A brokered convention scenario?

The Washington Times ^ | July 19, 2007 | Gary J. Andres

[gpapa]

Last week I described the Democratic presidential delegate selection process, outlining why capturing the 2008 nomination included more wild cards than a stacked poker deck. Democrats' heavy reliance of proportionally allocated delegates, as well as the large number of unpledged "super delegates," means several candidates could survive the primary season. At a minimum, there is a strong possibility that contenders other than the ultimate nominee will come to the Denver convention in August with a significant amount of delegate support.

Interestingly, Republicans find themselves in a similar situation, but for different reasons. Unlike the Democrats' proportional delegate selection system and "super delegates," many of the GOP states use a "winner-take-all" (WTA) system.

[scrabblehack]

Every time out they say brokered convention....then one candidate wraps it up earlier and earlier...

[California Patriot]

A brokered Republican convention would inevitably produce a nominee who has a hard time unifying the party to the (great) extent this will be necessary. People have expected for a long time now that the nominee will be the “choice” of the party’s voters. The reason there won’t be a brokered convention, in either party, is that there aren’t sufficient ideological differences among the candidates to sustain a second- or third-place campaign after a few defeats at the beginning of ‘08. After the first few primaries, a front-runner will be clear and everyone else will fold. There is almost no opportunity anymore for a Reagan ‘76 scenario, where he resolves — against the advice of at least some advisors — to stay in the race. Indeed, RR said he’d stay in the race even if he lost every primary. That kind of political seriousness simply doesn’t exist anymore.