Before primaries political bosses controlled state delegations at nominating conventions. When a party could not decide on a candidate after several ballots, the bosses would meet in “smoke-filled” rooms and “broker” a choice.
A little simplistic, but you get the idea.
It’s when none of the candidates get the majority of the delegates.
What is a brokered convention?
A fantasy.
It will never happen. About the time people start to figure out that the guy they don’t like is inevitable, they start talking about a brokered convention.
Not. Gonna. Happen.
It basically means a convention in which no candidate has a majority of the delegates. In such a scenario (it has been a long time since this has happened), a “Dark Horse” compromise candidate may emerge - someone no one ever expected and who may not have been running in the first place. Is this a good thing? It is if you don’t like anyone who is running right now...
well, they vote several ballots and no one gets a certain majority.....it may be more than just 50.1%
then they essentially negotiate delegates to reach a concensus
it’s a zoo i’d reckon
shame they can’t duel anymore
The party leaders can meet in smoke-filled rooms but the delegates still choose.
Merrill Lynch sells all the candidates to foreign investors and the election is cancelled. The proceeds are used to pay down the national debt.
NIRVANA!! THAT’S WHAT A BROKERED CONVENTION WOULD BE FOR ROMNEYITES!!
However, this has been an unusual year in that each party has two distinct front-runners and it is becoming likely that one if not both conventions this summer will be brokered.
As to whether this is a good or bad thing remains to be seen. For the GOP, if a brokered convention means that McCain will not be the nominee, than it is definitely a good thing. For the Democrats, the Clintons are nasty enough to emerge from any brokered convention the victors because they will stoop to any level and make any deal necessary to ensure that they emerge with the nomination.
It is caused by not enough delegates being won in the primaries to win nomination by any candidate.
Is it good? well, if it led to a strong conservative candidate I would say it is a good thing. OTOH, if it fractures the conservative vote and leads to a portion of the conservatives going to a McCain for example, giving him the nomination...it would not be a good thing IMHO.
Either of those two options will be on the table in a brokered convention...and maybe more.
Oh, and a brokered convention is far less likely to occur with the GOP than with the Dims because the GOP has so many “winner take all” states... A candidate can win 35% of the vote yet get ALL of the state’s delegates. With proportional, he only gets 35% of the delegates...
It’s like electing a new Pope.
And don't forget about the superdelegates--I think 10% or 20% come directly from the party leadership.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Republican_National_Convention
Neither Ford or Reagan had enough delegates to win the nomination by convention time. After fighting it out at convention, Ford won. And Reagan endorsed him and gave a very rousing speech.
A brokered convention is one where the convention goers would actually convene and decide upon a candidate. (As opposed to what conventions normally are: A few days of getting drunk, banging hookers, and betraying the Party’s rank-and-file.) I’m hoping for a brokered convention because I want to see blue-blood, RNC country-clubbers kissing a lot of conservative ass if they hope to get anything done.
It is a damp-dream fantasy of the Beltway Press in every single election cycle.
It isn’t going to happen. Bet on it. But the press pines, hopes for, has wild fantasies about brokered conventions every four years, showing that they’re just as stupid as they were four years ago.
When you see some twit in the press start breathlessly wondering if we’re “going to have a brokered convention,” you know right then and there you can stop reading, change the channel, whatever.
A brokered convention would simply be a recipe for electoral annihalation in November.
Instead of the candidate being known in March or April and being able to essentially campaign and get their ideas across from then, the candidate would only have a couple of months. That would be suicide if the other party have had a clear run for all those months while internal bickering was going on on the other side.
If we look at the Republican race as it stands, the most likely route to a brokered convention would see McCain with the largest (but not decisive) amount of delegates, Romney with the second largest and Huckabee with the third largest. The most likely scenario in that case is that Huckabee simply pledges his delegates to McCain in return for the VP slot. That could be arranged well in advance of the convention.
The chances are very very slim in that scenario of the process stretching out and no decision being reached leading to a ‘dark horse’ candidate emerging (although this is a common fantasy that you will see being mooted on FR currently). The incentive would be for two candidates with sufficient delegates between them to reach agreement. What reason would there be for them not to do so?
A fantasy where people magically get a candidate they like.
Believe it or not I remember the 1940 Republican Convention that I heard on the radio. Thomas E. Dewey was set to “get” the nomination when the galleries started yelling “WE WANT WILKIE”, “WE WANT WILKIE”! They got Wilkie and he lost to FDR in November. Not exactly a “smoke filled room” It was a long time ago and I do trust my memory(?)