The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Include economics among the subjects about which Vogel knows little. The law of diminishing returns would suggest that the cost per delegate is not linear. Rather, later delegates would cost less on a per-delegate basis than earlier ones. It's not just a good idea, it's the law.

Mitt Romney should drop out of the race.

He says he knows how to run a business, well if that were true then he should fire himself. Romney has used up more than $70 million in American voter's donations and has little to show for it. His product is a flop, too expensive and not selling.

On the other hand, Huckabee's product is very inexpensive and selling just as well or better. Now come on, which product would you buy?

Romney product = $70 dollars for a widget that yields 293 delegates = $0.23 cents per widget
Huckabee product = $2 dollars for a widget that yields 190 delegates = $0.01 cent per widget

Huckabee's product cost 1 cent per widget compared to Romney's product at 23 cents per widget which calcuates out to the same performance of the product (division of delegates won so far). Any one in their right mind would buy the widget that costs 1 cent if it performs exactly the same as the widget that costs 23 cents.

The business formula that Romney says he is good at proves that he should drop out of the race. He is wasting tons of money. If he can't run a campaign finacially sucessfully how in the world will he run a huge American government successfully???

Romney is losing money as fast has Enron did with social security of it's employee's.

Huckabee is a true leader, someone who wants to share the power with all Americans, not show his prideful power like Romney does.

Vote for true conservative Mike Huckabee!

ALEX VOGEL IS AN ABSOLUTE IDIOT! Clearly, he comes from a state where basic math is not a requirement for high school graduation. Romney has 270 delegates to date. Even $1 million per delegate would mean that he would have had to spend $270 million to date. It would take my daughter (in 1st Grade) less than 2 seconds to figure that out. According to Vogel's moronic math, Romney would have had to spend more than $313 million so far. There is no wonder why he is not affiliated with any of the major presidential candidates.

The Washington Post is equally idiotic for postin such a tremendously stupid analysis.

The lone Giuliani delegate should feel honored to have earned the moniker: "The 50 Million Dollar Delegate."

Sorry, that was total raised. Rudy spent $48,152,428 as of December 31, 2007: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00009908&cycle=2008

FWIW: opensecrets.org lists Rudy as spending $60,929,240.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008

Two questions. #1, does anyone have exact figures for Giuliani on this? I had heard some large number, but would like reliable stats. #2, can the stats on Romney please be confirmed? Thanks.

"Doesn't the Washington Post use fact-checkers?"
No
"This is embarrassing."
These reporters appear incapable of embarrassment, or shame.

This article looks to be factually erroneous on its face. Jonathan Weisman and the Washington Post should either retract it, or else include the total Romney amount spent (numerator) and the total Romney delegates won (denominator) that justify the purported $1.16-million-per-delegate figure.

Incidentally, I am no fan of Romney. Doesn't the Washington Post use fact-checkers? This is embarrassing.

Ron Paul spent $20,262,084 for 16 total delegates. That's $1,266,380 per delegate thus far. Rudy spent $50 million for ONE delegate in Nevada I think.

Sorry, but it seems as if the $35 million figure I had in my memory was what Romney has spent from his own PERSONAL fortune -- a more precise, total campaign amount I found at OpenSecrets.org was $86,068,239 -- divided by 268 (CNN just updated its estimated delegate count) equals $321,150.15 per delegate. That is still a far cry from $1.16 million per delegate, and it will continue to go down as the final delegate count from yesterday is determined (although campaign costs are still going up obviously).

My initial point, above, was that the math was off in the first place. Even using the correct amount, I also have a problem extrapolating that "rate" to from this point forward. There's no evidence that the rest of the delegates would cost Romney the same.

This Romney supporter is undettered, if a bit looney: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70T4mLnk1Dk

Well, I am partial to "fuzzy" math myself ; )

JakeD, you are far too concerned with technicalities and details far beyond the interest and grasp of the average voter. You're going to ruin it.

CNN's latest delegate count shows Romney at 265. At $1.16 million each, that means Romney has spent $304 million?! I thought it was more like $35 million so far -- maybe you meant $116,000 per delegate -- someone's math is off.

"The former Massachusetts governor has spent $1.16 million per delegate, a rate that would cost him $1.33 billion to win the nomination."

Yes, but they're really, really good delegates.

While Jon Weisman may think this post is just a barrel of laughs, I disagree. I think it is juvenile and inappropriate. Of course, I keep laboring under the sad misunderstanding the Washington Post is interested in providing a valuable, quality product. They say hope is the last thing to die.

LEARN LONG DIVISION -- OR HOW TO USE A CALCULATOR.
According to the Post website (9:30 am), Romney has 269 delegates. Do you think he's spent $269 million? Latest filings, through December, show he had spent only $86 million.

chrisaz2-Pandering to the Evangelicals and bringing Religion as strongly into the discussion as the WASHED-OUT Minister has done, is EXACTLY what I would call Religious Sectarianism!

However, as a Catholic, I will allow Huckster to seek redemption in Confession and atonement for his errors. Us Catholics are just forgiving and open minded sorts! Not Holier-Than-Thou, Just simply Superior! ;~)

LOL!

Seriously, I think Huckleberry would make a very nice VP! He could learn a lot from Mitt, and not only improve BOTH of their chances of actually ever getting into the White House, but could look forward to taking over after Mitt has served his Purpose!

BUT, get there on a Platform, not on Affiliations! :-)

What has he ever done in governing that would warrant a charge of religious sectarianism? You are wrong, wrong, wrong...you are also a whiner, but I guess that would fit right in with your chosen candidate, I suppose. Huckabee has done an amazing job with no resources, and a media that wrote him off since the south carolina primary. What candidate has done as much with so little? I think its the kind of guy I want to run the government if we have to have it.

Imagine such a thing. Religious Sectarianism as a Money Value! I have to wonder how much al-Sadr and al-Sistani spent to steal the Iraqi Elections?

Once upon a time, People in THIS Country voted with their Heads. NOW, they are either gullible easily manipulated Sheeple, or Voting by Affiliation!

It is a SAD Day in America. One look at the impending Recession should tell most of us, we are doing something WRONG!

But, alas, the Sheeple Bleat in misguided but obviously contented ignorance!

Or, possibly more like the Frog in the water being heated up!

Congress has an Approval Rating of 11%.

Golly fellow Froggies, let's elect one of them to be President! That should get the water really boiling!

I'm Bombed-Bombed-Bombed, let's elect McPain!

Really Bombed-Bombed-Bombed!, Vote for McPain!

Foorrrr McPaaiiinnnnn! We are Insaaaannne!

For McPaaaaaiiin....

NO LOL! :-(

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.