UPDATE: Romney Gets 16 Michigan Delegates, Santorum 14
Republican committee votes to award the state's two at-large delegates to the Michigan native, who won the popular vote in Tuesday's primary.
Photos
Update, 4:30 p.m. Thursday: A Michigan Republican committee voted Thursday to award 16 of the state's 30 delegates to the Republican National Convention to Mitt Romney and the remaining 14 to Rick Santorum.
Michigan's Tuesday Republican presidential primary showed the candidates splitting the state's delegates, though Romney won the popular vote.
The committee voted 4-2 to give Romney Michigan's two at-large delegates, according to MIRS.
Michigan Republicans award delegates based on congressional districts – two for each of the state's 14 districts – and two more awarded by the statewide vote.
2 p.m. Wednesday: Mitt Romney's campaign got a boost of optimism Tuesday night after learning that the candidate had won the popular vote in Republican presidential primaries in Michigan and Arizona.
The Michigan native took 41 percent of the overall vote in Michigan, compared with Santorum's 38 percent, and easily won Arizona 47 percent to 27 percent.
Many major media outlets are saying Tuesday's primary successes are exactly what Romney's campaign needed to boost momentum before 10 states hold primaries next week on what is called Super Tuesday.
However, Santorum's campaign is also calling Michigan a success, in light of reports Wednesday that the two candidates will likely split Michigan's 30 delegates nearly in half.
"Strategically, we were targeting delegates more than anything else," said John Brabender, a senior advisor for the Santorum campaign, during a conference call Wednesday afternoon.
The call was held in hopes of changing the storyline of the outcome of the Michigan primary in Santorum's favor, Brabender said.
"Despite outspending us by a great amount and being on his own turf, we managed to tie in Michigan," he said. "And that is a disaster for Romney."
Two delegates are awarded for each of Michigan's 14 congressional districts won by a candidate and two additional delegates are awarded to the candidate with the highest overall vote.
Romney won seven congressional districts in southeast Michigan and the Thumb, while Santorum, former senator of Pennsylvania, won six districts in west and northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula.
The results of the 13th District, the last to be counted, still aren't final, but it seems likely it will go to Santorum. It includes the east side of Detroit, the Grosse Pointes, Harper Woods and several downriver communities. It would be the only southeast Michigan district won by Santorum.
If Santorum wins it, the two candidates will split the congressional delegates evenly.
Herb Helzer
4:32 pm on Thursday, March 1, 2012
$5 million-plus spent (between Willard "Mitt" Romney's campaign and his affiliated Super PAC, Restore Our Future) to secure 410,000 votes and 15 RNC delegates (maybe 16 if the state's Republicans tweak how the two "at-large" delegate votes will be allocated).
Even with that, Rick Santorum would have won had he and his surrogates simply stopped talking about contraception and other hardcore social conservative issues.
The term "Pyrrhic Victory" applies here.
Ed Lambert
5:21 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
The one good thing might be the inattentive public's dismissal of all this going-on in the GOP these days. "Dismissal" is the wrong word, actually, because it presumes the public has actually heard the stuff. Maybe we followers of politics have a skewed impression of the influence of all this stuff on the public.
I agree that Santorum stuck his foot in his mouth when he should have kept the mouth shut in the first place. That, or simply focus on the misdeeds of the incumbent--which is more than enough material to keep a candidate going 24/7.
Actually, we wouldn't even be hearing about Santorum's jabber but for the determination of the mainstream media to get that message out. Perhaps you've noticed that they piled on Rush for his comments about Fluke but have yet to say a word about Maher's calling Palin the C-word and his big donation to Obama's SuperPAC.
Mary Carmine
4:22 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
PACs need to be outlawed.
Kevin Moser
1:45 pm on Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Mary, Lots of things ought to be outlawed. Wall St. should be number one. Lobbyists number two, Labor unions number three. All buy influence or have self serving interests bought and paid for. It should be the people who decide elections, No one else. I do not see anything wrong with anyone donating to candidates, but lets cap those as well. Rich people with more dollars can throw more support through their donations. Cap maximum at $500.00. I know, I am dreaming. No political candidate or incumbent would ever allow the above to happen as there would be no profit in it for them. Be nice if they for once put our needs ahead of their own.
dk
1:33 pm on Friday, April 6, 2012
And Republicans who want smaller government and keep passing new laws illegally. So much for loving the Constitution - anybody's.
Mich Republicans have ILLEGALLY passed over 96% (546) of their bills under “immediate effect”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/06/1081234/-Michigan-Republicans-have-ILLEGALLY-passed-over-96-of-their-bills-under-immediate-effect-
\
Ed Lambert
2:37 pm on Friday, April 6, 2012
oakland, you take the Daily Kos's word for things? Why? Do you know where they stand politically? Do you know that they support every action taken by Obama so far, criticizing him only when he hasn't gone far enough left?
I submit that Kos has no complaints about legislative action ever taken by Democratics when they are in control.
By the way, the "smaller government" issue is one largely concerned with the federal government. From that perspective we do not care what the states do since that is up to the states' residents to decide. If legislative action has been illegal in MIchigan, why have there been no successful court challenges to it?
Rachel Maddow, you say? Now that's scraping the bottom of the barrel. Enjoy feeding!
hartland eagle
3:54 pm on Friday, April 6, 2012
You don't have to take the Daily Kos's word for it. It's on video. What the republicans have done is a gross distortion of the intent of the immediate effect option of the Michigan Constitution - and they're not even meeting those terms.
I don't care what your politics are - once you see the video of what's going on, you'll agree this should not be happening in America.
A judge has already overturned two bills immediate effect. More to come. This is going to get national attention. It's a travesty and is downright anti American.
Ed Lambert
5:18 pm on Friday, April 6, 2012
hartland, I don't care what the video "proves." If there's substance to the claim, there would have been lawsuits filed by now. What you have here is Daily Kos in another of its attempts to push what it wants: absolute dominance by socialist-totalitarians.
When lawsuits are filed, I'll pay more attention. Kos is good for a laugh. Only that.
hartland eagle
10:19 pm on Friday, April 6, 2012
Uh, like I said. Lawsuit filed. Judge already intervened. Lots more to come on this.
Ed Lambert
9:02 am on Saturday, April 7, 2012
"Uh, like I said. Lawsuit filed. Judge already intervened. Lots more to come on this."
- hartland eagle
I now refer you to an article in today's Detroit News regarding the matter. In 2009 the Democratics passed 242 bills for immediate effect and were signed by Granholm (now of Current TV, Gore's network).
Tell me, hartland, what is your complaint?
hartland eagle
12:10 pm on Saturday, April 7, 2012
Democrats called for a roll call vote. Republican leadership ignored them, because they didn't have the votes to get immediate effect. No one's disputing the ability to vote in immediate effect. The issue is that the GOP blatantly and purposely ignored the rule of law, to ram in their discriminatory, union bashing agenda. It won't be lost on the general public. Fox News disciples excluded, of course.
Marty Rosalik
7:24 pm on Friday, April 6, 2012
Oakland, Ed, and Hartland, I would ask the same proof be given using the actual law section, paragraph, etc. as I asked of others posting here about alledged Obama administration law violations during the GM bankrupcy.
Ed I would and have used your exact arguement.
Ed said. " If there's substance to the claim, there would have been lawsuits filed by now."
Exactly my point for either.
Ed Lambert
9:09 am on Saturday, April 7, 2012
Marty, thanks for responding. I must say that hartland will now have to do some head-scratching to justify Daily Kos's and his complaint about a GOP legislature aping a Democrat legislature acting just before the turnover of 2010.
Regarding the GM bankrupcy, we have a case of Obama exquisitely demonstrating what he meant by people giving their "fair share": The settlement resulted in the company's investors--that includes lots of people in the middle class--losing big time on their investments while the UAW--the Democrat Party's big cash cow--acquired substantial ownershipm, having no record of corporate investment in GM.
DCC
9:03 pm on Friday, April 6, 2012
Looking for "substance"? Check out some video evidence: http://tinyurl.com/HouseLies
If you take the time to watch and listen, you will see how the House Chair dishonestly declares that "proper support" of the request for "immediate effect" was given by the House. It is a lie: the chair refuses to allow for a roll call of the vote, which should be automatic. The GOP would need 73 votes in support of a bill having "immediate effect", but only have 63 GOP House members. That means it is impossible for a measure to get the requisite 2/3 (73/110) unless 10 Democrats voted to support immediate effect. While bills frequently get passed by party line vote, it makes no sense that 10 Democrats, after having voted against the bill, would vote in favor of allowing the bill have immediate effect.
The GOP compounds the misbehavior by fraudulently entering the supposed approval into the record of the house.
This is just one example of the GOP abuse of power. The lack of a law suit, one that would be presumably decided by the GOP Supreme Court of Michigan (yeah, right), has not been filed does not mean the practice is legal.
And the GOP would scream bloody murder if Democrats were pulling this stuff.
Oh, and please, for once, stop avoiding addressing every charge of GOP misdeeds by trying to change the subject, or cloud the issue with things not at all relevant to the issue at hand: whether the practices of the GOP as they manage bills on the House floor are legal.
Jordan Genso
8:01 pm on Saturday, April 7, 2012
I think some of the commenters here need to google the "tu quoque" logical fallacy.
If the Democratic Party did what the Tea Party Republicans are doing now, then shame on the Democrats. That doesn't change the fact that what the Republicans are doing is unethical and more improtantly, highly unconstitutional & illegal.
To all of the Republicans, I will go on the record stating this in reference to what is happening in DC (a separate issue from what is happening in Lansing): If the Democratic Party ever becomes the minority in the Senate, and they mimic what the Tea Party Republicans are currently doing, obstructing anything and everything, I will criticize the Democrats for it. If that is to occur, are you going to defend the Democrats by saying "well the Republicans did it too, so it's no big deal"?