Skip to comments.And the GOP 2012 Nominee Will Be ….. [Drum Roll!] (Predicts a brokered convention)
Posted on 11/28/2011 12:25:30 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
If turn out to be right on this, remember you probably read it here first.
Im beginning to suspect that the GOP nominee for the 2012 general election may well be, None of the above. I.e., some dark horse candidate whos either at the margins (like a Huntsman or a Roemer), or someone totally out of left field.
It involves two words which we havent used in about 70 years: Brokered Convention.
There are Republican candidates with support an inch wide and a mile deep, and candidates with support a mile wide and an inch deep. None of the current candidates poll more than about 25% primary support at any one time, although they have done quite a bit of spot swapping in the polls these last few months.
Romney seems stuck at about 22%, plus or minus. Other leaders have come and gone. Currently, its Newt Gingrichs turn.
For a couple of generations now, candidates who hovered in single digits for any length of time like Cain, Bachman, Perry, etc. have dropped out of the race, ala Tim Pawlenty.
Dropping out in the absence of sufficient campaign funding and political support has always been the norm when running for a presidential nomination.
Now its different. Call it The Sarah Palin Political Business Model. This model uses a presidential campaign as a business start-up. As such, there is every incentive to keep running, even with improbably low poll numbers.
Most of the GOP candidates have more at stake than the presidential nomination, and the actual nomination isnt necessarily as valuable as what used to be the consolation prize: Post-campaign speaking fees and merchandise sales.
Heres my scenario:
Several candidates will make it to the GOP National Convention at Tampa Bay (FL): Romney, Gingrich, Huntsman, and perhaps Michelle Bachman and/or Ron Paul. Each will have run the distance for their own reasons, be they ambition, ideology, or long-term financial prospects. No single candidate gets through the primaries and caucuses with a clear majority of delegates. The first ballot will thus be a deadlock.
This is where it gets interesting. Once the first ballot has gone round, none of the delegates are committed to any one candidate, and for the first time in over 70 years, the political horse trading can begin in the (now metaphorical) smoke-filled room.
The problem they will face is this: Mitt confronts an anyone but Romney resistance which runs deep in the party. Everyone else (except possibly Jon Huntsman) is virtually unelectable as a GOP nominee in the general election.
In a negotiation very much like forming a parliamentary coalition, the various candidates (or their representatives) will offer their delegates votes in exchange for something of political value. It might be the vice presidential spot, a cabinet position, an ambassadorship, or perhaps a promise to act on some cherished piece of legislation or policy.
The Convention will then move for a second ballot to see if a nominee can be selected by a majority of the delegates. Im betting that the second ballot will also fail ,in the face of GOP factionalism and Rightwing/Tea Party purity tests.
If something isnt worked out by the 3rd, 4th or 5th ballots, all bets are off , and you will see moves to draft a least objectionable to the Convention nominee.
My personal assessment is as follows:
§ Romney: Ambition drives his campaign. He wants to be president, has the resources to go the distance, and relies on the motto, In the end, Romney is the only realistic choice. Its a tough sell for more than a third of the party delegates.
§ Gingrich: Going the distance. Nomination is secondary to product sales of books, DVDs, etc., and then more punditry and speaking fees. The nomination, if it comes to him, is a bonus.
§ Perry: Pride goeth before a fall. Perry has a record of zero electoral losses combined with money and substantial internal sycophantry to keep him going. Eventually, his money and his ego will give out and hell drop from the campaign, but not before grabbing a few delegates.
§ Bachmann: Ideologically driven, and would like to shape the future GOP in her own image. She only has a prayer of making it to the convention, and may be hoping for a FoxNews contract when this is all over, but otherwise probably doesnt have the savvy to properly monetize her candidacy for future income. Shell drop out and become a gnat on the fringes, like Palin but without the reality shows and adoring following.
§ Ron Paul: Might well make it to the end, because of his eccentricity and small but loyal following. Hell make it through to the convention because hes so damn entertaining. No chance of being the nominee, though.
§ Huntsman: Might make it to the convention. Ive felt from the beginning that Huntsmans goal isnt necessarily getting the nomination (though hed love to have it), but is actually to provide a more historically moderate and intelligent Republican alternative in order to try and drag the GOP back to an actual right-of-center political stance. Republican pragmatists may hope he has a chance, but I think it will be a generation or two (if ever) before his vision of a moderate conservative party (something like an Eisenhower Republican Party) can be realized.
§ Cain: Corporatists candidate with lots of money backing him, but (fortunately) doesn;t have a prayer of being nominated. Might get as far as Tampa Bay just because he can.
§ Santorum: Strictly ambition-driven. Google-search him. Hes done.
§ None Of The Above: After all is said and done, this will be the nominee. This person will be anonymous enough in the party to be inoffensive to a majority of the delegates, but will likely serve as not much more than a place-holder on the Republican presidential ballot.
After the 2012 election of the Democrat (likely Obama) as president, the political and ideological bloodletting within the GOP an almost literal struggle for the soul and survival of the Republican Party should make for an interesting 2016
A brokered convention is the wet dream of journalists everywhere, especially inside the Beltway.
It almost never happens, and the last “brokered convention” candidate to win the White House was FDR in ‘32.
I’ll bet that it won’t happen.
If you draw up scenarios....I can’t see any of these candidates taking more than twenty states during the primaries. Rick Perry will win Texas and probably three states out in the west. Mitt will win fairly big but not in the south or along the east coast. Newt will take half the south and most of the midwest, and Cain will pick up three or four states. It might become an interesting convention.
Anyone who wants to substitute a fresh face for the current GOP crowd needs to be ready for the Obama attack upon that person, and Obama has no scruples whatsoever. Those in the running now will have the benefit of not having stepped into the limelight only yesterday, and any potentially serious political problem (like the alleged Cain sexual harassment scandals) will likely have been flushed out and well aired.
Newt’s a loose cannon and unlikely to take much of the South or anything else when push comes to shove. Half the South — that’s dreaming. He’s the hare to Cain’s tortoise and IMHO can’t sustain it.
A lot of us still wish Sarah Palin would have run. She’d be dominating the race lopsidedly at this point. But she ain’t, so we got what we got.
UPDATED w/The Video: Sarah Palin Reconsider Ad In Iowa: Windmill Jousting, Doolittle Raid, Both?
Palin supporters announce Iowa ad buy (May commission a nat’l primary poll that includes Gov Palin)
I dont see it happening. Primaries these days tend to snowball. I understand the way it looks right now, today, it looks like its headed to a stale-mate. But people tend to jump on and off bandwagons when the day comes to cast a ballot.
By the time this thing gets to South Carolina, some of these candidates will have thrown in the towel. If they don’t, voters will jump off and then cling to whoever else closely matches their philosophy that has a chance to win.
That’s why I would not put a whole lot of faith in those SC or FL polls. Because they will change pending the outcome of the earlier races.
This writer adores moderates like Huntsman. He forgets there is something called traction with voters at play. The bias of the write is further evidenced by his declaration that Cain has no chance at nomination and then adds in parenthesis “fortunately”!
I guess he thanks his fortune Obama won’t face the most serious threat from a businessman nominee who knows his math and how to run a large business.
That’s what I was referring to in my post #1.
Iowa and NH together will record a total number of votes smaller than a dozen Florida city’s populations, in the primaries. This year SC & FL will matter more than IA and NH. Because the race is very fluid. What is different this year? The number of debates! No one needs to drop out until debates are done.
Sorry but I do not know Fred Karger, so your post went right over my head. Not your fault, it is my ignorance.
Hahahaha! No reason you should. Fred is the GOP homosexual candidate this cycle.
Im talking about momentum. If Gingrich wins Iowa and New Hampshire, he’ll have the wind at his back. At that point he’ll be tough to beat in SC. And the media will give him 99% of the attention.
That’s why I think its critical for Cain to win Iowa. Otherwise this could be a race between Romney and Gingrich.
Yes of course, big Mo can never be dismissed. I see Newt winning Iowa, Mitt winning NH and Cain winning in SC. But that is based on today’s news. Still 5 weeks to Iowa caucuses. If my guess is right no one will have big Mo past SC. Then FL becomes critically important.
The debates are being hurt by the current “low numbers” candidates. They need to weed them out. The candidates are staying in it to get face time on camera.
Perry will win Texas the way Al Gore won Tennessee.
Statewide, Perry has earned just as high a cadre of unrelenting foes as you see here.
The whole system is assbackwards and ought to be changed.
Ya picks yer candidate AFTER YOU NAIL DOWN A PARTY PLATFORM!!
THEN, and only then, you find a candidate to fit.
THEN pick the candidate.
I quit reading when this writer said that Huntsman would be in it at the convention
The rules of the Republican Party almost guarantee a nominee prior to the convention. After the first several states, the remaining states are winner-take-all. Therefore, the first several states are simply to winnow the field.
BTW if, in spite of what I said, it is a brokered convention, I think there’ll be an effort to get David Petraus to accept the nomination. He’s the only potential savior for the party.
You are so correct. These debates are like free money to anyone who chooses to compete. All they have to do is hang on until the next debate and hope someone ahead of them makes a big gaffe. In other cycles, some of these folks would be gone.
If there is a brokered convention, Sarah will be the nominee.
I won’t like the nominee if anyone of the Top Three wins ( Paul, Romney and Gingrich). I just think Bachmann is the best one with Cain in second. And until they win and prove to us they suck, I can’t say I will change my mind. I think they not only won’t be bad choices, but that everyone hates them because they are going to shake up washington. So are dead set against them in Rino/ Obama land.
Not a chance -- too many religious conservatives who won't vote for a habitual adulterer.
I’m only going to make one prediction. I predict that any prediction I should make will be wrong. Therefore, I won’t make any predictions. Just a few months ago I would never have considered voting for Newt....but am strongly leaning that way now. If my, normally rigid, views can change...then there is no telling what will finally happen.
BTW - This Australian piece doesn’t take into account that Huntsman has the same “Mormon” problem as Romney. Of course, folks will say it doesn’t matter...but it realy does.
Yours is a very good idea...we indeed are doing it azzbackwards.
There isn’t really anyone I could imagine even becoming the nominee that isn’t already a candidate in a brokered scenario.
Maybe Bob McDonnell.
I got to mention this. I was looking at Americans Elect, a non biased national poll of popular candidates, not according to party affiliation.
John Huntsman comes out 99% on the economy. Obama comes out 9%
Why are we ignoring this man and playing up the maroons, when the economy is the Giant issue - and all Obama can do is listen to his puppeteer Goldman-Sachs Geithner, whose only mantra is “mo money for banksters”? All we hear about is Herman Cain - a buffoon. Newt - retread of questionable values. Perry - duhhh. Okay, there’s Romney, but a lot of people would rather vote for wallpaper.
Why is a really sensible candidate like Huntsman ignored, while the media focuses on the farces? They want a cartoon show, is why. Not a tough debate all all the real issues, like Huntsman would give.
A moderate Republican - there’s a thought. Better than the screaming meemies. EVERYONE respected Eisenhower, the moderate Republican. I think the strongest complaint I heard about him, even from Democrats, was that he golfed too much. He not only won WWII, he built the Interstate Highway System, the most enriching and beneficial thing the government has ever done. And probably the last.
Maybe “None of the above” will be a brilliant speaker, akin to Churchill, charismatic, totally honest, with rock solid, no-nonsense plans to get the nation right.
Nahh, politics always picks the chumps in the end.
As for the “Mormon” problem, Kennedy was elected at a time when there was serious doubt that a Catholic could become President.
There are at least five women who will vouch that Cain is not a homosexual.
Of course, there were forty-two who would have vouched that Clinton was not ;’)
That’s what I’ve been pondereing.
“As for the Mormon problem, Kennedy was elected at a time when there was serious doubt that a Catholic could become President.”
Folks keep bringing that up. One thing is that it was a very long time ago. Second, is that people aren’t as open in stating a religious “dislike” of someone as they used to be. The “media” condemned the Baptist Pastor in Texas for condeming Romney, but I saw little “real” negative reaction by conservative evangelicals (because they - in principle - agreed with the pastor). Nope the “Mormon” problem is real for both Romney or Huntsman. Bottom line is that Huntsman will not be picked in a “brokered” convention.