Friday, April 27, 2012

Question Time

For some time I have admired -- and totally wanted to rip off -- the Question Day posts that Bernstein does on occasion. To this point, I had neither the time or inclination to do so. But the combination of the desire to try out the format and the influx of good questions via comments or email this week, I think, has pushed me over the edge.

In a nod to Question Time in the British House of Commons (and to acknowledge the fact that today is looking crazy time-wise), I'm going to field (good, quality1) questions and spread the answers out over more than just today. I've already got three really good questions with which I definitely want to deal,2 but if you have any others questions feel free to drop in in the comments section below or via Twitter under the hashtag, #fhqquestiontime.

1 Seriously, keep it substantive, folks.

2 To avoid overlap, I already have and plan to answer questions concerning:
  • Ron Paul's delegate strategy (and the convention)
  • Turnout in upcoming primaries
  • The status of Rick Santorum's delegates (post-suspension)

Recent Posts:
Iowa GOP considers new rule for close caucuses 

Pair of Missouri Bills Would Shift Future Presidential Primaries Back to April

House-Passed Bill in Virginia to Consolidate Primaries in Presidential Election Years to Be Considered in 2013 in State Senate 

Are you following FHQ on TwitterGoogle+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.


Anonymous said...

Is there a movement afoot in either party to move one of the big swing states (OH PN, ect.) either to inside the "carve out" category or close to it? If not (as I suspect) why do you think that is? I mean there would be a lot of benefits to the party not just for the nomination but also the general election.

Joshua said...

A while back, I asked if filing more delegate candidates in West Virginia than the number of delegate slots placed Romney at risk of having his votes split among the delegate candidates, and thus winning fewer delegates than he might otherwise have.

While this question is no longer as relevant as it was when I asked it, I'd still like to know the answer.

Anonymous said...

Are delegates required to vote at the national convention? If not, what is the point of binding delegates to a specific candidate?

Anonymous said...

What are the demographic differences between people who attend small congressional district caucuses and people who vote in primaries? Why is the result of the former (often a fraction of the percentage of the attendance of the latter) often used to choose delegates while the result of the latter is often used to choose who they're supposed to vote for?

Anonymous said...

Can bound delegates abstain on the first ballot?

Anonymous said...

And if bound delegates could abstain, then what would be the point of this entire primary process? Only a tiny fraction of the population even knows that these small caucuses (pre and post election) exist, and I wonder what they'd think to find out that when they voted it didn't matter because 100 activists decided they wanted to take over the district.

Anonymous said...

It appears that more so than in any past primary process (at least recently), there are going to be a decent to large number of delegates that are strong supporters of a specific candidate but bound to a different candidate at the convention. It is an outcome of one candidate's supporters realizing that there is a large disconnect in certain states between the primary vote and the process of choosing delegates, which has rarely been exploited in the past. This is possible in some states, but not in others where the candidates pick their own delegates, where state committees pick delegates, or where delegates are voted in directly. Now that people can see that there may be a loophole in the process, will there likely be any efforts by states to amend the delegate selection process so that any "binding" that takes place due to a primary vote is more meaningful and reflective in the delegate apportionment?

Anonymous said...

Jon Huntsman has a billionaire father. How much would it cost Huntsman to pay off the average delegate at the national convention to cast their vote for him (or to abstain in the first round and cast their 2nd round vote for him)? Multiply that number by 1200, and you have the total cost of a Republican National Convention coup. There's no need to convince millions to like you if delegates aren't actually legally bound to vote for their state winners.