Regarding the GOP delegate races, those results are a little spread out over the interwebs, so will require some time to aggregate.  My favored candidate for my district– Jim McHale– did not win, but he did OK.  Interestingly, in my district well-known insider Ken Davis, about whom many are less than enthused, was included on the GOP sample ballot as an endorsed delegate at the last second absent any appropriate vote, at least as far as this committeeman is aware.

While Mr. Davis did not win, he did siphon off 1300 votes which affected the ultimate results.  There could be an explanation for this, but the most thorough one I’ve heard thus far is there was a “mix-up”, so an endorsement fell upon him by fiat, like manna from heaven.  This will require more investigation.  A very polite e-mail to the chairman of the Chester County GOP has thus far gone unanswered.

As for the rest of the Commonwealth, I believe there are at least some unendorsed delegates who have been elected, and not all of them are Paul-bearers.  As Mr. Drudge says, developing…

There’s nothing in this post for voters in the Dem. primary.  Your vote matters, and if you’ve been paying attention there’s not much I can tell you about each candidate.  I could tell you about what PA’s superdelegates are doing, but that shouldn’t be part of your equation.

As for those casting a meaningless PA presidential primary ballot, my recommendation is this:  Remember, top of the ballot is legally meaningless, and the state GOP likes it that way.  Down the ballot you will vote for delegates to the convention, who will cast a vote for your district in St. Paul.

If you live in my district, vote for Jim McHale.  If you have the opportunity to vote for additional people, leave it blank.  Generally, avoid most of the people pledged to Ron Paul, although God bless them for running and absolutely vote for them if you dig Dr. Paul.  If you don’t, though, go to this page, also look at the GOP sample ballot you can get at your polling place, and vote for a person who is not endorsed by the party, and is not a Ron Paul supporter.

In my research I have determined it is those people who are most likely to have your district’s best interests at heart.  As a group, the greatest fault of those people is they are running mostly because they think it would be fun to be a delegate at the convention.  That’s their greatest fault.  How we could go wrong with a delegation like that, I don’t know.  Pass the bottle, and move to close!

The take away point from all this is what?  That when it comes to electing the president of the United States, Republicans have to do lots of research and attempt to guess who might best reflect their values by proxy.  If you wanted to design a system concentrating power and influence in the hands of people with roles the public doesn’t understand, this is it.

That’s not the way I think things should be done.  You?

Jim McHale, running to be a delegate in the 16th district, got his start as a Paul supporter.  Upon witnessing more intimately the bursting inanity of Pennsylvania’s primary system is he decided the right thing to do was to simply reflect the will of his district.  He informs me, though, that in order to be designated a “Pennsylvania Patriot for Ron Paul” one has to agree to vote for Dr. Paul at the GOP convention regardless of the will of the district one represents.

I mention this because when I spoke to some of those people they claimed they would try and represent their constituents rather than the interests of Ron Paul.  So either they were lying to me, or they are being less than truthful with the Paul campaign.

So unless you hear otherwise from me, the people indicated as Paul supporters on that grid intend to vote for Ron Paul, which is absolutely their prerogative.  It is, of course, also incumbent to them to be honest with the voters about their intentions, and I am beginning to have my doubts about their veracity.

Your mileage may vary.

The editors noted that delegates are permitted to abstain.  They were remarking on how this may come in handy when it comes to for the GOP to settle on a veep selection.  But abstaining is in the air…

Bob Casey, you may or may not know, has not met an issue or controversy on which he can avoid fleeing, lest he reveal his characteristically equivocating and vapid core.

So after insisting he would avoid endorsing a presidential candidate, he changed his mind.  And rather than endorse the candidate the large majority of his constituents tends to prefer, he decided to boldly get behind the national front-runner, apparently hoping to curry favor with St. Barack and lessen Clinton’s eventual victory in Pennsylvania

Of course, the percentage of people who really care about Bob Casey’s opinion is only marginally higher than the percentage of people– like me– who think much more highly of McCain because Phil Gramm is a close adviser.

Casey is, again, such a weasel.

No. 1 with a bullet is our old friend Al Gore.  Of course, all those in the know suspect there’s a small but real chance that Gore will still end up being the nominee…

While I don’t know anything about Mr. McHale, I hereby endorse his candidacy, which is my prerogative as a committeeman.  He was not one of the rubber-stamp candidates ‘endorsed’ by the local GOP committee, and that’s good enough for me.  As I live in his district, I think I’ll actually be able to vote to send him to the GOP national convention.

Of course, he could be a Paul supporter.  Or perhaps he digs on the Huckster.  Heck, he could be a Bircher for all I know.

What I do know is that he cares more than the endorsed candidates, for whom I’ve seen no signs.  He will also likely be a straw that stirs the drink, and that’s what the GOP needs both here in Pennsylvania and nationally.

(In fact, I’m going to put my money where my mouth is and run him some Google ads off of my account, linked directly to this post.  This means if you’re reading this, Jim, you should pop me an e-mail at karlub at yahoo dot com to make sure I’m representing you accurately!)

Josh’s post is especially amusing, as he feigns confusion over Sen. Casey’s tentativeness is supporting a candidate.  What?  Casey is unable to boldly articulate an opinion on something?  Why, that’s as rare as the Phillies having a mediocre April!

[note for out of towners: the Phillies always suck in April]

We hear from them that “electability” is important.  What most of those superdelegates mean to do when they cast this line of thought is have the listeners own mind catch upon Ms. Clinton’s fairly impressive negatives. If I were a superdelegate disposed to support Obama, though, I would probably stop this justification.

Look at the following poll data is three key swing states both parties covet in the general election.  Who do you think is more electable amongst the two democrat candidates for president?

PENNSYLVANIA

OHIO

FLORIDA

Seems to me with Rev. Wright thing is not going to blow over easily for St. Barack.  Perhaps a superdelegate-enabled win for her is not beyond the pale.  I mean, there are lots of folks unsurprised by Wright’s hyperventilating.  When I worked downtown there would be a group of African American religious nuts outside suburban station with a P/A every Friday, when the weather was warm, yelling pretty much the exact same stuff to passing commuters who would ignore them the same way they ignore panhandlers.

But all those blue-collar union types in the Democratic party surely have a problem with that type of rhetoric.  Especially since part of Obama’s appeal is that he was supposed to get us past that sort of thing.