Did winner-take-all primaries cost Romney (and conservatives) the nomination? A buddy of mine put together a pretty good chart demonstrating that they did. Download a PDF of it here.

If Republican delegates had been assigned proportionally, Romney would have actually led McCain by 8 delegates on Feb. 7–the day he suspended his campaign. Instead, McCain led Romney by 441 delegate, which made the former governor’s calculus pretty clear. The table below shows the delegates as they were after Super Tuesday, and as they would have been had the GOP gone to a proportional system.

what could have been?

One potential argument for winner-take-all is to avoid the brokered convention that Democrats now seem destined for. Indeed, if the GOP can win the presidency, it might be argued that the primary election system was a key reason why. But is it worth it? The appearance of consensus around McCain doesn’t change the fact that there are deep fissures within the GOP. In fact it makes them worse by disenfranchising the rank & file.

Many on the left think a brokered convention would be so bloody as to scar the party for decades. But isn’t their some nobility in it? Isn’t it a good thing that factions are forced to duke it for control of the party?