[Hoot Gibson]

LOL, the caucuses are part of the primary process here in this country. But since you are having so much trouble with all of this, Denver Post political reporter Joey Bunch does a very nice job explaining the whole thing. And for convenience sake, he does so in a video which comes up automatically upon going to the page, (MY DENVER POST LINK ABOVE). According to him, the Colorado delegation of 2012 was "pledged to the winner of the caucus all the way through." (to the convention) Which as I said happened to be Rick Santorum last time around.

OH and BTW, I believe if one were to have another look at the map I posted for the 2012 vote, one would readily be able to verify it's accuracy.

You keep saying that Santorum won the caucus (when you are not incorrectly calling it a primary), which is true. Explain how Santorum, winner of the caucus straw poll, emerged from Colorado with only 6 pledged delegates to runner-up Romney's 13 delegates. Ron Paul was blown out in the popular vote and still had 5 delegates pledged to him. Gingrich received more votes than Ron Paul and had zero pledged delegates.

How do you reconcile those numbers if the popular votes were used to apportion delegates? The answer should be obvious to you by now. The delegate pledges were voluntary and were unrelated to the votes each candidate received. A straw poll and an election are not the same thing. The straw poll was nothing more than an opinion poll. 12 delegates elected not to pledge their support to any candidate, but none of the delegates were required to pledge their support.

As I said, the 2012 Colorado Caucuses and the non-binding straw poll that was held are a well documented part of history, not a matter of opinion. The map that you posted does nothing more than show the results of the straw poll. It is probably 100 percent accurate, but it does not change history.