In Louisiana, Uncommitted Beats McCain, But McCain Beats Romney

It seems that "pro-life uncommitted" won the Louisiana Republican caucuses last night.

But Mitt Romney, the only candidate with a real precinct organization there, trailed behind Sen. John McCain and Ron Paul in the final results.

Per the state party:

Delegate candidates endorsed by US Senator John McCain (R-AZ) appear to have won more state convention delegate positions than any other presidential slate at the Louisiana Caucuses.

Mitt Romney finished third (fourth, really).

Comments

Mitt Romney would be tarred and feathered by the Dems in the GE because of his strange beliefs. I love it when people say 'religious belief' should NOT be a judgment. Oh sure. So an outright Satanist would be okay with you? Give me a Break. Your 'religion' is a foundation of your very being. JFK correctly pointed out that Catholics were actually mainstream in their thinking (anti-abortion, etc.) so the fact he was Catholic really didn't matter. As a recovering Mormon I can tell you this is NOT TRUE of the Mormons. You are NOT ALLOWED to ask questions about the Mormon beliefs. Until that wall disappears, anyone who thinks it doesn't matter is a fool.

Posted by pmichael | January 23, 2008 9:01 PM

Wrong - please check your sources - Here is the LA GOP web-site. http://www.lagop.com/ Ron Paul came in a close second and will win once the provisional ballots are counted (newly registered Repubs - i.e. Paul supporters). Stay tuned. Please report accurately - it’s your job. Also, Giuliani is cooked – slipped to third in the polls in FL. Huckaboom’s broke and then its down to flip flopping Romney and crazy McCain. Oh, and Ron Paul….

Posted by tc | January 23, 2008 9:14 PM

Wrong!

Go to www.lagop.com

It goes like this:

1. Uncommitted/pro life
2. John McCain
3. RON PAUL
4. Mitt Romney

Ron Paul BEAT Romney in Louisiana. Get your facts straight please.

Posted by Mike in Boston | January 23, 2008 9:14 PM

What would it take to have one honest journalist in the media who won't misrepresent the facts?

Why do we CONTINUALLY see Ron Paul thrown under the bus by reporters who come off as if their on another candidate's payroll?

You wonder why some Ron Paul supporters seem angry? This is why. This is exactly why.

Posted by Mike in Boston | January 23, 2008 9:18 PM

It is really hilarious that a lesser known website like atlantic.com would know how to bring traffic to their website. You would also hope that a lesser known website like atlantic.com would be able to give out the right news in the first place!!

Ron Paul came in second or third depending how you look at it right now. ROMNEY DID NOT BEAT RON PAUL IN LOUSIANA. SHOW ME WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR NEWS FROM?!!!

Posted by Aziz | January 23, 2008 9:19 PM

Are you sure about those results- "Mitt Romney finished second, followed by Ron Paul". Where did you get that info? The Louisiana GOP webisite itself says "Supporters of Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) appear to have captured the next highest number (after McCain) of delegate positions."

Every other source I find says the same.

Posted by rward | January 23, 2008 9:20 PM

Dr. Paul came in second. Why the lie? What is there to gain?

Posted by Truth | January 23, 2008 9:27 PM

I really believed in this country and it's honor. Reporting like your's is absolute garbage. It makes us look like thieves and liars. When Bin Ladin was accusing us of being corrupt I thought the man needs to have his head detached. What I see the MSM and cheesy media like you are doing I wonder if this guy was as far off as we like to think he is.

Posted by JOSEPH | January 23, 2008 9:34 PM

I offer the following quotes DIRECTLY from the Louisiana Republican Party website:

"Delegate candidates endorsed by US Senator John McCain (R-AZ) appear to have won more state convention delegate positions than any other presidential slate at the Louisiana Caucuses."

"Supporters of Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) appear to have captured the next highest number of delegate positions. I applaud the supporters of Congressman Paul for their enthusiasm and superior organizational ability,"

"In addition to the uncommitted delegates and McCain and Paul supporters, Governor Mitt Romney appears to have won a handful of state convention delegates."

How hard was that Ambinder? DUH!

Posted by Mike in Boston | January 23, 2008 9:35 PM

Thank you for making the correction Marc- it really is much appreciated.

Posted by rward | January 23, 2008 9:44 PM

Note to pmichael.
If you think Mitt Romney is a pure Satanist than you my friend have never met one. I also don't believe that you are a recovering Mormon. I'm not buying it. I am a practicing Mormon and I ask questions, and get answers everyday. You my friend are bearing false witness against your neighbor. The end does not justify the means... You Mormon haters/exposers of the true satanistic beliefs of Latter Day Saints seem to think that LDS believers don't really know what they believe and that the leaders prefer us to be mind numbed robots. Romney, and many Latter Day Saints like him, including myself, know what we believe, which is redemption through Jesus Christ. Do us all a favor, just stay out of this election cycle. Keep your religious bigotry and false representation to yourself. By the way, Romney will do just fine in the GE

Posted by James F | January 23, 2008 11:39 PM

James F.
First off - I never said Romney was a Satanist. I only asked if that would 'matter'. Nice going. Are you schooled by Bill O' REALLY? Your debating skills are quite similar.
I wish I could be nicer here, but ...
YOU are one of those fools I spoke of. You are not "buying" that I was once an Aaronic Priest - one of those actually allowed into the baptismal monuments contained within the Oakland Temple. You just proved either you don't have the slightest idea what LDS believes and is... or you are one of those trying to cover up what this cult believes.
Hope you sleep well tonight.
Go retrieve your IQ again - and perhaps that excuse will console you.

Posted by pmichael | January 24, 2008 12:10 AM

Where's that little feature that says "flag if offensive" or such? It would be as handy on this line as at the HUFF PO. I'm NOT coming back I think.

Posted by Liz | January 24, 2008 12:43 AM

This is funny. I had to laugh.

If it's true Ron Paul came in behind McCain - hilarious.

Posted by rikyrah | January 24, 2008 2:03 AM

These results are as wacky as the rules--three hours from 5PM to 8PM in 11 cities?! So uncommitted won...lol.

Posted by mikeVA | January 24, 2008 2:14 AM

To go back to the original post-

I was very surprised this morning to read that Senator McCain had won these caucuses. Marc had written yesterday that Mitt was the only major candidate who had made any effort there, and it appeared that it would be chalked up as another "gold" in a state where he alone campaigned, such as Wyoming and Nevada. Now, it appears that he didn't even attain that. (Not understanding the rules, I don't know which metaphorical medal Mitt should receive from this....)

Posted by ElectionNightHQ.com (McCain site) Publisher | January 24, 2008 9:15 AM

was very surprised this morning to read that Senator McCain had won these caucuses

I was also surprised. Looking into it, it seems that McCain had enough friends in the LA GOP establishment that when they put together their pro-life/pro-family fusion slate, they listed some of his delegates (those on his official slate) as well. So those delegates got the McCain vote *plus* the pro-life/pro-family vote, pushing McCain to the top of the heap for committed delegates.
There is still a great deal of uncertainty as to who the nominally uncommitted delegates will support. National Review rumors that many were actually Thompson supporters; where will they go now? Further, the LA GOP is still counting 700 provisional ballots (and yes the vote totals for this caucus were small enough that it matters).
Last but not least, it looks like a candidate would really want a majority of delegates in at least one of the seven districts to be guaranteed any delegates to the national convention. The fifteen state delegates from each district choose three national convention delegates (and those 21 in turn choose more national convention delegates, but I don't know by what process). So while for example Paul currently has 4 of 15 delegates in one district and one in another (pending the provisional ballot count), this will likely get him zero delegates to the national convention.
I don't know what McCain's count looks like. In order for Romney to be behind Paul he must have gotten nearly wiped out, since Paul only has 5 of 105 at last reporting.

Posted by bbartlog | January 24, 2008 11:04 AM

Yeah, pmicheal is full of bologna, as they say. Just like people who grow up as "mainstream Christians" have to denounce their former beliefs when they decide they would like to permanently indulge in some "sin" as identified by their church or the Bible, so with "recovering Mormons." (I love that term--clever)They just can't live with themselves. They have to spend an ENORMOUS amount of effort trying to drown out their guilt--that nagging suspicion that maybe, just maybe, what they're doing is wrong.

I'm one of those Mormons that likes digging it all up (our doctrine, our history, etc) and discussing it with other Mormons and yes (DRUMROLL) some of them are "leaders" in the Church. No one freaks out. And they don't need to, in any case. A big picture view--a full account of facts, not just the twists and distortions so beloved by "recovering Mormons" who cling to those sorts of teddy bears--generally reveals the truth of it in a comprehensive way. So far, I've seen nothing to suggest I'm in a bad Church (though I've no doubt the legion of anti-Mormons will line up to show me things they think I haven't seen).

Posted by Bryan | January 24, 2008 12:04 PM

In order for the louisiana republican party not to be corrupt, here is the thought process that would have had to go through the majority of Republican louisiana voters on tuesday........

Quick, let me rush out to the polls and vote uncommitted. I've waited eight years to cast a vote that counts ... yes.....uncommitted. We all know how much we can trust the Republican powers that be in Louisiana like Villere!!!! I would like Villere to decide for me who to vote for. I don't have an opinion. But I hope they choose that champion of the unborn...Rudy Guliani.

And after I vote I'll sprout wings and fly to the moon.

Posted by Bob D | January 24, 2008 4:22 PM

The problem is there is not any honest reporting on anything about the results including reports being given to us by the Louisiana GOP. The web page promoting the Pro-Life/Pro-Family slate was paid for by the Louisiana GOP. No delegate candidate running on the John McCain slate won. The LaGOP press release dose not state John McCain was supported by any winning Delegate, but that John McCain endorsed winning Delegates. McCain is trying to claim some of the uncommitted Delegates were really his. The LaGOP is also dragging its feet counting the 900 or so Provisional Ballots and the results of these ballots could dramatically change the Delegate counts.

Posted by Kmkolsch | January 24, 2008 10:22 PM