Current Delegate Count (I'm giving Trump the 12 delegates for winning Missouri): Trump 748 (48.8 %, 19 delegates short of the required delegates to win nomination) Cruz 463 Rubio 171 Kasich 143 Others 15 If Trump takes Arizona and wins all 58 delegates (highly likely, he's way ahead in recent polls), that gives Trump 748 of 1493 delegates. That's past the magical 50 % threshold. So you can see how these winner take all states in which Trump is ahead in almost every poll will lead him to 1237. He's going to be very close to 50 % in the proportional states as well. Winner Take All States coming up with Trump's position in RCP Poll of Polls: Arizona 58 (Up 13) TRUMP WINS Wisconsin 42 (Up 10, Rubio part of poll) Delaware 16 (No Polling) Maryland 38 (Up 9) Pennsylvania 71 (Up 10, Rubio part of poll) Indiana 57 (No polling) Nebraska 36 (No polling) California 172 (Up 10.5, Rubio part of poll) Montana 27 (No polling) New Jersey 51 (Up 18.5, Rubio part of poll) South Dakota 29 (No polling) 597 total delegates of the remaining 1037 are winner take all, that puts Trump at 1287 if he wins them all. The only way to prevent him from getting to 1237 is for Cruz to win California, Nebraska, Montana and South Dakota and Kasich to win Pennsylvania. That's 337 of the 597 in those states. 03/22 UPDATE: Trump takes all 58 delegates from Arizona. Trump now has exactly 50 % of the vote plus 1. So if the run for the nomination ended today, Trump would have gotten the needed votes by 1. 03/22 UPDATE: Cruz gets to 50+ percent in Utah and takes all 40 delegates. A big win in the push to stop Trump to 1237.
islstl, when did you become such fanatical conservative. How did your version of conservatism work out for Louisiana and Kansas as of late?
I'm a hybrid conservative/liberal. Strong defense, small government, fiscally conservative, socially liberal. I hate the extreme right wing of the party, the church goers, etc. I don't know what you're getting at with the 2nd question.
You know there is no doubt La and Ks have been poorly led. There is a stream of illogic that if less government is good no government is better. That is no better than the mirror image you see in Md, Il, Ca and other states where years of liberal democrat management has bankrupted rich prosperous states. What do you say about the way Baltimore and Maryland have been run or the myriad of problems those states face. They don't get the exposure because the industrial and financial bases were so much greater. IMO the damage done there is as bad or worse.
the last 2 of 3 governors for maryland were republicans. Illinois and California you definitely have a point, but Louisiana and Kansas both are on the brink. Kansas is the laughing stock of the nation. Other than Mississippi, all those Democrats they elect down there.
Point is extremists on either side can run a state into the ground. It's not political ideas but ideas taken to extreme that rot things. You were hitting isisi for being conservative fiscally. A smart disciplined conservative can be a very effective leader and bring prosperity as can a disciplined liberal.
Just taking a guess, but I'd bet his recent support of a certain conservative candidate has more to do with being tired of the same old career politician shit than it does with support of one side or the other. Both parties have been hijacked by crazies that are only interested in their political careers, they could give a shit less about the American people or the country. Neither party deserves to be in power.
i thought the same of him. He is probably fed up with a lot of things. Nothing wrong with that if its not misguided.
