Talk:2012 United States presidential election in Louisiana

paul won?

Ron paul won??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.58.144.30 (talk) 15:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Read section "Results" in article and you get to know everything. Bielsko (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Santorum won the Primary, and it looks like Paul just won the Caucuses, but that isn't in article yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaLeBu (talk • contribs) 16:46, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Fact that Paul won the caucus is in article! See "Results" section, you can read about it. Bielsko (talk) 16:57, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Candidate order

Should we put them in order by delegates or popular vote? or perhaps leave it until the final numbers? --Metallurgist (talk) 03:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

At the U.S. Virgin Islands caucus, Ron Paul won the popular vote but Mitt Romney took most of the delegates. Paul is listed first in that page's infobox. So it appears that wherever there is a mismatch between the popular vote & delegate winners of a contest, the popular vote currently takes precedence for the purpose of sorting the candidates in the infobox. The way things look right now, we probably won't know the final delegate count from LA for a while yet. Primary totals have to be used for the popular vote here since I don't believe any straw polls were taken at these caucuses. This format applies to the sub-pages only. The main primary page sorts by the delegate "soft count." 68.58.63.22 (talk) 09:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

There was fighting at the state convention June 2nd.

I was going to put something at the bottom of the article from the Green Papers, but upon further examination it looks like Green Papers for Louisiana have not been updated yet. Here is what I was about to add (at the bottom of the article) :: After the Louisiana GOP state convention on June 2, the Green Papers have the following delegate totals for candidates: Rick Santorum (10); Mitt Romney (5); Ron Paul (0); Newt Gingrich (0); five others (0); uncommitted (5); available (26); for a total of 46 delegates. Other sources of the results remain unclear at this point. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 15:08, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

This 15 delegates are elected according to the results of the primary. Delegates elected during state convention are now unknown. Bielsko (talk) 15:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree that, because of the apparent mess at the recent LA convention, nobody really knows how the remaining 28 delegates are going to be allocated at the 2012 GOP national convention. Here's some more info, including how Santorum still wants to be sure that he gets at least the 10 delegates that have already been bound to him by LA's earlier primary:

http://www.ktbs.com/news/Breaking-Ron-Paul-supporters-takeover-Louisiana-Republican-State-Convention/-/144844/14439858/-/2c86yt/-/index.html and http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/05/rick_santorum_asks_la_gop_to_m.html Guy1890 (talk) 04:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Ugh, then there's this "sanitized" report from the AP about the convention. It appears to be the "official" LA GOP Party line on what "really" happened at the recent LA convention: http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/517bb1742d454be98b065759e419d44e/LA--Republican-Convention What another mess... Guy1890 (talk) 04:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

We still don't know which delegates are elected according to the primary (20 at-large delegates), which are Congressional Districts delegates (18 delegates) and which are delegated nominated by the Executive Committee (5 delegates). Numbers from official statement are confusing. Let's see: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=428250057195783&id=120081838041860

Like I said above, the above Facebook posting is basically the LA state GOP's "Party line", which, of course, the RonPaulers disagree with, since they apparently saw fit to have their own convention at the same time that this convention was going on. Guy1890 (talk) 19:27, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Under party rules, ten supporters of Rick Santorum were chosen. Five delegates are official Mitt Romney delegates and one is for Ron Paul.

http://lagop.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012-Supplemental-Rules-copy.pdf: Supplemental Rule 15. At-Large Delegate and Alternate Delegate Elections. In accordance with the provisions of Rule 19, which provides in Rule 19 (d) that the convention elect twenty (20) Delegates at large [Rule 19 (d) Delegates] and Rule 20, which provides in Rule 20 (b) that these twenty (20) Delegates [Rule 19 (d) Delegates] be allocated to Presidential candidates in accordance with the results of the Presidential preference primary, and the determination of the Executive Committee, certain Republican candidates for President are allocated Delegates and Alternate Delegates among the twenty (20) Delegates and twenty (20) Alternate Delegates [Rule 19 (d) Delegates and Alternate Delegates] as follows: Rick Santorum, ten (10) Delegates and (10) Alternate Delegates [Rule 19 (d) Santorum Delegates and Alternate Delegates] and Mitt Romney five (5) Delegates and five (5) Alternate Delegates [Mitt Romney Rule 19 (d) Delegates and Alternate delegates]. Further, five (5) at large Delegates and five (5) at large Alternate Delegates [Rule 19 (d) uncommitted Delegates and Alternates] are allocated as uncommitted.

Santorum - 10 Romney - 5 Paul - 1 Santorum's and Romney's delegates are elected according to the primary results (see http://lagop.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012-Supplemental-Rules-copy.pdf). Five are uncommitted. So one Paul's delegate is CDs or or Executive Commitee's delegate.

The other fourteen are technically unbound to any candidate and are expected to support Governor Romney.

??? That fourteen delegates are at-large, CD's or Executive Commitee's delegates? They are mixed.

No one was nominated for the final thirteen positions, which were left vacant and may now be filled by the state party’s Executive Committee.

??? What thirteen delegates? What kind of delegates? They are at-large, CD's or Executive Commitee's delegates? As above - delegates have to be mixed. According to the rules, Executive Committee nominate only five (not thirteen) delegates...

Bielsko (talk) 10:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

20 at-large delegates allocation are now clear: http://lagop.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012-Supplemental-Rules-copy.pdf Bielsko (talk) 15:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

• LAGOP's statement

This link basically says the same thing as the above Facebook posting. Guy1890 (talk) 19:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• Ron Pauls statement
• Newsreport on numbers in the "Ron Paul" delegation
• Backgroundstory and all video assembled in one place
  Jack Bornholm (talk) 08:04, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

As of this date (June 9) from the Green Papers :: Santorum(10), Romney(5), "Uncommitted"(5), and "Available(26). Almost the same, the Louisiana GOP website listed June 2nd :: "Under party rules, ten supporters of Rick Santorum were chosen. Five delegates are official Mitt Romney delegates and one is for Ron Paul. The other fourteen are technically unbound to any candidate and are expected to support Governor Romney. Louisiana receives 46 votes at the national convention." Our table lists six for Romney and none for Paul. FYI, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

State Republican Convention and its controversies

The events surrounding the Louisiana Republican Convention are important and should be summarized factually somewhere on Wikipedia. Paul supporters are claiming La. as a major win through the rump convention or a major injustice if the rump convention is not recognized, but Wikipedia lacks descriptions and even lacks mention of the basic facts. All this is true while there is adequate source material in the local and national press. The present article is the natural place for a description of the convention, despite that the article's present name does not mention the Convention. The word "Convention" can be added to the title later. Some one or more persons familiar with the events and controversies related to the convention please step up and produce a summary. Here is how it is done so far for two other states: Maine Republican caucuses, 2012 and Missouri Republican primary and caucuses, 2012. Thanks if you would help get something started on this.CountMacula (talk) 02:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Article name

Please see discussion at Talk:United States presidential election, 2012#Article name, to change ", 2012" to "of 2012". Apteva (talk) 21:46, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on United States presidential election in Louisiana, 2012. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120430031133/http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ron-paul-wins-louisiana-caucus-2012-04-29 to http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ron-paul-wins-louisiana-caucus-2012-04-29
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120407013439/http://www.lacaucus2012.com:80/Caucus2012 to http://www.lacaucus2012.com/Caucus2012

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)