Primary Updates - August 2014

I finally have some time to update some things here. Unfortunately, the blog has become down the list of priorities with everything else going on.

In Livingston County, we have up to five different primary contests depending on where you live.

8th District Congress - Mike Bishop vs Tom McMillin. This race has gone negative and I've gotten my share of mailings. This seat leans Republican, but it's not a safe district with Mike Rogers retiring. The dems have a four way primary of their own, so there's contests on both sides.

State Rep: - There are primaries in the 42nd and 47th district. In the 42nd, there's Brighton School Board President Nick Fiani, Former Livingston County Press and Argus General Manager Rich Perlberg, Novi Teacher Dale Rogers, and Brighton Township Treasurer and past LCGOP Chair Lana Theis. There's been a lot of "Friends of the Program" stuff going on in this race, although not from the candidates themselves.

In the 47th District, there's Howell Mayor Phil Campbell, former Howell School Board trustee Wendy Day, retired construction worker Harold Melton, and Handy Twp Supervisor Dr Hank Vaupel, . Ted Ring dropped out of the race but his name is on the ballot. I expect this race to be extremely close, maybe even 2002 close.

Both of these districts are tough to read. It depends who turns out the vote and who stays home.

For County Commissioner, two incumbents have primaries. Steve Williams is challenged by Steven Hart. I'm not as familiar with Pinckney area local politics as I am other parts of the county, but I don't think Williams has a lot of worries here. I've seen a lot more from Williams. Ron Van Houten is facing Fowlerville Village Councilman Doug Helzermann. Both candidates have been active this campaign trail. This could be a geographic matchup. I don't bet against Van Houten. He's been through battles before.

Those are four primary contests. What's the fifth contest? Precinct Delegate.
334 candidates have filed. Historically (at least in Livingston County), there's been few contests for those positions. That has since changed. Part of this is due to the Lt Government battle between Brian Calley and Hartland Township's own Wes Nakagiri. Precinct delegates elect delegates to state convention. State delegates pick the nominees of (among others) Lt Governor. There's more in state there as well as precinct delegates vote for 1/2 of the County GOP executive committee (which chooses officers) and state delegates next year pick district and state party leadership.

It's an active primary, despite the high profile races uncontested.

There's also several ballot questions in the county.

Prop 1 - Personal Property Tax repeal, use tax earmarked. - I'm undecided on this one. I think the PPT needs to be repealed, but this ballot language is confusing. There's broad support for this from local governments, chambers of commerce, Senator Joe Hune, and others across the spectrum. If I voted today, I'd be a reluctant yes vote, but I still need to see more.

Fowlerville Schools - Millage renewal, non residential (18 mills).

Hamburg Library - New Millage (replacing expired one) 0.80 Mills

Green Oak Fire - Millage Renewal - 1.77 mills

Green Oak Police - Millage Renewal - 2.38 mills

Pinckney Library - Millage - 1.4562 mills (.9562 renewal, 0.5 new)

Howell Twp Roads - Millage renewal - .9496 Mills

Putnam Twp Fire - Millage renewal - 1.192 Mills

Cohoctah Roads - Millage renewal - 1.5 Mills

Village of Fowlerville Mosquito Control - Millage Renewal - .469 Mills

What happened in Virginia? (Eric Cantor loses)

I haven't followed a lot of national election races this year. There's been too much stuff locally that takes up my time. I knew longtime incumbent Eric Cantor had an opponent, but I didn't think much about it. If I thought an incumbent would have gone down in flames, my money would have been on Lindsay Graham.

It was Eric Cantor, House Majority Leader and  a suburban Richmond area congressman. He lost to a guy named David Brat. A lot of people are giving opinions about the reasons for that and a lot of people are taking credit. I'm not a Virginia elections expert. I do know the obvious. Cantor ticked off his district, and Brat was viewed as an acceptable alternative. David Brat is an Economics Professor at Randolph Macon College. He's a Michigan native and went to Hope College. He has a doctorate from American University. That's all that's really known about him.

These are the facts here about the primaries.

There were three congressional primaries there. Two of them had incumbents, and one was an open seat.

VA-01- Rob Wittman won his primary 76-24 in a low turnout race. This district was next to Cantor's and had around 1/4 of the votes in the primary. Cantor's district is more Republican, but both districts are Republican leaning districts. There was 17500 votes there.

VA-08 - The democrats had an open seat in Jim Moran's district. That primary had almost 39000 votes. That is a base democrat district covering Arlington, Alexandria, Falls Church, and part of Fairfax County.

In Cantor's VA-07 district, there were 65000 votes. Turnout was high. Cantor lost by 7300 votes in a 56-44 defeat.

Geographicaly, Cantor won four municipalities.
Culpeper County - 2900 votes, 50-49 -  Rural, northern part of the district
Orange County - 2000 votes, 61-39 - Rural, northern part of the district
Spotsylvania County - 3600 votes, 54-46 - Rural, northern part of the district
Richmond (his home) - 3100 votes, 54-46 - The big city.

The rest went to Brat.
Chesterfield County  - 13000 votes - 55-45 Brat, Richmond suburbs
Goochland County - 2700 votes - 54-56. Rural, west of Richmond.
Hanover County - 13000 votes - 68-32. Rural/suburban transition area north of Richmond
Henrico County - 20000 votes - 53-47. Suburban Richmond
Louisa County - 2400 votes - 56-44. Rural. Northwest of Richmond
New Kent County - 2000 votes - 63-37. Rural. East of Richmond

In short, Cantor won his home, and three rural counties furthest away from the district closer to the DC area. He was clobbered in suburbia and the rural areas closer to Richmond.

That's the facts, the rest is conjecture. 





Was this due to amnesty as many pundits say? Maybe, maybe not. Lindsay Graham won without a runoff (7 way race), unfortunately. I was hoping McCain's mini-me would at least be tossed to a runoff. Was this tea party? McConnell beat Matt Bevin in Kentucky. Most of the tea party put their forces in Bevin's race and Chris McDaniel's in Mississippi. (two very flawed challengers against beatable incumbents).

One difference I see between Bevin/McDaniel and Brat is candidate quality. Bevin lost 60-35 in the primary to McConnell in what was supposed to be a close race. Bevin made a fatal error when he made a cockfighting and dogfighting speech. I can see the Michael Vick/Bevin morphing ad already if he won the primary. Or a postcard with a picture of those two next to a Golden Retriever. McConnell isn't my favorite, but needed to win that one. Some of McDaniel's top supporters (who need a major league ass kicking and I don't mean just a political one) may cost him the race against the democrat if he wins the primary. I'd be reluctantly voting Cochrane if I lived in Mississippi. Those wouldn't be ideology votes since I'm closer to the challengers on ideology there than I am the incumbents. In the case of Brat, I haven't heard his name in the news or on political websites until yesterday. That's not always a bad thing considering I'm up in Livingston County, Michigan and not Hanover County, Virginia. I didn't hear about Brat making cockfighting comments. I didn't hear about Brat's supporters sneaking into a nursing home to take pictures of the opposing candidate's wife. Brat ran on political record as best as I can tell.

Brat's quotes. From Politico

“I think it was just kind of a perfect combination of when I was walking door-to-door, you just go up to the door and talk to the average person and everybody is in agreement that the country’s on the wrong track, right?” he said, before appearing on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program.
“You just walk up to the door and say, ‘How are you doing?’ and everyone knows we’re on the wrong track. The problem with modern politics is everybody is doing sound bite stuff. In my stump speech, I give 20 minutes on why I think we’re off track. And I think people do really want to engage in a serious high-level discussion on how to get the country back on track because people care about their own country.”

I liked Brat's comments here from the same article.

When Brat began to walk away from the interview, he quickly turned around and stopped. He said he had just spoken to Sean Hannity on the telephone, and said he wished the press would stop labeling his victory as the conservative right toppling the establishment.
“I do want to add that the press – and I’ve heard there’s already some senior Democratic officials trying to spin this as a matter of right or left – and I just reject those categories. I’m running on free markets, constitutional principles. I don’t think free markets are either right or left. I don’t think the rule of law is either right or left. So through the duration of the last six months the press has been trying to pigeonhole me. Some people call me a liberal professor, other people call me a tea party candidate.”
When asked if he is a tea partier, Brat said, “I just say what I say — I’m running on the Republican principles, the creed. I’ve given stump speech after stump speech on those six principles that I believe in and I have huge grassroots and tea party support, and I owe those people the election. I owe Republicans, tea party, grassroots — they all came together and helped me win tonight. Utter thanks, but the press is trying to do this sound bite stuff and put you in a little hole, and peg you in one way or the other.
“I do just want to emphasize I’m running on ideas and principles. It’s for real. And so the press ignored me last time when I said that. Everyone’s acting like it’s a mystery how I won. I think the American people actually like principles and ideals. That’s what I said for six months and no one paid any attention. And so now that I won, it’s a shocker, I think it’s for real, based on those themes: principles and ideas matter.”

This http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/2014-virginia-primary-david-brat-107700_Page2.html#ixzz34LKxdTL9">caught my attention.

Brat also got a bit lucky. At the same time he was emerging, Cantor and his political team were angering conservatives by trying to tighten their grip on the Virginia Republican Party. Cantor tried to boost Linwood Cobb, his close ally, for a local Republican Party chairmanship, and failed. It was a loss that most of his aides brushed aside, but caused real ire among tea partiers.
That widespread discontent became evident Tuesday evening. Cantor lost six of the 10 counties in his district, including Henrico County, his longtime political base

If you burn bridges, and those you burn know what they are doing (or know people who know what they are doing), bad thing can happen to you.

This is from a local Hanover County activist who wanted Cantor fired. It's titled the Top 10 reasons Cantor lost.

I'm beginning to see a picture of what I think happened. Normal insurgent challenges don't win, until enough people get pissed off, and enough people who know a bit about campaigns get pissed off.

From that Top 10 list:

10 – LOST TOUCH: There has been significant discontent in the district for years with Eric Cantor. He earned a reputation as someone who cared more about Fortune 500 companies than he did voters in his own district and he proved it by spending all his time with them and no time with the people in his district. It was baffling to many of us. When the tea party first sprung up people were angry with Cantor. I had known Cantor and Ray Allen for years and thought it was just a misunderstanding. Surely this could be resolved by opening the lines of communication and just having a meeting together for Cantor to hear our complaints so we could work together. I still remember the private meeting I had with his consultant, Ray Allen, five years ago when he told me, “Eric Cantor will never hold a town hall meeting. Over my dead body! You hear me?” Fatal mistake.

Consultants (and I am one) are often in a bubble. Mike Rogers was not a tea party favorite, but he's shown up and engaged and made his case to them. I've seen his people at a lot of tea party events as well as regular Republican events.


Numbers 2 and 8 really I think were the biggest.

2 – STRONG CANDIDATE: The conservatives and tea party put up a strong candidate. A lesson should be learned here by others. Brat has an impressive resume with his PhD in economics, his seminary degree from Princeton, and his work in ethics reform and education policy. He was an intelligent and articulate candidate that brought credibility to the movement. Brat ran a positive and upbeat campaign that solely was focused on the Republican Creed. Cantor refused to engage Brat or even participate in debates with Brat. Fatal mistake.

How often do I mention candidate quality?  This David Brat guy doesn't sound like a Christine O'Donnell, Matt Bevin, some of Chris McDaniel's top backers, or Sharron Angle.

8 – UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES: Eric Cantor and his consultant, Ray Allen, wanted to control the Republican Party of Virginia and he was willing to use any means necessary to accomplish his goal, including slating tea party and conservatives out of the political process. He created such outrage that we removed Cantor’s 7th district chairman, Linwood Cobb, at the convention last month. We left the convention with 700 delegates that energetically and enthusiastically worked the doors and phones for Brat. It is really not smart to make enemies of your friends, and especially when you are in a primary. Fatal mistake.

And THAT I think was the big key. One of the old sayings is "If you're going to kill the king, you better succeed." That doesn't mean wound for one battle. When convention battles are takeover battles, you're going have some nasty fights and they last a long time. Activists in general hate coronations. They also have more political knowledge than the average activist.  A lot of them don't have fear of "big names". "So what, you work for us" is the general attitude.

From Politico in April

RICHMOND, Va. — House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is a rising star in national politics, but here at home, he’s at the center of a battle with fellow Republicans.
His allies are maneuvering to pack leadership slots at the Republican Party of Virginia with like-minded figures — a move they hope will bring stability to a party with little money and lots of infighting.

That’s infuriated some local conservatives, who feel they are being squeezed out of positions of power and aren’t going down without a fight. They are rallying behind insurgent primary challenger Dave Brat, an economics professor with just $40,000 in the bank — compared to Cantor’s $2 million.

While Brat has little chance of upsetting Cantor in the June 10 primary, the campaign and its supporters are making life a little tougher for Cantor, who will almost certainly become the next speaker of the House.

Those don't impact the numbers, but they impact organization and lot of them know what they are doing. If they all went to help David Brat, that can have a big impact, especially if they have good voter lists and contact information. 

 

I don't think this was all ideological.  Graham survived. McConnell survived. I think ideology was part of it, but more of it was inside baseball stuff that came back to bite him This election is a lesson. It's a lesson to every pol and party official out there. Be careful who you piss off.

Recap of the primary

It was a rough primary overall, at least for me. It wasn't a total loss and some folks I wanted to win, but a lot of the candidates I was supporting lost. Most losses don't bother me that much in primaries. Usually I can easily point to good reasons why the results were the way they were. I wasn't happy with the Genoa Races or Oakland judicial race at all. The best folks didn't win there, and at least in the Genoa case, low turnout absolutely killed us. I wasn't that happy with the treasurer's race either, and low turnout didn't help us at all there either. I'll update the districts periodically now that the results are in.




One thing I noticed is that a lot of votes were absentee. There were 10215 votes in the HD-47 primary. I did some work for Cindy this primary. At least 34% of the vote - going into election day - was absentee. I assume that's across the board and applies to HD-42 as well. I don't have the exact numbers. Turnout was very low despite all the contested races. In my Green Oak polling place, I walked in. There was one person ahead of me and one person in line at the other precinct there. At 11:30 AM, I was number 55. My ballot number was about 259. Cards cast - 311.

The lack of absentee program doomed Clark Durant. Durant peaked late and worked hard at the end in Livingston County, but you have to have the AV program going to have a chance against a name like Hoekstra. I think if all of the turnout was Tuesday with no AV's, Durant may have won. The election started in June however and not August. Hoekstra needs to have the AV program ready to go to have a shot against Stabenow.

Mike Rogers won easily against two unknowns. I didn't see much if any of a campaign from Hetrick or Molnar. Hetrick had some signs in the right of way, but it takes more than that to have a strong campaign that would challenge someone like Mike.

Dale Rogers had a waiver wire campaign against Bill Rogers, but did what he could considering the resources in his campaign. I'll give him credit for hitting doors and also showing up the unity breakfast this morning. He took his lumps like a man, as I had to do in a couple of cases with some of the campaigns I was involved in, and I hope he stays active.  I respect those who run actual campaigns. 

Harold Melton I think underestimated Cindy Denby due to her low key demeanor. There's a difference between being low key and weak. Cindy's a very strong incumbent especially due to the constituent relations in that office. If you're going to challenge Cindy, you better be prepared or you'll be overwhelmed, and not even by the campaign resources. Personally, I wish Harold ran for township board in Howell Twp.

Prosecutor was close as expected. Bill Vailliencourt won narrowly over Carolyn Henry. Lyle Dickson had more votes than the difference between the two, and I wonder who would have otherwise receive those votes.

Sheriff wasn't close. Tom Ash defeated Tom Ash. Bob Bezotte won easily, and I think Ash's speech at the Brighton Tea Party, the 11th hour complaint from Alex Duncan (who lost his race in Marion Twp) claiming he got an ass whooping in 1985 as a kid (I later found out Bezotte was out of town that day) and claiming he mentioned it as not politics, and the Dukes of Hazzard stunt by Mike Moorman all cost him.

Margaret Dunleavy won easily as expected. That's a well run office and she does a good job.

I was surprised at the treasurer's race. Brian Wutz ran what I thought was a good campaign and a much more active one. Nash was an appointed incumbent who had much of the established elected officials/commissioners backing but was running an essentially status quo campaign. I thought it was going to be close, and it was a 62-38 loss. It was closer all other countywide incumbent challenges, but it still wasn't close. I hope Brian stays active. He's a good guy who adds a lot to the party.

I was surprised at the margin in the Register of Deeds race, although I'm not surprised Sally Reynolds won. Sally's an underrated campaigner who works despite limited campaign budgets. She was hitting a lot of doors. Carole Bullion was a stronger challenger than her results would indicate. Both are good people and I hope Carole stays active. I hope Carole runs again when the seat opens up.

There are two commissioners who lost re-election. Three were vulnerable. Two are gone. Ron Van Houten survived against Bill Call. Van Houten's a good guy. I don't know Bill Call except that he is or was part of the school board. I was a little surprised Van Houten won because of Call's strength in Fowlerville. Jim Mantey lost to Bill Green. I'm not that surprised there. Mantey was a good commissioner. He was not a good campaigner. People didn't know him. I am slightly surprised at my own district. I will have having a new county commissioner. Jack LaBelle is being replaced by Gary Childs. I don't know him. I know that he owns a bike shop and has many ties in South Lyon. Much of Green Oak is closely tied to South Lyon around the Rushton area. I voted for Jack, whom I knew from the board, and he won't be easy to replace.

Incumbents were the winners generally in the township races with few exceptions. I wasn't happy against with Genoa's case. Don't complain when "downtown Genoa" is on the way.  I was happy to see Linda Rowell win, but Spicher and Woodall would have done a real good job there. Green Oak has a new trustee. James Tuthill will be replacing Wally Qualls. I was hoping Mike Z would win in Hamburg.

Ballot Questions:

Passed - Conway Twp Roads, Deerfield Roads, Hartland Fire renewal, Osceola Roads, Fenton Schools Renewal (in county), Fowlerville fire/library,

Failed - Howell Township Sewer (no surprise there - 80-20 margin)



Outside the county, MI-11 wasn't a surprise to me. Bentivolio in Oakland had about 29,000 votes compared to the 13,800 writeins. In Wayne County, Bentivolio had about 13,800 to the 8400 or so write-ins. I estimated that it would take about 25,000 to have a ghost of a chance and about 30,000+ to have a more realistic chance. There were about 22,000 write ins. Most were probably for Cassis. That's damn good, but shows how difficult it is. Interestingly, Bill Roberts the LaRouche guy, only lost Oakland by 2000 against the establishment candidate Syed Taj, Taj did better in Wayne County where he's from, winning by 4000 there. I wonder if the dems are kicking themselves for not running someone stronger like Dian Slavens, Tim Melton, or Mike Duggan.


MI-13 - John Conyers won easily.

MI-14 - Gary Peters is the first whitey in Congress to represent a part of Detroit since either Sander Levin or Curtis Hertel to have part of the city in their district. Hansen Clark won the Wayne County portion of the district 51-33 with others taking the rest. 33% is still good for a white dude in Oakland County who most importantly doesn't live there. Oakland came through big for Peters. Clarke actually got third in Oakland, behind Brenda Lawrence and Peters. Peters won not surprisingly West Bloomfield and Farmington Hills. Somewhat surprisingly, he won Southfield, Oak Park, and Pontiac. Pontiac and Oak Park wern't close. Southfield was close because Lawrence is the mayor there, and Peters still won. Southfield, Oakland, and Pontiac blacks aren't as adverse of voting for white folks. I am surprised Peters won because Detroit still has most of the district.

I'll update the districts when I get a chance to reflect who the nominees are for the fall.

Strategic August primary voting

New Poll on the senate race now that it's narrowed down some.

Also, I'm probably going to get an earful on this post.

Some people confuse presidential and regular primaries. They work slightly differently. In Presidential primaries, you choose a ballot and publicly declare it. It's recorded and public record. It's still an open primary, but the party ballot is not secret, although the actual vote is. In regular August (or July if absentee) primaries, you get your ballot and vote for one side and the nonpartisan races. Ballots are not declared in August.

Do I vote in the Republican primary here in Livingston County because I'm a Republican, or because that's where the contests are held? The answer is because that's where the contests are held. In this county, there are no primaries on the democrat side. That will mean that the democrats are likely going to vote in our primary. As we're an open primary (although you must vote one side of the ballot). I've only crossvoted in one primary, back in 2002 when almost all of my races were unopposed on the R side, and we had a primary on the dem side for governor (and I was confident that Posthumus would demolish the jackass Joe Schwarz). I was hoping to stop Granholm and voted for the easiest dem to beat. Blanchard.

Since then, I've stayed on my side, and certainly will be doing that again this primary as there are a ton of contests on my side, and none on the dems (who have no primary opposition). When there's several contests on both sides (2010), I'll stay on my own being in Livingston County. I only go for mischief if I don't have to skip too many races.

If I lived in Warren, particularly HD-28, I'd be voting a democrat ballot, as Warren is a democrat stronghold. I'd vote my normal way in November, but I understand how things are and have a major philosophy. Take the best you can get in that area. Either that means the easiest opponent, or one who has one or two issues of agreement. In that district, almost any dem will win, so I'll go for the moderate. Jon Switalski and Lesia Liss are both economic liberals in an economic liberal area. However, Liss is at least reasonable on the 2nd Amendment issue and life issue and isn't for killing babies. She's more of the old school democrats that most of us in auto families grew up with. Switalski is a down the line lib. I'd take what I can get there. Lesia Liss would have my vote in the primary, and Steven Klusek would have it in the general.

That's similar to the 2002 John Dingell vs Lynn Rivers strategy. Gun owners and Auto Industry interests encouraged the republican members of their organizations to vote for Dingell in the primary because he was better than Rivers. Both are liberal, but you'll occasionally get something good with Dingell.

I'm sure many democrats think the same way here in Livingston County in reverse. Primaries are often when the elections are decided, especially downticket. Not many democrats win as democrats in Livingston County.

July 9th is the last day to register in the primary.

Did 100,000 democrats actually cross over 3-1 for Santorum in the Michigan primary? I don't believe they did.

One of the big pushes from Romney surrogates in Michigan is that due to sites like Daily Kos and a Santorum robocall, that 100-120,000 democrats voted in the Michigan primary to create mischief like the case with McCain in 2000. The source that is used is exit polling from CNN. I do not begrudge the surrogates for using exit polling as a source. On a lot of things, it is good. I think the polling was close with a lot of factors. That aspect I am doubting. I also highly suspect that it is being used as quasi-justification for awarding that extra delegate to Romney after the fact.

Even if the 100,000 democrat crossover is true, I don't have a lot of sympathy for it. This year. The reason being is that the party chose an open, or a closed in name only primary with same day choice of ballot. There's no party registration in Michigan either. I've long argued against an open primary when there is no contest on the other side. It only works when there is a competitive race on both sides. Presidential primaries are much different than August counterparts when both sides usually (although not always) have contests of their own.

So why don't I think 60,000 votes out of the 377,000 cast for Santorum came from democrats? Actual election returns. If you look at Michigan maps, especially 2004, you'll see how many counties votes for democrats and how many voted for republicans, along with which ones. A lot of the democrats in Michigan are concentrated in a few areas. This can be seen with the congressional districts. Most of the democrat districts, especially under the new allocation, are 60% or more democrat. All of those districts except the 13th district, votes for Romney, not Santorum. Most of the Republican held districts voted for Santorum.

GOP held Districts:
CD 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 - Santorum
CD 8, 11 - Romney

Dem districts:
CD 5, 9, 12, 14 - Romney
CD 13 - Santorum

That alone doesn't tell the whole story. There are pockets of democrats in the republican districts and pockets of republicans in the democrat districts, but it is not hard to find samples in democrat areas. One thing is clear, most of Santorum's votes were from Republicans. Most of Romney's votes were also from Republicans. Democrats don't win Livingston County in primaries. Democrats don't win Ottawa County in primaries.

I'll start with Pontiac and Auburn Hills. Why? Pontiac is a democrat stronghold in Oakland County. It's 80% democrat every election. It also was ground zero for an open state rep election and charter issue as well, so there is a reason for the democrats to vote there besides mischief. Here's the results for that state rep district, strictly in Pontiac itself, followed by Auburn Hills, a democrat leaning area, but not nearly on the same scale. Republicans often get 45% of the vote there, although McCain bombed and Obama broke 60% there.

Pontiac:
Tim Greimel (D) - 88.10% - 5,746
Bob Gray (R) - 11.90% - 776

Auburn Hills:
Bob Gray (R) - 50.53% - 1,338
Tim Greimel (D) - 49.47% - 1,310

Gray overperformed in Auburn Hills, probably due to the presidential primary. Here's the primary results in both areas there.

Auburn Hills: (population about 21,500)
Romney - 743 - 40.23%
Santorum - 639 - 34.88%
Paul - 279 - 15.23%
Newt - 117 - 6.39%
Obama - 782 - 93.65%
Dem Uncommitted - 53 - 6.35%

Pontiac: (Population about 59,000)
Santorum - 575 - 41.01%
Romney - 364 - 25.96%
Paul - 317 - 22.61%
Newt - 92 - 6.56%
Obama - 4881 - 97.72%
Dem Uncommitted - 114 - 2.28%

Most dems stayed home in their primary, even with just Obama there with "uncommitted". About 15-20% of Pontiac often votes Republican and about 45% of Auburn Hills often votes Republican. The Republicans in Pontiac are more likely working class social conservatives and small business owners. Those in Auburn Hills tend to vary. Auto executives are there, and it is also Tom McMillan's old stomping grounds before he went to the Rochester area. Both Romney and Santorum received more votes in Auburn Hills than Pontiac. Ron Paul was another story.

Here's one of the most Republican areas of Oakland County. Brandon Township. I'm going to follow that with nearby Oakland Township. They are both republican strongholds in Oakland County. There were not a lot of crossovers here. Both of these areas are consistently over 60% Republican areas.

Brandon Twp:
Santorum - 802
Romney - 775
Paul - 275
Obama - 135
D Uncommitted - 22

Oakland Twp
Romney - 1736
Santorum - 870
Paul - 271
Obama - 188
D Uncommitted - 17

Both of those are North Oakland Republican strongholds. The areas there are both republican areas voting for different republican candidates. One's a little more rural than the other, but neither are Bloomfield Hills where there is more of a homer factor.

Macomb County results varies some as well. The strongholds there are less like Pontiac and are whiter, with some republican pockets, and a lot of union independents. There wasn't a real pattern one way or the other.

Warren (about 60% dem):
Romney 4229, Santorum 4074, Paul 1337, Obama 3066, D uncommitted 638
Roseville's percentages were about the same as Warrens

Washington Twp (GOP Stronhold)
Romney 1932, Santorum 1347, Paul 355, Obama 376. D uncommitted 66

Utica (50/50)
Santorum 217, Romney 213, Paul 77, Obama 89, D uncommitted 28

Ray Twp (GOP Stronghold)
Santorum 261, Romney 250, Paul 74. Obama 53, D uncommitted 11

Overall Santorum won these areas:
GOP - Armada, Memphis, Ray, Richmond City and Twp
Dem - Center Line, Eastpointe,
Swing - Lenox, Utica

Santorum didn't win Roseville, Warren, or Mt Clemens which are democrat, nor Republican areas like Washington Twp, Shelby Twp, or Macomb Twp.

Obama had the most votes in Center Line, Eastpointe, Roseville, all narrowly.
Romney actually beat him in Mt Clemens. Both Santorum and Romney beat him in Warren. I think both candidates had their share of crossovers in these parts of Macomb County. Social liberals more to Romney and Social conservatives more to Santorum. I certainly didn't see a big push though one way or another, despite dem consultant Joe DiSano's advocacy of mischief.

Looking at another democrat stronghold. Washtenaw County.

Ann Arbor had less than 10% turnout outside of the 2nd Ward which is more republican than most of the city. That is a high money area, and went for Romney. The rest of Ann Arbor was mixed across the board, but hardly enough to manner. Some went to Santorum, some Romney, some Paul. Some of those were probably crossovers, but at less than 10% turnout, they could just as easily been those few republicans in the city.

Ypsi went narrowly for Santorum, but Obama had more votes there. The "rural" Ann Arbor Township precinct went for Santorum. That's also the Dominos Farms location. Whitmore Lake area went for Santorum. Augusta Twp (south of Ypsi) did as well. Probably not crossovers. Saline went for Romney. Probably not crossovers there either. These areas are matching about what I'd suspect.

I've look at different election areas across the state. I'm noting really out of the ordinary with vote patterns. 100,000 votes or even 65,000 in crossovers is very significant. If someone can point out where they would come from, I'd appreciate it. I don't see it. Not with Bay County and Saginaw County going for Romney, and if I was going to expect crossovers, it would be there.

I may be wrong and missing the forest for the trees here, but I don't see it. Exit polls are usually close, but not 100% in all aspects, and sometimes that is due to people lying. Voting results are what tell the truth.

Absotute Bullshit from the credentials committee

Flat out. This is legalized cheating. This is something that Richard Daley or Boss Tweed would pull. He's smiling from his grave. ACORN's cheering too.

From The Detroit Free Press

The Mitt Romney-Rick Santorum Michigan primary results just got a little more contentious.

Michigan’s two at-large delegates to the Republican National convention will be awarded to Michigan native Mitt Romney, following a vote last night by the state party’s credentials’ committee.

The vote came despite the party’s rules that the two at-large delegates are supposed to be awarded on a proportional basis based on the statewide popular vote. Romney won the statewide vote by a 41% to 38% margin over former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.

The rest of the state’s delegates will be split evenly between Romney and Santorum because each won seven congressional districts across the state.

This is the biggest example of why there's animosity between tea party groups and some committees within state party. If Santorum won the statewide popular vote, would you change the delegates after the fact? We all know the answer to that. Stick with the rules you made before the election. This is going to set off a firestorm among the grassroots, and also have repercussions in other states.

How is this going to factor down south (if they do the same for Santorum) or with states on Super Tuesday? Not very well. It will again feed into the perception (and reality here) that the elites are pushing Mitt Romney on us no matter what. It's bullshit. State committee as a whole needs to reverse this decision for their credibility, and stick with the original results. Procedures are important, and it's bad precedent, reminding me of a couple of convention votes (and cheating) from the old days before Saul Anuzis implements actual voting machines in voting. By this lame attempt to save face with a Romney "win" in Michigan, the credentials committee is getting egg on the entire state party, reflecting back on all members of party leadership down to district and county level. It's not worth one delegate.

This bullshit needs to be reversed ASAP. Kudos to Mike Cox and Eric Doster (election law attorney) for voting against this.

Post election Michigan analysis - Romney v Santorum

There's a lot of spin going on about this election. Santorum's claiming he won on election day. I think he's right. Pundits are claiming that Santorum collapsed from a 15 point lead on the last day. I think those are largely wrong. He never had a 15 pt lead here. There's also a lot of pissing and moaning about crossover Democrats (around 10% or so) and exit polls having Romney "Winning" republican voters.


As for crossovers, they may have mattered in the 13th district, but that's about it. ALL of the other major democrat districts went for Romney. 5th (narrowly - and Santorum won the Republican county), 9th (Levin), 12th (Dingell), 14th (Clarke/Peters). Romney won the 8th, 10th, and 11th held by Republicans, but the rest went for Santorum. Romney won the vote in Bay and Saginaw Counties. It's Tuscola that nearly cost him in the 5th.

Apparently, the at large was supposed to be split, but state party wants to change the rules for Romney so there isn't a tie here. (eyeroll). If Jason Gillman's right, This is the type of bullshit that pisses people off. It's the same reason I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever about Santorum courting Reagan Democrats, or getting crossover votes. Romney's supporters chose this system. They wanted the open or closed in name only primary. They wanted it because they were worried about a Pawlenty or someone else upsetting their favorite candidate and thought that Romney would ironically appeal to independents and democrats. I pushed for caucus when this was decided, and I support that now. I don't think democrats should vote in Republican primaries. However, I'm not going to get pissed off when it happens when it is preventable and the powers that be choose not to prevent it. T.S. Don't change things after the fact because your boy didn't get the win. This is why people get mad at party leadership. Santorum did best in the most republican counties, with the exception of Livingston, Atrim, and Emmet. Santorum won Ottawa, Allegan, Missaukee, Hillsdale, Barry, Branch, St Joe, Sanilac, Lapeer, Osceola, Wexford, and Kent. That ain't due to democrats.

The biggest lesson from last Tuesday was this. The election wasn't Tuesday. It was from 30 days before Tuesday that ended Tuesday. I also made one major miscalculation in my predictions. I knew seniors would go for Romney as did the absentees. The absentee vote was key. I don't know the exact percentages, and won't because some counties combine absentee votes with normal precinct votes in their reporting. Others don't. Here are some samples.

Macomb County:
Romney Election Day 23,188
Romney AV 14,650
Total: 37,838

Santorum Election Day 22,999
Santorum AV 7,219
Total: 30,218

Total AV's - 21,869 (32.13% of the vote between the two of them not counting others)

That was enough to flip the 10th District to Romney. Absentees probably flipped the 5th as well although I can't get good AV reports there.

Romney won Kalamazoo County 9671-9008. It was absentees that once again made the difference there. Even in areas Santorum won, he lost absentees. Some areas in K-zoo combined absentees. Some didn't. The REPORTED AS ABSENTEE vote went 2479-1052 for Romney. That alone was 19% of the vote and does not include about 1/2 of the municipalities so the closer AV number between the two of them was probably 25-30% Take away just the reported as absentee votes, and Santorum won K-zoo County 7956-7192.

Unfortunately, I can find good AV precinct data in interior Northern MI counties that voted for Romney narrowly, but from what I have seen so far, the AV's are at least 25% of the vote, and might be closer to 30% statewide. If that is the case, then the polling samples were way off earlier. The polls had 17% absentee estimates. Why the discrepancies?

Exit polls had Santorum winning those ages 30-64, Romney winning Seniors, and Ron Paul winning the 20-somethings. There isn't a lot of surprises. Santorum did best with those "most conservative" and those who strongly emphasized the life issue. It was the pro-life vote. That's in-line with most polling up through the elections. The senior sample thought should be higher. This is speculation, but the pollsters probably missed the snowbirds. A lot of the voters were probably in Florida. Florida already had their primary and Romney won. A lot of the snowbirds probably made an early decision and sent it in. Pollsters didn't reach them because they wern't home or at least the home where they are likely registered. Why would they be registered in Michigan? Property tax homestead exemptions. The millage rates are much lower with homesteads than a vacation home here.

Absentees are often 30%+ in a general election. Anyone running campaigns in Michigan need to remember that and start early. Romney did and won because of that. Santorum became a 'legitimate candidate' in Michigan on February 7th (hat trick win), after the voting already started in Michigan. His whole Michigan campaign was in three weeks. It's amazing he even competed here with two strikes against him (money and early voting).

Long story short. Don't forget the absentees.

Unofficial Michigan results by congressional district - Romney 16, Santorum 14

3rd Update 3-1 - Changing the rules after the fact gives Romney the extra delegate.

2nd Update 2-29 - Apparently the at large delegates will be split 1-1 because they were close. That means Romney and Santorum actually tied in Michigan.

Update 2-29 - According to MIRS, Santorum won 1-4, 6, 7, 13. Romney won 5, 8-12, 14.

I'd still like to see the Tuscola numbers. Surprised at 13 from the absentee numbers I saw, but knew it was close.

MIRS numbers:
Congressional District Vote Breakdown (according to the Michigan Republican Party).

1st: Romney, 32,252. Santorum*, 32,325.
2nd: Romney, 29,912. Santorum*, 39,900.
3rd: Romney, 31,999. Santorum*, 33,491.
4th: Romney, 27,117. Santorum*, 29,528.
5th: Romney* 21,691. Santorum, 20,837.

6th: Romney, 26,738. Santorum*, 31,126.
7th: Romney, 28,925. Santorum*, 30,133.
8th: Romney*, 32,930. Santorum, 25,234.
9th: Romney* 24,060. Santorum, 17,221.
10th: Romney*, 31,319. Santorum, 29,278.

11th: Romney*, 41,733. Santorum, 24,577.
12th: Romney*, 19,623. Santorum, 17,675.
13th: Romney, 7,946. Santorum* 9,481.
14th: Romney*, 18,157. Santorum, 10,844

-------------------------------

First off, ignore the Sec of State's website for delegates. It's supposed to be by the NEW districts, and not the old districts. CNN did a great job with the county map.

I ran some numbers. The obvious districts ones I'm going to just call. Districts 2 and 6 went for Santorum just based on looking. Districts 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14 went for Romney. I can't get a read on the 13th, so I'm going to assume it's Romney's unless I find results that say otherwise due to the 10,000 vote Romney spread in Wayne County. (Updated - Wayne County Precinct results are in. MIRS called it for Santorum.

District 1:
Santorum by about 590. Mason County wasn't included, but Santorum won it so I'll call it for Santorum.

District 3:
Santorum by about 1669

District 4:
Santorum by about 1982 (Saginaw's clerk numbers for district splitting)

District 5:
Depends on Tuscola County. Too close to call. ALL of Tuscola gives Santorum a 968 vote edge. With it, Santorum wins by 511. Without it Romney leads by 457. I can't call it. MIRS called it for Romney.

District 7:
I have Santorum up 930 not factoring in Scio Township. 1/2 of Scio Township is in the 7th, and it's the less democrat part, relatively speaking (Dexter side). Romney took the Washtenaw portion of the 7th by 865, not counting Scio. It's close, but I'm going to call the 7th for Santorum. - (Scio is in. Even with all of Scio included, Santorum wins by about 300-400)

District 13:
MIRS called it for Santorum. Crossovers may have won this one since I think Romney won (barely) the more republican areas due to absentee votes.

So right now as it stands:
Romney wins overall, CD 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14. Total of 16
Santorum wins CD 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 13. Total of 14.


--------------

What did I learn from this? Romney didn't win this election today. He won this election largely 30 days ago. Santorum may actually have won "today." The election wasn't only today though. Absentee voters skewed the polls off slightly, and turned what I expected to be 1% either way into an approximate 3% victory. Seniors according to an exit poll voted for Romney by 16%. Absentee voting went higher if the patterns I saw in Kent, Washtenaw, and Macomb Counties went statewide. I had a bad feeling when I saw a low turnout today at the polls, combined with heavy absentees for Romney. Romney polled well with seniors which concerned me because in elections, they often run the show and bring their pick the victory. That's not to any party's advantage in Michigan despite Obama's bad polling among seniors. Seniors would also be the folks who remember George Romney as governor where I'd only know the name from political history.

The other thing I thought was a mistake by both candidates was not visiting Livingston County. This is the 3rd most republican county by percentage in the state, and it was ignored. Romney won it, which isn't surprising because he DID visit Milford next door and has at least been here before. Santorum had a chance to introduce himself here and didn't do so. Many voters here relied on the news when defining Santorum. Many also did with Romney, but a lot of folks have met him or met someone who has met him, especially Oakland transplants. Advantage Romney.

This puts Romney in a good position for Super Tuesday, but nothing's set in stone yet. There's still a primary. Personally at this point, I'd like to see a brokered convention. I never thought I'd say that. I don't expect it to happen, but I think we'd get a better overall GENERAL election candidate from a convention than what we are saddled with today. Romney's organization saved his ass here today. It's his biggest campaign strength. The problem is that there's only so much that can be done with this flawed a candidate. Santorum didn't become a player until Iowa and then those three wins in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri (I think). He then did what he did in Michigan in only a month while taking a scorched earth blast from Romney. Will he recover or not? I don't know. I don't know if Newt's still in the game either.

After today, I'm rooting for the brokered convention. That's my new endorsement, long shot as it may be. Until the final decision is made, I'll be happy to go back to covering state level and local level stuff.

Poll Update - 2nd PPP poll less of an outlier

Last Thursday, I had a post about the delegate process and listed polls and congressional districts.

I never thought Santorum was up 15 over Romney in Michigan. Most of the polls have it 4-10 pts. I think 4 is accurate, right now as things stand today. Will it change in a week? Possibly.

What I like about the PPP polls is that delegates in Michigan are chosen by Congressional District. All the polls are statewide only or listed by some regions. PPP used phone area codes. While that's not a perfect assessment of the polling by district, it does show a rough estimate.

Here's the latest from PPP


Area Code:
231 - 44-22 Santorum - West/NW MI. Muskegon to Traverse City
248 - 36-32 Romney - Oakland County
269 - 48-35 Santorum - Hastings, Battle Creek, Kalamazoo, St Joe
313 - 43-22-21 - Romney, Paul, Santorum. Big shift in Wayne County - Is this the Grosse Pointes or Redford/Westland? Paul vote is probably Dearborn.
517 - 40-33 Santorum - Big shift to Santorum. Lansing area, Western Livingston County, Hillsdale, Jackson.
586 - tied at 38. Macomb County.
616 - 37-35 Santorum - Grand Rapids, Holland, Ionia
734 - 40-29 Romney - Big shift to Romney. Ann Arbor, Ypsi, Southernmost Livingston County, Monroe. I'm not surprised here with Ann Arbor.
810 - 46-19-18 Santorum-Paul-Romney. Eastern Livingston, Flint area, Lapeer, Port Huron.
906 - 29-27-21 - Santorum-Romney-Paul - The UP. Small sample of numbers fluctuated here.
989 - 39-29 Santorum-Romney - From Saginaw to Northeastern Michigan.

Based on this:
Santorum takes - CD 1, CD 2, maybe 3, CD 4, CD 5, CD 6, CD 7, CD 10 (thanks to thumb),
Romney takes - CD 9, 11, probably 12, 14.
Tossup - My own 8th District and the 13th

These are the NEW districts that count, not the old one's. That could help or hurt Romney in a big way since the Bloomfield/Birmingham areas - his home base - are carved up into several districts.

The 9th has Southfield Township and Bloomfield Township.
The 11th has part of West Bloomfield, Bloomfield Hills, and Birmingham, as well as Troy.
The 14th has most of West Bloomfield.

Romney in all polls leads Oakland County. The question is where in Oakland. Oakland County is a big place, and doesn't think uniformly throughout the county.

Also the big shift his way in 734 and 313. Where was the 313 samples? I'm guessing largly Grosse Pointe, in the 14th district. Does Redford and Westland in the 13th lean the same way? I'll be somewhat surprised, but it's possible. The 734 numbers here reflect my more original thoughts. I don't see Ann Arbor or suburbs warming up to Santorum. I think Romney would also play well in Plymouth (11th District).

I see this going likely 8-4 Santorum with two up for grabs in the race for Congressional districts. If I got pushed into the corner, I'd guess Romney with the 8th and Santorum the 13th, both narrowly making it 9-5. I wouldn't be shocked at 8-6 or 10-4.

That's also if things don't change. A late surprise attack wouldn't shock me in the slightest.

Michigan's Delegate Process, Preview of race per Congressional District

There's a lot being said about Santorum taking the lead to some degree in most opinion polls. If Santorum wins Michigan, it will be gigantic from a PR, momentum, and fundraising standpoint. From an actual delegate standpoint, it's more complicated than that.

Michigan loses 50% (30) of the delegates for having the election before Super Tuesday. Part of the reason Michigan moved their primary up is because State Party wanted a primary and not a convention. By law in Michigan, elections are held only four days in a year (in response to MEA and school elections)

You can lose the state, and take more of the districts. From what I can find, delegates are apportioned in this fashion.

Two delegates selected at large proportional based on 15% of the vote. I don't know how that would work with two delegates.

Two delegates each, winner take all per NEW 2012 congressional district. These are the new districts, not the current districts. A map of the new districts are here.

Quick rundowns:

Mitchell Poll - Santorum up 17% in Grand Rapids Media Market, 9% in Non Detroit Media Market, 7% Detroit Media Market.

Detroit News poll - Comment - "Oakland County is an island for him"

MRG Poll - Santorum up 3 over Romney in Lansing media market, Santorum up 45 in the UP, Santorum up 18 in Traverse City Market, 16 in Grand Rapids Market, four in Detroit and Flint media markets. Romney up 8 in Oakland County. Tied in Macomb.


PPP Poll by Area Code:

231 - Santorum up 20. 231 is West and Northwest Michigan from around Muskegon north to Petoskey.

248 - Romney up 14. 248 is Oakland County.

269 - Santorum up 14 over Newt. West and Southwest Michigan from around Hastings to Battle Creek to Kalamazoo to St Joe to New Buffalo.

313 - Santorum up 10. 313 is part of Wayne County. Detroit, Redford, Grosse Pointes, Dearborn.

517 - Paul up 3 over Santorum and Romney. 517 is largely Lansing area, Jackson, Western Livingston County, and Hillsdale.

586 - Santorum up 15 over Newt. (Strongly contradicts PPP) 586 is Macomb County.

616 - Santorum up 13. Grand Rapids, Holland, Ionia.

734 - Santorum up 22. Ann Arbor, Monroe, Ypsi, part of Wayne County (Livonia), small part of Southern Livingston County.

810 - Santorum up 13. Brighton, Flint, Lapeer, Port Huron.

906 - Santorum up 22 over Newt. That is the UP.

989 - Santorum up 20. Saginaw, Bay City. Northern Lower Michigan.

M1-01 - North Michigan. As of now, it looks like Santorum's best district. 906, some 989, and some 231 area codes. It's a very blue collar area outside of parts of the Lake Michigan Coastline. The UP is conservative, but more than anything else despises phonies. McCain won most of this area in 2008. Advantage Santorum

M1-02 - West Michigan Coast, from Holland to Ludington. 616 and 231. Ottawa County is the most republican county in the state. It's going to drive this district. Muskegon County could factor in with crossovers and independents, along with the base. The rest of the district is rural populist. The life issue is BIG here. Advantage Santorum.

MI-03 - Most of Kent County, Ionia and Barry Counties, Calhoun County. 616, 231, 269. Ionia and Barry are rural populist. Grand Rapids suburbs will drive the turnout here. Calhoun County could impact things. Advantage Santorum. 

MI-04 - Rural North and Central Michigan. From Lansing's Northern border up to Cadillac and Roscommon. From Big Rapids to the Saginaw suburbs. Mostly 989, maybe some 231. Santorum should do well here.

MI-05 - This is a blue district, but just as important for delegates. Mostly 810 and 989. Genesee County, Western Tuscola County (important for GOP), Saginaw area, all of Bay County, Arenac County and Iosco County. White union crossovers and independents may be the key here in the Flint suburbs, some Saginaw suburbs, and especially Bay County and the Standish/Tawas area. There's a small GOP base area near Fenton (Frankenmuth's now in the 4th).

MI-06 - SW Michigan. 269 area code. The new MI-06 now has ALL of Allegan County which is just as republican as Ottawa County (Southern Allegan is competitive reducing the county percentage). All of the counties have significant GOP populations (Kalamazoo County is dem, but not ALL dem) to impact this district. District went big for McCain last time. Polls are showing Santorum up here, but it's tough for me to call. Upton wins here too. 

MI-07 - South Central and Eastern Michigan. 517 and 734. This district no longer has Calhoun County and picks up Monroe County. Monroe is quite populist and often hostile to a Romney type Republican. They usually (not 2010) like John Dingell types of democrats and Randy Richardville types of Republicans.  Much of the district is populist independent conservative. Romney's best hope here is a good showing by Ron Paul.

MI-08 - 517, 810, some 734, and 248. The 8th district changed some. It keeps Ingham County and Livingston County, but adds more of Oakland while dropping Shiawassee and Clinton Counties. That MAY help Romney. The question is this. Where in Oakland County, is Romney's strength? Is he leading based on across the board strength, or is it concentrated in the Bloomfields and getting drilled in places like Clarkston. The new 8th covers "North Oakland" is a lot different than what people think of when they think of Oakland County. There isn't a lot of difference between North Oakland and Livingston County when it comes to politics, even though Livingston has a much more conservative reputation. Both of those areas are social conservative, BUT also are fiscally conservative as well. I think the 8th is up for grabs. All candidates have strengths and weaknesses for this district. 

MI-9 - This is the new 9th, much like the old 12th. 248 and 586. It's now Macomb County based, while also taking in the white parts of SE Oakland County, as well as Bloomfield Township. This may have been Mitt's old home (or it could be the 11th). The question here is which poll is accurate with Macomb County. This is a blue district, but with a couple of significant GOP populations. Bloomfield Township, parts of Sterling Heights, and parts of St Clair Shoes and Clinton Townships. There's much more GOP vote here in Macomb County. If Mitt gets the GOP votes in Oakland all out and his way, he's going a chance at this. I bet he's up BIG in Bloomfield Township and Southfield Township (Bingham Farms). Edge Romney due to that.

MI-10 - 586, 810, maybe 989. This district is the home of Reagan Democrats. Northern Macomb County, and the thumb. Most of the votes here are in Macomb, but the thumb is also very important. Lapeer is a base county. St Clair is competitive. The rest of the thumb is conservative, but not necessarily Republican. I think Santorum will take the 10th.

MI-11 - 248, some 734. This district is a mix of mostly the old 11th and old 9th. Advantage Romney. It's mostly in Oakland County, along with some western Wayne County suburbs. It drops a lot of the union territory to Dingell or Conyers. This district has Troy, Bloomfield Hills, and Birmingham which gives Romney an advantage. Livonia's tougher to read and is a little more Reagan Democrat. Canton's very tough to read. Plymouth, Novi, and Northville areas are on paper more Romney friendly. I think the South Lyon, Highland, and Milford areas will be a little tougher for him. I'll be shocked in Romney loses here through.

MI-12 - 734, some 313. This district stretches across Southern Wayne County from Dearborn and Downriver to Ann Arbor. I was a little shocked to see Santorum win big in 734 territory according to PPP, but I think a lot of the republican vote here will be from West Dearborn and South Downriver. I think crossovers will decide this district. For whom is the question. Ann Arbor will likely cross over for Ron Paul. Downriver for Santorum (stick it to Romney).

MI-13 - 313, 248. This is a VRA district, but has a small and significant GOP base for a primary of this type. The Grosse Pointes. There's significant GOP minorities in Farmington Hills and West Bloomfield as well. I think Romney takes this district unless enough blacks cross over.

MI-14 - 313, 734. This is also a VRA district, but does into the more populist Western Wayne County suburbs. There's significant (for this district) republican minorities in Redford, Dearborn Heights, Westland, and Garden City. I think Santorum has an advantage there.

If things stand as they do today, I'd pick Santorum to win districts 1-7, 10, and 14. I'd have Romney winning 9, 11, and 13. I'd have the 8th and 12th up for grabs.

I'm voting for Rick Santorum in the primary

It's down to four people. Nobody will likely drop between now and the 28th. The four left are Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum.

Perry's out, and I'm not going to vote for a dropped candidate. That's like voting for uncommitted which is out of the question. Uncommitted means I'm passing my delegate vote off to someone unpledged. An unpledged delegated will support whoever he's asked to support. The only time I'd vote for uncommitted is if I don't care.

It's no secret my views towards Mitt Romney. The more I think about Gingrich, the most I just can't do it - for the same reason as Romney. Newt has a better record, but he's flipped so many times as well. I can't forget him and Pelosi together yapping about global warming. I can't forget about his scandals either. I can't trust him.

And trust is the biggest issue when appealing to all groups of voters. Romney and Newt are only electable if Obama beats himself. That's probably true to a degree for all candidates. A poll nine months out does not show anything about electability IN NOVEMBER. What some Romney defenders and Fox News types say is that he needs to move left to get independents. Bullshit. You don't move left - OR right - for independents or moderates. You move competent. Most independent voters and moderate voters care most about competence issues. The social liberal independent voters will sometimes vote for social conservatives - as long as the person is viewed as a competent individual and doesn't run his mouth too much. The mouth is what sometimes hurts social conservatives. The votes do not. Mike Rogers is not a social liberal. He's won Lansing before. City of. He's won Meridian Township, better known as Okemos. Social conservative and economic populist voters don't like panderers either and also care about competent issues. I throw trust in with competence issues.

Romney's record consists of tax/fee raising, gun bans, flip-flops and Romneycare. No deals. Newt's past I can forgive as a person. That's between him and God. However, that doesn't mean I trust him to keep his word to the voters. He's flipped too many times as well. He's out.

That leaves Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. I personally like both of these guys as people. I voted for Ron Paul in 2008. I like Santorum and I'd love to take about 50% of each of these two or split the difference on some of their issues and combine them into a candidate. I'm not nearly the foreign policy hawk Santorum is, nor the dove Ron Paul is. The last one I agree with more than not on policy was Reagan. For all the talk, there hasn't been a lot of difference on that from Bush 1 down to Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. Santorum would be little different there outside of talk.

I prefer Ron Paul on spending, although Santorum has voted for a balanced budget in the 1990's being part of the class of 94. He also supported Bush's budgets which aren't a good thing. I prefer Santorum on life issues. Ron Paul isn't bad there, but Santorum will go that extra step. Both are pro-2nd Amendment, but Paul will vote against good bills because they aren't perfect. I understand being a stickler of procedure at times, but national reciprocity is a big deal. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. That is where I split with Ron Paul. Pragmatism. Take what you can get with the circumstances, move in the right direction, and get the touchdown on a 2 yard run instead of the 80 yard pass when it isn't there. I don't forget bad votes on things like national reciprocity. All that does is codify full faith and credit.

The other issue is who can beat Romney and Obama. Ron Paul is an 10-25% guy in most states. He has his core following and is who he is. I think he needs to be taken seriously, especially on economic matters. Small "l" libertarians are, have been, and need to be part of the Republican coalition. A little respect - both ways - would go a long way of not blowing this opportunity to grow the party and the movement. However, he has shown so far that he can't beat Romney based on election results this year.

Santorum's weakness is 2006. He was crushed statewide in Pennsylvania. That was and is my major concern with him. However, he also won that same state twice, once in a non-republican year (in PA). 2000. He also won a democrat district (now Mike Doyle's) in the Pittsburgh Penn Hills area. You can make a case either way with electability with multiple wins and a bad loss in a bad year. The thing Santorum is showing now is that he's working his ass off with little money, and still winning some states. He recently got the hat trick. Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri. He also won Iowa after the fact. Those are four very different states with very different demographics. He gaining, and Romney once again like in 2008 can not close the deal when everything is set up for him.

Next is Arizona and Michigan. Michigan's primary is an open primary despite what some say. You just have to declare a ballot. In 2000 there was about 20% crossover votes from democrats and I expect about the same here. Delegates are won based on the both proportional (statewide) and winner take all by congressional district. I believe the congressional districts for this are the new ones, not the old ones. There's also a second election on Feb 28th in the OLD 51st district. Paul Scott was recalled thanks to the very shady folks known as the MEA-PAC. Joe Graves should make this recall all for nothing outside of a three month vacancy. From what I've heard, he's good people and will do a good job. That election will increase turnout in the 51st district and the 5th Congressional District.

If I'm Santorum, I'd campaign across the entire state. However, I'd pay extra attention in these areas if I'm going to make a run for the delegates.

1. The 1st district. Most of it was neglected and did not vote for Romney in 2008. With independents able to vote, this will be a key area.

2. The 6th District. Another McCain/not Romney district in 2008. There's an opportunity there.

3. Ottawa, Kent, Livingston, Hillsdale, North Oakland, North Macomb, Lapeer, Allegan, and West Oakland Counties. That's the base area. It goes without saying that it will be important primary day. We all know that. I'm being Captain Obvious here.

4. The blue districts. Don't neglect them. Why? Because it's winner take all by congressional district. Even with an estimated 20% crossover vote (based on 2000 numbers) will have less votes and count more for the district delegates. Detroit won't have a lot of votes in the primary, but winning the two Detroit based districts will count more than say the 8th district, even though Livingston County alone will probably have more votes than both of them. Proportional delegates count too, but it's the districts.

The blue districts are as follows.

5th - Open with Dale Kildee retiring. This one is especially important with the increased turnout in the 51st, which includes much of the Republican base in the district. The other key areas are independents and social conservative crossover democrats in Flushing, Davison, Bay County (all of it now), and even Tawas City. There's an opening for a working class guy to appeal to some of these areas that Romney will likely have problems.

9th - Levin. This now is dominant in Macomb County. Romney will clean up Bloomfield Twp as it was his home, but there's some crossover votes and a sizable republican minority in Southern Macomb County. Posthumus won Clinton Township and St Clair Shores. Warren is 60% Dem, but has over 100,000 people. Sterling Heights is competitive.

12th - Now Dingell's district. Santorum will struggle in Ann Arbor for obvious reasons, but Downriver has a sizable Republican minority. Downriver is closer to 40-46% GOP compared to 20-25% in Ann Arbor.

13th - With the switch, John Conyers and a couple of challengers. It's about a 15% Republican district, so it won't take a lot of votes to win. Westland, Garden City, Redford, and Dearborn Heights are exceedingly important here, along with your minority of black republicans. There aren't a lot of them, but they do exist. A lot of them are social conservatives. Santorum is pro-life. The 3-10% here who do sometimes vote Republican can make a big difference in this district.

14th - With the switch, Hansen Clark with Gary Peters and Brenda Lawrence. This is also about a 15% district, but a little different than the 13th. There is a small GOP base here in the Grosse Pointes. Advantage Romney. Advantage Romney in West Bloomfield as well. This is the toughest blue district I think for Santorum to win.

Santorum should do well with pro-lifers. He'll probably split the gun vote with Ron Paul, although that reciprocity vote should damage him. It will be an uphill climb with Romney's top level organization and money. I think it's Romney's to lose, but I don't think he'll take all the congressional districts, and I think it will be much closer than people think.

Santorum didn't raise taxes. Romney raised "fees" as governor. Santorum is pro-2nd Amendment. Romney signed a gun ban. Romney implemented Romneycare. Romney's record on jobs is mixed at best. Romney became supposedly pro-life when he ran for president. Santorum not only votes pro-life, but lives it. He'd also appoint good justices to SCOTUS. Santorum was part of the late 90's growth where Clinton got the credit. Santorum was part of the class of 94 and Contract with America. He was there. Romney was a son of privilege. Santorum was a working class son of immigrants who earned a law degree and worked in private practice.

I don't have a perfect vote in the primary. I don't even have an easy vote. Perry and Pawlenty dropped. Of the four that's left, Santorum's the best we got and the best chance to upset Obama (yes, Obama is the favorite against all of them) this November.

I'll be voting for Rick Santorum on February 28th.

Iowa results and quick analysis

I'm a little surprised at the results coming in. This is the first actual poll that counts. New Hampshire is next January 10th, followed by South Carolina on January 21st and Florida on January 31st.

The Iowa caucuses count. They count more for momentum than anything else, but unlike the phone polls, these are binding and have a larger sample size. These are the actual votes.

There IS no recount. The result with 99% in is a likely very narrow victory for Mitt Romney. I say likely, because who knows what that 1% does.

1st - Mitt Romney - 25% - 30,015
2nd - Rick Santorum - 25% - 30,007
3rd - Ron Paul - 22% - 26,219
4th - Newt Gingrich - 14% - 16,251
5th - Rick Perry - 11% - 12,604
6th - Michele Bachmann - 5% - 6,073
7th - Jon Huntsman - Less than 1% - 745
8th - Herman Cain - Less than 1% - 58

Rick Santorum's results surprised me, and I'll admit a major bias against his chances due to 2006. He had very little money, but he outworked most candidates in Iowa. He's legitimate now in this election. The question is if he can sustain it going into New Hampshire and South Carolina. Mitt Romney is going to go after him. That's what sunk Gingrich and dropped him to 4th. It may have an impact on Ron Paul as well.

Big winners:

1. Santorum - His late surge put him in the picture. He has a chance to be the "anti-Romney" candidate at the time it counts. He did this with almost no money. Eight votes away, and if there was a recount, could have made this even more interesting.

2. Romney - He wasn't contesting Iowa until late. He didn't bomb here. He didn't need to win here. New Hampshire is where he needs to win to stay around. His win here helps.

3. Paul - He's going to be a pain in the arse to the elites. Again. This year.

As for others, that doesn't mean they lost a chance for the nomination, but at best, they are going to have to fight against national momentum from Iowa with the next primary/caucuses. Some like Giuliani (2008) don't recover. At worst, they're done because of this. Those that lost here have added pressure in New Hampshire and South Carolina, as well as Florida.

The question is what happens next? Do the rest of them stay in, and if so, for how long? Perry said he's going to go back to Texas and think about the results and make a further decision.

Once again, Romney can't break that 30% barrier, although neither can anyone else. He wasn't expected to really in Iowa, but he's got nearly all of the establishment in his corner, Foxnews in his corner, the pundits in his corner, and most of all elite level of organization and monetary support. On paper, he should run away with this. This is the "strong" candidate. This is the guy who is supposed to supposedly beat Obama. He's now essentially tied another candidate out of nowhere, and was viewed as dead in the water. Every time a candidate implodes, another one rises in the polls against Romney. This time it is Santorum. Out of nowhere, he almost beats Romney. If your campaign is based on being "the electable" one, you better do what Bush did in 2000 after the early scare and not be John McCain in 2008.

This is going to possibly be a long primary season, especially if it narrows into a three way fight with three different bases. If Santorum can solidify himself as THE one single "anti-Romney" candidate who isn't Ron Paul, it will be an interesting primary, and there will be no "inevitable" nominee, regardless of the wishes of the establishment. Romney will have to at best, earn this. That's good. That's why we have primaries.

On the same note, for all the folks against Romney, nobody there has caught on. I wonder if Pawlenty wishes he did not drop out.

As for Santorum, my concern with him is that he got trounced in 2006 by 18% to Bob Casey Jr. He went too native and Virginia instead of Suburban Pittsburgh and it cost him. That's weakness, and a big one. However, he also won elections he had no business winning on paper. He won a Pittsburgh area district in 1990 which was democrat for 12 years, and survived redistricting. In 1994, his district went democrat by 10% to Mike Doyle (still in Congress) when he won a US Senate seat (easier than his congressional district) in an upset over an incumbent democrat. He won re-election in 2000. He's won tough elections in the past as well as lost. However, he's also an ex-senator, and we know how many US Senators have become presidents. Harding, Obama, Kennedy, Nixon, LBJ, Harrison, and Andrew Johnson are the only ones in the modern political system post 1860.

New Hampshire's next. Romney needs to probably run away with this one in his backyard. If not, he's in big trouble. Santorum needs to at least place here in less friendly territory for him as New Hampshire has a bit of a libertarian and paleo conservative streak. Ron Paul could surprise a lot of people here.

South Carolina is unfriendly to Romney in the primary so there isn't high expectations for him there. Santorum will have to do well there or Romney will probably win the entire thing Snyder style due to split votes. If Romney wins here, I think he's got it.

The actual race has begun. So far the official standings are:

Romney - 13 Delegates
Santorum - 12 Delegates
Rest - 0

Beware of big fish wannabes in small ponds

The Detroit News has a story out that has my guard up. The title is this. Tea party groups work to unseat Stabenow. There already is a process for that. It's called a PRIMARY. We will decide the GOP nominee in August.

Invitations are being sent to all eight GOP candidates for a Jan. 14 debate at Central Michigan University, organizers announced. Two leaders from each qualified tea party group will be invited to participate in a Feb. 25 straw poll at CMU to determine who wins the tea party endorsement.

Uniting under the banner, Michigan 4 Conservative Senate, organizers say endorsing one candidate and rallying behind him is the best way to ensure a conservative candidate defeats Democratic incumbent Sen. Debbie Stabenow in November.

"It's just a way to take a pulse of tea party groups and encourage them to work together and rather than work apart," said Cindy Gamrat, an organizer for Michigan 4 Conservative Senate.

1. What is "qualified?"
2. Who are the designated "leaders?"
3. What is the "tea party?"

That type of talk gets my guard up. It looks like a power move to me.

Speaking for myself, I'm not "tea party." I agree with them more than I don't, but I do things my own way. I've been to a couple of RetakeourGov meetings and met some folks from Brighton Tea Party, but haven't finally contributed to any tea parties. I also am not a member of any leadership there, nor choose to be. I'll stick with being an occasional spectator.

The media talks about "Tea Party" being one singular thing. It isn't. There are hundreds of different local parties with their own personalities and opinions. Some of them are larger and more organized than others. Some are more ambitious when it comes to politics than others. I'm impressed with what I've seen from retakeourgov and their organization at the meetings I've seen. I haven't been to a Brighton Tea Party meeting, but they (along with a Milford group and Retakeourgov) did a good job with the senate candidate forum recently.

Most tea party members I know aren't trying to be "big fish in a small pond." Almost all of them never start out that way. Eventually many leaders or "lieutenants" in these organizations gain a following, get told how great they are, and start to believe their own press clippings. Many, not all, not even most. The good ones stay grounded.

However, this is politics. The definition of politics is "who gets what, when, and how." Power. Power brings out the worst in a lot of people. Politics is nasty for a reason, and nothing can get more nasty than internal political wars (along with local cities, school boards, and townships). Been there, done that, and weary of being involved in it again. I don't know the internals of this, but it's looking like a couple of power moves here.

I don't know much about Cindy Gamrat outside of her being a recent Indiana transplant to Plainwell in Southwest Michigan. Michigan 4 Conservative Senate is the website for this plan. This is modeled after Indiana's attempt to take out the center-left Dick Lugar in Indiana. Dick Lugar however is a Republican. Far leftist Debbie Stabenow is not.

So is this a "Stop Stabenow?" It's not. Stabenow will be quasi one on one (and some 3rd parties) against the Republican nominee whoever it is. This is about "stop Hoekstra." This is an attempt to have a coronation of the favorites of a few people. This is no different than the coronation attempt many establishment folks are trying to set up for Pete Hoekstra.

The question is who's the favored candidate.

"I think it's really disingenuous to have a group of people come together and anoint themselves as tea party leaders and take it further and endorse a candidate," said Patty McMurray, of Birmingham, co-founder of the Michigan Conservative Alliance, which wasn't invited to the straw poll.

Modeled after the tea party unification in Indiana, Michigan tea party organizers say it's important to not only vet the candidates but also the tea party groups themselves. Gamrat has been whittling down the original list of 120 conservative groups in Michigan to ensure their longevity and activeness, and that they are truly a tea party group, not affiliated with a national organization and not a political action committee. Those who qualify are allowed to have two members cast votes in the straw poll. McMurray's group was excluded because it's a PAC, Gamrat said.

Vetted by which people? WHO decides what is "legit?" McMurray's group is punished due to having a PAC? MANY tea party groups have PAC's. It's good organization. Anyone can form a PAC. It's not hard to set up, although it takes discipline to manage properly. Those with a PAC are doing good work. I think McMurray is attacked for supporting Hoekstra.

Currently she expects about 110 people to cast straw poll votes, representing 55 tea party groups statewide.

How large are these 55 groups? How are the votes weighted? Will the locals support this?

McMurray and fellow MICA co-founder, Leisa Audette, are both Hoekstra supporters and feel the event is rigged so Hoekstra doesn't win. Though he co-founded the Tea Party Caucus while in Congress, some fellow candidates have painted Hoekstra as not conservative enough and part of the Washington establishment.

It is rigged against Hoekstra, along as all candidates except one. It's a coronation attempt - the same thing that much of the establishment is doing for Hoekstra.

On a side note, this whole "Tea Party Caucus" in Congress is a joke. This is a case of politicians in DC calling themselves "Tea Party" and trying to pass themselves off as conservatives. I never bought into that talk. Talk is cheap. Votes are what matter, and Hoekstra has a long history of votes. Good and bad. He can stand by those votes and defend them, or admit mistakes if he's changed his mind on the issue. Debbie Stabenow can join the "Tea Party Caucus" if she wants. Does that make her tea party? No way. Talk is cheap. Deeds not words.

Randy Bishop, of the Northern Michigan Patriots, has been actively promoting the tea party convention and openly criticizes Hoekstra. He says unifying behind one candidate is necessary to avoid splitting the vote — as what happened in the governor's race last year leading to a Rick Snyder victory, he said.

"Just as much as much as we respect their choice not to participate we hope they would respect ours to participate," Bishop said of uninterested tea party groups.

By excluding those with a PAC? I'm interested in who Gamrat and Bishop are supporting. I'm more interested if it's the same person, and that is who they and a few others want to win.

The good and bad with tea parties is that many of them are new to politics. The good about that is that the old boys and girls club gets shaken up. The GOP establishment is largely as disliked as the democrats. They want to get involved and make a difference.

However, not all of the "establishment" is bad. Many of us have been involved 10, 20, or 30 years. Many of us are as conservative or more so as the tea party members. We also have a long history of inside baseball and power struggles and good intentions producing bad results. I've seen big fish and small pond syndrome. I've seen folks become yesman to become popular with big fish in small ponds.

That's a danger here I see with consolidation or quasi consolidation attempts. I understand the thought of trying to herd cats or tea party folks to supporting one candidate to stop a Snyder, but:

1. Who decides?
2. What's the process?
3. What's the criteria for the endorsement?

This is a dangerous game that can easilly become more about personalities than about issues. Certain people like to see themselves as power brokers. You get on the right PAC boards and you become "an important person." You can puff yourself up to sound even more important, and can have some yesman who follow you, tell you how great you are, and then try and take your spot in the future. There's also yesmen "leaders" who will automatically "lead" their group to follow whatever some big name wants. That's what I refer to as big fish in little pond syndrome. I've seen it over 11 years of involvement in PACs, C4's, Party, and office politics. Guess what. Most of those who think they are big names, really aren't that important. The ones who puff themselves up in the room, usually aren't important, and deep down, they know it.

I hope the tea parties (plural) stay about ideology, and less about personalities. THAT is their strength. Once they become about personalities and favorites, it's all downhill from there. The cost is respect.

As for this races, I think the primary needs to work itself out over the next few months before any push towards going behind one candidate. I understand the push. Joe Schwarz in 2004 taught a harsh lesson.  Hoekstra I'd vote for over Stabenow easily. No hesitation. Candidates will rise and fall as they are vetted, organized, and make more statements. Our Senate primary is in August. Not February.

Michele Bachmann wins straw poll. Ron Paul 2nd

The important thing about the Ames Straw poll isn't just who wins, although it's a big deal for Bachmann who is now looking more as a serious candidate. What's also important is who places, and who craters. From Reuters

AMES, Iowa (Reuters) - Michele Bachmann won the Iowa straw poll on Saturday in the first big test of the 2012 Republican presidential race, as Texas Governor Rick Perry launched a White House bid that could reshape the race.

How important is winning the straw poll? I don't really like wikipedia as a source, but this looks legit.

1979 - Winner is George HW Bush. 1980 nominee - Ronald Reagan.
1987 - Pat Robertson won. George HW Bush nominee. Bush finished 3rd. Bob Dole finished 2nd.
1995 - Bob Dole and Phil Gramm tied. Dole was nominee. Gramm dropped out early after losing Louisiana to Pat Buchanan.
1999 - George W Bush won. Bush was nominee.
2007 - Mitt Romney won. McCain was nominee. McCain finished 10th, while skipping the event.

In other words, it's historically important to place, if not necessarily win. Here's the results.

Place	Candidate	Votes	Percentage
1	Michele Bachmann	4,823	28.5%
2	Ron Paul	4,671	27.6%
3	Tim Pawlenty	2,293	13.6%
4	Rick Santorum	1,657	9.8%
5	Herman Cain	1,456	8.6%
6	Rick Perry (write-in)	718	4.3%
7	Mitt Romney	567	3.4%
8	Newt Gingrich	385	2.3%
9	Jon Huntsman	69	0.4%
10	Thaddeus McCotter	35	0.2%
—	Scattering	162	1.0%

According to National Review those competing in the Ames poll are Bachmann, Pawlenty, Paul, Cain, McCotter and Santorum. Romney, Huntsman, and Gingrich wern't competing as hard. Perry just announced. Palin isn't in, and probably got most of those 162 votes. McCotter was not allowed in the debate. 

My analysis and two cents on this.
Ames Winners:
Bachmann - She won it. She's on the map. She worked hard in Iowa and finished first. She is Iowa born, and that could have helped.

Paul - He's back. With the fiscal clustermuck, I think more conservatives that are less isolationist than he is will look at him more closely. Historically, there's always been a strong minority of republicans who are isolationist and more who are non-interventionist. I think it'll get stronger again as someone takes Pat Buchanan's old role. Ron Paul is becoming that face.

Rick Perry - He did the best by far of those skipping the race. He beat Mitt, who won this last time. He almost doubled Newt, and dwarfed McCotter and Huntsman. His 6th place finish was based solely on write-in votes. This is a good start for Perry.

Ames Losers
McCotter - I like Thad McCotter He's a good guy. I also think he should have run for senate instead. McCotter was locked out of the debate, so this isn't all his fault. However, 35 votes out of about 17000? He probably met more people than 35 in Iowa.

Huntsman - He can recover because he's a multi-millionaire many times over. This still isn't a good showing, even skipping the race. He'll have to make a big move in New Hampshire, McCain 08 style to have a shot.

Santorum - Santorum did better than I expected finishing 4th. The problem he has is that much of the same group that would vote for him would also vote for Bachmann. You won't out pro-life Santorum, but Bachmann can match Santorum in this area, both in stance and intensity.

Cain - I somewhat hesitate to put Cain here, but he finished behind most of the rest who competed strong in Ames. I think he'll survive this, but he'll have to make a move quick or he'll be just the protest vote candidate of 2012 of those who don't like the rest of the crowd. I think Ron Paul is hurting Cain. I like Cain, but his election history is his weak point. He finished 2nd in his one major statewide primary race in Georgia.

Newt Gingrich - Finished behind Romney and Perry and had probably close to 100% name recognition despite skipping the race.

Too Early to Tell:

Pawlenty. Was 3rd place enough? He got less than 1/2 of the votes of his fellow Minnesotan, but they were aimed at different crowds. I'm not ready to write off this campaign yet, but Pawlenty is going to have to make a move. He's going to have to dent Romney a bit and get a lot of the folks that would otherwise vote for him look at Pawlenty.

Romney - He announced he was skipping early on. He finished 7th, ahead of most who skipped the race, except Perry. Perry's votes were write in.

Fallout:
Who is going to drop? That's the most important fallout that happens due to Ames straw poll results. McCain stayed in despite 10th out of 11th in 07 and won nomination. He was in the same shoes Romney is now with a 2nd place finish in the last primary overall looking for another shot. Tommy Thompson finished 6th and dropped early due to the 07 performance. The field's starting to narrow some. The question is by how much. 

MI GOP State Committee chooses "closed" (actually open) primary

The state committee went with an "closed" primary. I'm not surprised at this. Usually the full committee goes with the policy committee recommendations. My problem with this is as follows. One is that this is in reality an OPEN primary. Anyone can come in, declare themselves to be a republican on the SAME DAY as the election, and vote. I'd be much less opposed to this if there is separate registration 30-60 days before this primary and force voters to make an effort. I think this is going to be a disaster. I think a lot of people support this by its name until they find out that this isn't closed. Most republicans I know support actual closed primaries. Most democrats I know support the same thing on their side. They don't want a Fieger 98 repeat, just as we don't want McCain 2000 repeat.

The problem with a "closed" but really open primary is that it only works if there are actual contested elections the same day. If Obama had a strong challenger, this could work - if the democrats were not using a caucus in 2012, as they did in 2004. Even Kevin Shopshire can vote in the Republican primary if he chose a Republican ballot, which is the only ballot there. I don't blame him if he does do this. He doesn't have a contest on his side. I'm sure there was some cross voting in the past. Geoffrey Fieger in 98, McCain in 2000, and Rick Snyder in 2010 are examples of it.

One of the biggest reasons state party supports this is to get a list. That's nice, but if you have a 20% crossover list like in 2000, that's a lot of money and time going to waste. In 08, the crossovers were estimated at about 7-8%. That's with a contest on both sides.

I'm not opposed to this as a "stop Romney" campaign. In fact, I was told by someone I respect on state committee (who is undecided as I am) that he thinks Romney would win a convention easily. I prefer a caucus, but still would rather have a convention than an open primary, even if Mitt Romney was guaranteed to win it. If he won a convention, he earned it by getting republican votes. My preferences are caucus, a true closed primary, county conventions, state conventions, and open primary in that order. It's the process that's important. Republicans should choose the republican nominee. Democrats should choose their nominee. 3rd parties should choose their nominee. Independents should vote in the general election or better yet, join a party and get active. I was a conservative independent for years. I understand how tough it is to join the party since the "I" label makes you feel good, but there's more than can done within a party structure than outside of the structure.

Lastly, one of the good things about the party system in Michigan, at least among republicans, is that it is a fair system. Precinct delegate is an elected position (open spots are filled). Delegates choose their county executive committee. Delegates choose representatives to state convention where district committee and state committee members are chosen, as well as party chairs and vice chairs. If you want to make a difference in the party, show up at the meetings, talk to people in the party, run for precinct delegate, and be active. Maybe in 2016 or 2020, we can have a caucus ready for implementation.