told pretty lies about how they’re not the ones who are fringe, really, and African-American voters who want proper deference shown to Barack Obama. That’s enough of a combined voting bloc to get the nomination. Alas for the Democrats, swing voters have already had eight years of Barack Obama and progressives; and those voters are showing little sign of being interested in twelve. Continue reading A *dirty* Democratic primary season may still happen!
Cthulhu reference. Also, SMoD. And, well, this:
Cruz is great. Rand Paul is great. Scott Walker is great. Bobby Jindal is great. Rick by-God Perry is great. Jeb Bush . . . was a really, really fine governor. We have primary elections for a reason, and these are some big boys (and girls? What says Governor Martinez? Governor Fallin? Governor Haley? Governor . . . ?) who are more than capable of inflicting upon themselves whatever savage and perverse ritual combat Republican-primary voters demand, with the last man standing demanding of the conclave in Cleveland: “Are you not entertained?”
Should be a hoot.
Personally, I recommend staying frosty when it comes to the primary. After all, every Republican candidate except one will end up losing it; their supporters should probably be prepared for that to happen. Or, conversely: if they’re planning to take their ball and go home if their candidate loses… then they should probably do it now, and avoid the rush.