Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

After Alabama and Mississippi: Will the GOP Convention Be a Battleground?
National Journal ^ | March 14, 2012 | Alex Roarty

Posted on 03/14/2012 1:08:13 PM PDT by BAW

Is it time to take the Republican convention seriously as a potential battleground?

Republicans should know better by now. Their still-putative nominee, Mitt Romney, lacks the conservative support to capture the kind of expectations-exceeding primary win necessary to capsize underfunded but motivated rivals Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.

Romney didn’t do it in South Carolina, Colorado, or Tennessee. He proved unable once again on Tuesday to claim victory in a state, Mississippi, that seemed tantalizingly within reach.

The months-long trend makes it clear that Romney will have to win the GOP nomination with math, not acclamation, steadily accumulating enough delegates in friendly contests until he reaches the nomination-clinching number of 1,144. But that path is fraught with risk. There is always the chance that he’ll fall just short of the magic number, which raises the possibility of a contested August convention in Tampa.

Many mocked the notion a month ago, but it now seems increasingly likely. “After last night, you have to start think it’s possible,'” said political consultant Curt Anderson, a former political director of the Republican National Committee who advised Rick Perry before he quit the race. “It seems more possible than before, that’s for sure.”

The Santorum and Gingrich campaigns are each eagerly embracing that very scenario. In a memo released this week, the Santorum team argued that some delegates ostensibly pledged to Romney would switch to the onetime senator if Romney fails to win on the first ballot at the convention. Combined with a difficult schedule remaining for Romney, that dynamic ensures that the front-runner won’t acquire enough delegates, the Santorum campaign contends

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: brokeredconvention; convention; gingrich; romney; santorum
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last
To: Mountain Mary

Well, I’d say last night wasn’t a victory for him. Secondly, I’m not talking about victory speeches. I’m talking about the kind of speech when you’re back is against the wall and what needs to be done and uplifting. Not “we’re gonna piecemeal hamstring Romney.”

41 posted on 03/14/2012 2:15:24 PM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Mountain Mary

I hear Romney’s fundraising is way way down

42 posted on 03/14/2012 2:15:24 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: webstersII

The point is that Romney is not much different than BO

43 posted on 03/14/2012 2:17:45 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

The term “brokered convention” does not mean what it did 150 years ago. Today, each state has slightly different rules about its national convention delegates. In Texas, for example, the delegates are bound to vote for their allocated primary nominee for the first round of voting. If after the first round of voting, there is no majority, they are then all free to vote for anyone. So you see, it’s not really “brokered” as the nominee will need to win the delegate votes, one way or another.

44 posted on 03/14/2012 2:18:29 PM PDT by Stat-boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice

You got it. There is no reason why either Mitt or Rick would debate him. Even when/if Newt gets a GOP nomination, it will be like pulling teeth to get Obama to debate him.

Even then, moderators, location, topics, etc. will be rigidly controlled lest the affirmative action, white-guilt, halfrican Muslim be embarrassed. In such a forum Newt wouldn’t be ALLOWED to win.

The only place he can redeem is at the GOP Convention, frankly.

45 posted on 03/14/2012 2:20:01 PM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Open primaries are stupid, that is totally right.

46 posted on 03/14/2012 2:21:08 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
It has been my understanding that Romney has never had a significant number of small donors. Lots of corporate bundling. If is big money boys start pulling back, he will have real problems.
47 posted on 03/14/2012 2:21:57 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Romney - Santorum: Twin Sons of Different Mothers...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Stat-boy

I saw a brokered convention on TV as a kid. Ronald Reagan spoke there, giving The Speech. It was great. As a matter of fact, it was riveting. All eyes everywhere were focused on it.

I’d like for everyone to see one again. It might help people see what Presidential politics and citizens involved in politics can really do.

48 posted on 03/14/2012 2:23:14 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: BAW; Pride in the USA; Stillwaters

I think Newt all but said this in his after-election speech last night. He said he’s staying in all the way to Tampa because:

1. We must block Romney
2. We must elect a conservative

He said, “It may not be one of us. It may be that somebody else steps forward.” It doesn’t get much more plainly spoken than that.

I believe Newt is fighting with everything in him for the survival of this great Republic. His goal now is to be part of taking down the Establishment at the convention, and to do all he can to see to it that we have an electable conservative nominee, even if it’s not him. I sent him more money this morning.

49 posted on 03/14/2012 2:30:47 PM PDT by lonevoice (Klepto Baracka Marxo, impeach we much.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Oh, and I remember Reagan giving that speech. As a family, we were huddled in a small living room of a cabin, watching a tiny TV. Reagan’s hair started flying as he became more insistent. We were shocked that this was Reagan. You could see the lights of tiny TVs playing the speech in other dimly lit cabins.

My dad got up and went to the telephone: one of those old, finger-dialed black ones with the big fabric cords. He called long distance to the convention and spoke to the state leader. I sat at the dining room table that had an old, lacy ivory tablecloth on it and a single light overhead. He was determined and wanted Reagan nominated right there.

My dad did that and spent some hard-earned money on long distance. That was the first time I ever paid any attention to politics.

I was in awe.

50 posted on 03/14/2012 2:31:02 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: webstersII; Lurking Libertarian
People seem to miss this point. The establishment will still have the upper hand.

It would, most likely, be a bruising fight which would ultimately increase the chance of re-electing BO.

No, you miss the point: if Romney is the nominee, it is a guaranteed loss.

He has to be defeated or the GOP will suffer catastrophic losses.

Once Obama and his minions in the MSM start using his record against him, it's all over. Romney will drop like a rock in the polls leading up to the election and will never recover.

Romney's record:

1. Supported Gay Adoption.
2. Implemented and supported Gay Marriage while Governor of MA.
3. Supported Abortion
4. Believes in Global Warming.
5. Supported a state level Cap-and-Trade system while Governor of MA.
6. Supported the Brady Bill.
7. Implemented an "Assault" Weapons Ban while Governor of MA EVEN after the Federal level AWB was allowed to elapse.
8. Supported TARP
9. Implemented a Socialistic HealthCare program called RomneyCare that includes $50 Abortions and an Individual Mandate.

51 posted on 03/14/2012 2:31:02 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

We need a super conservative majority in BOTH HOUSES, ones that can over ride even 0’s EO’s and other insanities. Even if it ends up with the RINO, that would put a stop to a lot of what he could do.

Any congress critter or president who FAILS to keep faith with the Military, WON’T keep faith with U

52 posted on 03/14/2012 2:46:08 PM PDT by GailA (Any congress critter or president who FAILS to keep faith with the Military, WON'T keep faith with U)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

They need to start attacking 0 and 0’care. And Yes it is FR POSTED! Not only on this issue but on the guts to the Military, Medicare. There won’t be a doctor to take granny come 2014 if we do not get this monster repealed. Yes cuts need to be made, BUT NOT GUTTING Medicare as 0 has done.


Nestled within the “individual mandate” in the Obamacare act — that portion of the Act requiring every American to purchase government — approved insurance or pay a penalty — is an “abortion premium mandate.” This mandate requires all persons enrolled in insurance plans that include elective abortion coverage to pay a separate premium from their own pockets to fund abortion. As a result, many pro-life Americans will have to decide between a plan that violates their consciences by funding abortion, or a plan that may not meet their health needs.

53 posted on 03/14/2012 2:54:36 PM PDT by GailA (Any congress critter or president who FAILS to keep faith with the Military, WON'T keep faith with U)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

“The point is that Romney is not much different than BO”

That’s what everyone said about BO versus McCain.

Do you really think that McCain would have appointed a loser like Sotomayor to the SC? Would he have initiated gov’t healthcare and all the other lib stuff BO has done?

Sure Romney is not that conservative, but to say that he is not that different from BO is not true. He is not out to destroy this country on the altar of political correctness and fairness.

He wouldn’t be a good, conservative president but to say that he would pursue the same type of stuff that BO has pursued is ludicrous.

54 posted on 03/14/2012 3:16:51 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice

Good conclusion. I sent Newt more money two days ago myself.

55 posted on 03/14/2012 3:31:51 PM PDT by Pride in the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: monkapotamus

Get ready for microwave more popcorn I think the GOP convention GOING BE GOODD

Maybe not like 1968 riot convention for Demos they could try LOL!

56 posted on 03/14/2012 3:41:02 PM PDT by SevenofNine (We are Freepers, all your media belong to us ,resistance is futile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar

I don’t see how Santorum puts that much of a dent in Mitt unless Newt drops out or suddenly drops to less than 5% in the 14 or so variations on winner-take-all states from here on out. The math seems to show Romney getting very close to 1,144 at the current trajectory, enough that any contest at the convention would be a foregone conclusion, because you have over 100 unpledged RNC delegates who can vote for whoever they want even on the first ballot plus Ron Paul’s delegates opening up on the second ballot.

Newt will be acting as Rick’s Ross Perot in the many numerous winner-take-all states and districts coming up (far more than in the primary’s first half).

Illinois is a case in point. It has direct delegate election by district, which means whichever candidate’s delegates get the most votes in that district, win the whole district. Romney is polling 35-31-12-7 right now in Illinois. Newt is taking enough votes away from Rick to give him second place. If that vote spread held across every district, Mitt would win ALL 69 delegates in Illinois. If Newt dropped out and Rick got 75% of his votes (even if Mitt got the other 25%) then Rick would win those instead.

Upcoming are 622 delegates from “conditional” or by-district winner-take-all states, all ones “moderate” enough to give Mitt the win out of a split vote, just like Ohio and Michigan did:

West Virginia
New York
Connecticut (a mix)

The fully statewide winner-take-all contests are perhaps less likely to be lost by Mitt in any type of race. Although I’m not sure what the character of Republicans is in all these states and if Santorum could win any, except of course Wisconsin. 228 delegates from these.

Puerto Rico
Washington D.C.
New Jersey

439 delegates remain from proportional contests. The problem with these is while most of them favor the conservatives, Romney is going to be able to accumulate delegates from them anyway. Since they’re not WTA, we can’t shut Romney out of delegates in the states where we’re likely to be the winner.

Rhode Island
North Carolina
New Mexico
South Dakota

If Romney gets 150 from the proportional, 186 from the statewide winner-take-all (subtracting Wisconsin), he’s up to 831. He’d only need HALF of the delegates from those seven “conditional” winner-take-all states to hit his magic number. When you consider he’ll get maybe 150 from Ron Paul and the RNC combined, he only needs about 150 from the 622 in those states to get to a “safe” zone.

The ONLY strategy is to make it a 2-man race and then BLOW Romney out of the water in as many winner-take-all states and districts as possible. The status quo has Romney sailing pretty comfortably to the nomination. We have to deny him VIRTUALLY EVERY DELEGATE in Illinois, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Texas and maybe half of the California and New York ones. To do that we need to have a candidate that wins THE MOST VOTES in almost every district. That will not happen when we have one candidate siphoning off votes from the other.

57 posted on 03/14/2012 4:00:22 PM PDT by JediJones (The Divided States of Obama's Declaration of Dependence: Death, Taxes and the Pursuit of Crappiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: webstersII

RomneyCare is ObamaCare.

Romney will not repeal it.

Romney is pro-gay, pro-abortion, anti-gun and appointed liberal judges in Mass-a-taxes.

He will flip flop right back if he wins.

58 posted on 03/14/2012 4:08:27 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian


59 posted on 03/14/2012 4:26:59 PM PDT by Undecided 2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson