Cruz allowing Kasich to compete in New Mexico and Oregon

[dax00]

RI rounds down and gives the extra delegates to the winner statewide.

I see. Thanks for the clarification. Their allocation rules are irritatingly odd.

[Seriously?]

RI rounds down and gives the extra delegates to the winner statewide.

I see. Thanks for the clarification. Their allocation rules are irritatingly odd.

One of many states that have little annoying quirks on the Republican side. The Democrats are a lot more straightforward, but for that super delegate nonsense.

[Attorney General & LGC Deputy Dwarven Dragon]

Looks like he's willing to do whatever it takes to get Kasich out of Indiana, even if it means ceding Oregon and New Mexico to Trump.

The ironic thing is that if the voters listen, which is dubious, Kasich gives up a winner take all state by CD and statewide in return for two proportional states Oregon is basically as proportional as it gets with like a 3% floor and New Mexico requires a 15% floor.

But I am not so convinced that the voters will like Cruz and Kasich telling them how to vote. They'll vote Trump instead.

At the end of the day, both Kay-sick and lyin' Ted have the same chance of winning the nomination on the first ballot as Lief.

TRUMP's chances of winning on the first ballot aren't great if he doesn't win Indiana. Is it doable? Sure. But it really puts him under pressure to surprise in Montana, Nebraska, or South Dakota.

Assuming the polls are true, Trump should take somewhere between 95 and 106 of the 118 pledged delegates up for grabs on Tuesday. He'll lose 9 or 10 in RI and a few CDs in MD.

Assuming PPP is right and Trump >50 in CT, he'll take all 28. He'll also take the 16 in DE and the 17 statewide in PA. The range in RI at 50% is likely 9-10. He should win the statewide in MD (38), but lose a CD or two. I put him in the 26-35 delegate range there.

After April 26, Trump will basically be at 950 of 1,237.

Worst case, assume 9-12 in Indiana.

Also assume Nebraska goes Cruz and West Virginia should be a near clear Trump sweep of the 37 delegates there the next week.

Piece those two together and you're now very close to 1,000.

Oregon (28) is straight proportional. Worst case, he'll take 1/3 of those delegates, so let's give him 9.

Washington State (44) is proportional for the statewide delegates (14) and modified WTA for the 10 CDs. >50% takes the district, <50% is 2/1. Trump will get 10-15 delegates even if the loses the state.

You're now roughly at 1,020. About 200-225 to go.

Trump takes New Jersey's 51 delegates. Roughly 1,070.

Trump gets 5-15 delegates out of proportional NM (24). Roughly 1,080.

Cruz wins SD and MT.

Trump would need about 140-160 or so of the 177 CA delegates to go over the top.

Also remember, that a number of the 54 CD delegates in PA have softly agreed to vote for the winner in that district. Trump is polling > 50% according to a PPP tweet in PA. That increases the likelihood that he'll get a decent portion of the unpledged there as well, minimizing California's significance a tad.

12 is four congressional districts(of 9), yeah that's possible in a losing scenario, but it doesn't seem incredibly likely. If TRUMP loses Indiana, he gets 3-9. Not seeing how 12 happens, the Cruz support would have to be quite regional.

I don't think it's safe to assume that TRUMP will sweep WV. There's plenty of articles around pointing out that WV delegates are directly elected, and while candidate preferences are listed next to the delegates, there's a few pitfalls. First off, the delegate selection is apparently all the way at the end of the ballot, after the beauty contest and after the gubernatorial primary and all the other local primaries that the state chose to hold on the same day. Some voters might just not reach the end of the ballot. Second, there's a clause that if a voter selects more than the allotted number of delegates by accident, their entire delegate selection portion won't be counted. Third, there's another clause that if a voter selects more than two delegates from any one county, all the delegate votes they cast for that specific county are thrown out. The way it's phrased, it seems like some of this may not be detailed much on the ballot itself. Plus, you also have to take into account TRUMP losing a small number of delegates thanks to his voters not liking certain names, just as we saw happen in Illinois. So TRUMP has to acknowledge the possibility that he ends up with ~25 delegates. (the total is 34 per 538, not 37)

So, if we assign TRUMP the following:

CT: 28/28 (Optimistic, it's not a given that he will get 50% and Kasich might be able to nab CD-4, which gets him 3 delegates no matter what)
Delaware: 16/16
MD: 35/38 (Slightly optimistic, I won't be surprised if he gets 32)
RI: 9/19
PA (Total): 53/71
IN: 9/57
WV: 25/34
OR: 12/28
WA: 17/44
NJ: 51/51
NM: 10/24

Then he needs 127 of California's delegates. That gives him room to lose 15 of the 53 congressional districts. He'd better hope Cruz or Kasich doesn't surge in the state. The number goes down to 100 if he wins Montana, and I think TRUMP would feel a lot better knowing he only needs 100 delegates from CA instead of 127.

[Phony Moderate]

Frankly this just reinforces TRUMP's image as a rank outsider who the Establishment hates. And it also suggests that Cruz is 'just another politician'.

[Donnie]

Frankly this just reinforces TRUMP's image as a rank outsider who the Establishment hates. And it also suggests that Cruz is 'just another politician'.

Exactly. Beside that, a LOSER+LOSER=LOSERS.

[NHI]

They should have started doing this two weeks ago.

Too little, too late.

[Incipimus iterum]

This is the same strategy Mo Udall and Frank Church did in 1976 to try to stop Jimmy Carter. Udall did not campaign in Nebraska, Oregon,and Rhode Island, while Church did not campaign in South Dakota.

[Torie]

Bad deal for Cruz, really.

A worse deal for Cruz is one that allows Trump to get to 1237 on the first ballot. Hey, if he could give Kasich say 30 of his delegates, in exchange for getting 10 delegates from Trump, one would think he would snap that deal up in an instant.

[Holmes]

I slept on this, and I still think it's a really bad idea. And Kasich is still telling supporters to vote for him in Indiana. People will just see this as another sad attempt from Cruz to steal it from Trump, just like in Colorado, and they'll retaliate by voting for Trump. If Trump really is above 50% in Pennsylvania like PPP says he is, then it's pretty much game over anyway.

[Torie]

I slept on this, and I still think it's a really bad idea. And Kasich is still telling supporters to vote for him in Indiana. People will just see this as another sad attempt from Cruz to steal it from Trump, just like in Colorado, and they'll retaliate by voting for Trump. If Trump really is above 50% in Pennsylvania like PPP says he is, then it's pretty much game over anyway.

Was the comment made before or after the supposed pact was reached?

[Gass3268]

I slept on this, and I still think it's a really bad idea. And Kasich is still telling supporters to vote for him in Indiana. People will just see this as another sad attempt from Cruz to steal it from Trump, just like in Colorado, and they'll retaliate by voting for Trump. If Trump really is above 50% in Pennsylvania like PPP says he is, then it's pretty much game over anyway.

Was the comment made before or after the supposed pact was reached?

It was made today in a press conference, so after. He said they should still vote for him in Indiana, he's just not going to run ads or campaign.

[Gass3268]

Also I have a gut feeling that Cruz giving way to Kasich in New Mexico and Oregon is going to result in Trump winning more delegates in those states.

[Torie]

Also I have a gut feeling that Cruz giving way to Kasich in New Mexico and Oregon is going to result in Trump winning more delegates in those states.

It sounds like maybe Kasich did the deal because he didn't have money to put into Indiana in any event. And that suggests that Kasich does not have much of a preference between Cruz and Trump, and thus is willing to increase the odds of Trump getting nominated in order, at least as he sees it, to keep his own Hail Mary Pass campaign alive. Thanks a lot John.

[jaichind]

It is too late for a deal like this to work. Cruz should have tried to make a deal before the NY primary to back Kasich in NY in return for Kasich's support for Cruz in IN.  If that had worked in NY it would have built a basis for collaboration in places like PA where  Kasich would focus on urban areas and Cruz focus in rural PA.  If that worked then it could have created the conditions for a similar collaboration in places like CA.  But without positive experiences of collaboration as a  confidence building measures I do not see how this will work.  We have to wait for IN results to see if this worked and in the meantime there will be plenty of things that will work to undermine this deal on the ground.

[Gass3268]

Also it wouldn't surprise me if Lyin' Ted stabs Kasich in the back after Indiana and campaigns in New Mexico/Oregon.

[IceSpear]

Also it wouldn't surprise me if Lyin' Ted stabs Kasich in the back after Indiana and campaigns in New Mexico/Oregon.

That would actually fit perfectly with his campaign so far!

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

Also it wouldn't surprise me if Lyin' Ted stabs Kasich in the back after Indiana and campaigns in New Mexico/Oregon.

It's a near-certainty. No honour among thieves and all.

[Vosem]

I slept on this, and I still think it's a really bad idea. And Kasich is still telling supporters to vote for him in Indiana. People will just see this as another sad attempt from Cruz to steal it from Trump, just like in Colorado, and they'll retaliate by voting for Trump. If Trump really is above 50% in Pennsylvania like PPP says he is, then it's pretty much game over anyway.

Well, yeah. The point is that those who want _trump to lose above all else should vote Cruz (which they were probably going to do anyway), but those who support Kasich specifically, or cannot stomach Cruz, still have Kasich as an option rather than fleeing to _trump.

The genius of this move is that it allows Cruz to give some delegates to Kasich (in NM and OR) in exchange for _trump getting fewer delegates in Indiana. Who delegates vote for on the first ballot is more a question of pride than one that actually matters at this point (either _trump or not-_trump is what's significant).

Exactly. Beside that, a LOSER+LOSER=LOSERS.

Anybody who actually thinks like this has been supporting _trump for weeks (in fact, probably since before Iowa). I'd also note that most of Cruz's surrogates have been admitting that he's aiming for a contested convention post-FIMNO, and it doesn't seem to have meaningfully hurt anywhere outside the Northeast (which is its own world in this primary).

[Gass3268]

Looks like he's willing to do whatever it takes to get Kasich out of Indiana, even if it means ceding Oregon and New Mexico to Trump.

The ironic thing is that if the voters listen, which is dubious, Kasich gives up a winner take all state by CD and statewide in return for two proportional states Oregon is basically as proportional as it gets with like a 3% floor and New Mexico requires a 15% floor.

But I am not so convinced that the voters will like Cruz and Kasich telling them how to vote. They'll vote Trump instead.

At the end of the day, both Kay-sick and lyin' Ted have the same chance of winning the nomination on the first ballot as Lief.

TRUMP's chances of winning on the first ballot aren't great if he doesn't win Indiana. Is it doable? Sure. But it really puts him under pressure to surprise in Montana, Nebraska, or South Dakota.

Assuming the polls are true, Trump should take somewhere between 95 and 106 of the 118 pledged delegates up for grabs on Tuesday. He'll lose 9 or 10 in RI and a few CDs in MD.

Assuming PPP is right and Trump >50 in CT, he'll take all 28. He'll also take the 16 in DE and the 17 statewide in PA. The range in RI at 50% is likely 9-10. He should win the statewide in MD (38), but lose a CD or two. I put him in the 26-35 delegate range there.

After April 26, Trump will basically be at 950 of 1,237.

Worst case, assume 9-12 in Indiana.

Also assume Nebraska goes Cruz and West Virginia should be a near clear Trump sweep of the 37 delegates there the next week.

Piece those two together and you're now very close to 1,000.

Oregon (28) is straight proportional. Worst case, he'll take 1/3 of those delegates, so let's give him 9.

Washington State (44) is proportional for the statewide delegates (14) and modified WTA for the 10 CDs. >50% takes the district, <50% is 2/1. Trump will get 10-15 delegates even if the loses the state.

You're now roughly at 1,020. About 200-225 to go.

Trump takes New Jersey's 51 delegates. Roughly 1,070.

Trump gets 5-15 delegates out of proportional NM (24). Roughly 1,080.

Cruz wins SD and MT.

Trump would need about 140-160 or so of the 177 CA delegates to go over the top.

Also remember, that a number of the 54 CD delegates in PA have softly agreed to vote for the winner in that district. Trump is polling > 50% according to a PPP tweet in PA. That increases the likelihood that he'll get a decent portion of the unpledged there as well, minimizing California's significance a tad.

12 is four congressional districts(of 9), yeah that's possible in a losing scenario, but it doesn't seem incredibly likely. If TRUMP loses Indiana, he gets 3-9. Not seeing how 12 happens, the Cruz support would have to be quite regional.

I don't think it's safe to assume that TRUMP will sweep WV. There's plenty of articles around pointing out that WV delegates are directly elected, and while candidate preferences are listed next to the delegates, there's a few pitfalls. First off, the delegate selection is apparently all the way at the end of the ballot, after the beauty contest and after the gubernatorial primary and all the other local primaries that the state chose to hold on the same day. Some voters might just not reach the end of the ballot. Second, there's a clause that if a voter selects more than the allotted number of delegates by accident, their entire delegate selection portion won't be counted. Third, there's another clause that if a voter selects more than two delegates from any one county, all the delegate votes they cast for that specific county are thrown out. The way it's phrased, it seems like some of this may not be detailed much on the ballot itself. Plus, you also have to take into account TRUMP losing a small number of delegates thanks to his voters not liking certain names, just as we saw happen in Illinois. So TRUMP has to acknowledge the possibility that he ends up with ~25 delegates. (the total is 34 per 538, not 37)

So, if we assign TRUMP the following:

CT: 28/28 (Optimistic, it's not a given that he will get 50% and Kasich might be able to nab CD-4, which gets him 3 delegates no matter what)
Delaware: 16/16
MD: 35/38 (Slightly optimistic, I won't be surprised if he gets 32)
RI: 9/19
PA (Total): 53/71
IN: 9/57
WV: 25/34
OR: 12/28
WA: 17/44
NJ: 51/51
NM: 10/24

Then he needs 127 of California's delegates. That gives him room to lose 15 of the 53 congressional districts. He'd better hope Cruz or Kasich doesn't surge in the state. The number goes down to 100 if he wins Montana, and I think TRUMP would feel a lot better knowing he only needs 100 delegates from CA instead of 127.

Connecticut is WTA if someone goes over 50%. The CD's only come into play if no one is over 50%.

Also about California:

McCain won California by 7.69% over Romney in the competitive California race in 2008. McCain ended up winning 89.6% of the delegates to only 8.7% for Romney. Trump currently has a polling average lead of 20.5%. My guess is if he can keep his lead 10%, he's probably going to win enough in California to get where he needs to get.

[wolfsblood07]

This is a last gasp of desperation and will backfire badly.  Trump should lock it up before the convention for sure.

[IceSpear]

The question is whether Trump v. Cruz v. Kasich is more likely to have distinct geographic polarization in CA than McCain v. Romney did. I'm guessing yes.

[The Other Castro]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Alrighty then.

[Gass3268]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Alrighty then.

I heard the interview, he basically said that he didn't have the resources to campaign or put up ads in Indiana, but his supporters should still vote for him.

[dax00]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Alrighty then.

And this is why Kasich won't surrender his votes in Cali, securing the nomination for the Donald.

[Vosem]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Alrighty then.

And this is why Kasich won't surrender his votes in Cali, securing the nomination for the Donald.

Just like Kasich didn't surrender his votes in Wisconsin and Cruz didn't surrender his votes in Ohio, amirite?