Skip to comments.(Vanity) More Thoughts on a Brokered Convention
Posted on 01/17/2008 7:00:24 AM PST by gbscott1954
I have heard the possibility of a brokered convention kicked around alot on here. I think the possibility of the deadlocked convention is in direct proportion to how badly all our current candidates want the presidency. They have a potential to remain past Super Tuesday, even if they do not do well. Romney has the money. Huckabee has the core evangelicals, and seems to be a true believer in his God chosen task of being president. Rudy will probably do well on Super Tuesday, perhaps winning a couple of the Northern primaries. I do tend to believe that McCain, especially if he does not win in S.C. and do well in FL, will have nowhere to go. He has no built-in constituency. Maybe the foreign policy hawks, but little else. Fred, if he can catch a wind from S.C. (I dont think he has to win, but do well. Finish ahead of Huck maybe), will gain more support in the South and win several of the Southern states. Then, one or more of the candidates will horse trade, or positions will harden and we will have a no-holds barred fight up to the convention.
I am not one who believes that we will have a long-deadlocked convention. The days of many, many ballots are gone. The simple reason is that it used to take 2/3 of the delegates to win. That is why the 1924 Dem Convention was so disastrous, with 103 ballots before a virtual unknown was nominated. It may go two or three ballots, but not more. There will be some kind of horse trading or a break for the guy on top with momentum. I predict that if there is a brokered convention the nomination will go to the man who has campaigned, demonstrated some winning power, and can appeal to all factions of the party. Whether you are a Thompson supporter or not, it is obvious that he is acceptable to all factions. The social conservatives can accept him on his abortion/gay rights stands. The fiscal conservatives can accept him for his pro-growth, anti-tax stand. The foreign policy conservatives can support him for his commitment to stay strong militarily and conduct the war on terror to win.
My conviction is that NONE of the other candidates are acceptable to all wings of the party. Does this guarantee victory in the Fall? I am not sure, but I do think that when you place Fred in debate against the best that the Dems have to offer he will surely shine. Just my thoughts here. I would welcome comments.
Thompson needs to win South Carolina, and then probably get at least second in Florida.
If he can’t win South Carolina, where can he win? Not enough places to get anywhere near enough delegates to be a factor.
More importantly, McLame and the Huckster need to be stopped dead in their tracks.
If McCain wins SC, there will not be a brokered convention. Bloomberg will enter the race killing Rudy and clearing the way for McCain to steal the nomination.
Perhaps you are right, but a really good showing energizes his followers. If he comes a close second to McCain I think it will energize Fred for the rest of the South and then you will see some victories.
I agree. I wish Hunter had more impact so he and Thompson could team up.
However, there are two candidates I absolutely will not vote for and if they get the nomination the GOP will most likely explode. Huck & McPain. LronPaul does not count, he should be running as a Libertarian.
I would eventually get behind any of the others in the the General. Why? SC appointments.
Michael Steele and his group GOPAC have been pushing 6 months for one. Remind them to bring the Cigars.
to many faulty premises here. McCain will win SC. Thompson, at the absolute best, will crawl into third.
But the bigger problem here is that going to the convention without a nominee will GUARANTEE defeat in November. Two months is too short to campaign in a nation of 300 million. How will any candidate raise the kind of money necessary in those two months? It’s impossible. Sure, we convention junkies would love it, but that’s not much of a trade off - our entertainment, versus 4 years of Hillary/Barack.
I’m a Fred supporter, but I’m also a realist. He’s gaining some traction in South Carolina, but he has to gain a lot more. If he does not at least pass Romney and come close to McCain there he’s in trouble. If that happens I’m for a brokered convention. We need someone who can unite the three main factions of the party (social and economic conservatives and national security hawks). Fred is the only one out of the current candidates (besides Duncan Hunter who is polling at 1%). If we can’t have Fred then I would rather another candidate step forward at a brokered convention such as Newt.
“Two months is too short to campaign in a nation of 300 million. “
For us political junkies we follow politics all the time. The common person does not start paying attention until the last couple of weeks of an election. Two months is plenty of time.
I think that we would be looking at a Mitt/Fred ticket or Fred/Mitt coming out of the brokered convention.
Either one is fine by me. However, should the RINO’s rear their ugly heads and insist on Trudy being on the ticket, the party would need to balance that flaming lib with a true, rock-ribbed conservative.
Duncan Hunter. At the TOP of that ticket.
Wait till Paul decides to run on a third party ticket.
He’s got to do something with all that money!!
Why not assure that Hitlery wins??
When Huckabee drops out, Fred will sweep the south. All Fred has to do is beat Huckabee in S Carolina. Huckabee drops out and all the Evangelicals coalesce around Fred, as they should have in the beginning. McCain will never get more than he has now.
As a former Newt fan, it troubles me to have to tell you this, but Newt has transformed into an unprincipled RINO over the years.
“As a former Newt fan, it troubles me to have to tell you this, but Newt has transformed into an unprincipled RINO over the years.”
I heard this statement he made something about moving on from Reagan or something like that. I just wonder if his statements are taken out of context. This is the mainstream media we are talking about...
“When Huckabee drops out, Fred will sweep the south. All Fred has to do is beat Huckabee in S Carolina. Huckabee drops out and all the Evangelicals coalesce around Fred, as they should have in the beginning.”
Well, Thompson beating Huckabee is still looking quite a tall order. Presumably, in your scenario, if Thompson doesn’t beat Huckabee in SC, then Thompson drops out? I’d be suprised if Huckabee drops out before Super Tuesday though in any event. He doesn’t seem the graceful withdrawal type.
I heard Newt clearly state that the era of Reagan conservatism is dead. Rush was stunned, as I was. Newt is positioning himself to be acceptable to the leftist leadership at a brokered convention.
Fey on him and his liberal friends!
“I heard Newt clearly state that the era of Reagan conservatism is dead. Rush was stunned, as I was.”
I guess what I’m asking is what does he mean by this? Does he mean that we have to get over talking about Reagan this or that? If true I would agree.
Reagan did not invent the conservative movement. For that matter neither did Barry Goldwater. What both of them did is successfully espouse the principles that our founding fathers believed in and founded this country on.
I think that what Newt may be saying is that we (as conservatives) should not be continually looking for the next Reagan. He was a one of a kind. What we should be looking for (as conservatives) is a candidate who can successfully espouse and advance the conservative principles to answer the needs of the American people today.
Is that what Newt could have meant?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.