I just saw that McDaniel is officially challenging the results of the Mississippi run-off. Good for him, and I hope he wins.
Regarding Lindsay Graham, why were there four or five challengers in the SC Primary? That’s just dumb or were a few of them paid to do it to ensure Graham got back in?
Regarding Lindsay Graham, why were there four or five challengers in the SC Primary? That’s just dumb or were a few of them paid to do it to ensure Graham got back in?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
You are a little confused, my friend. In a Presidential Primary, your premise is absolutely correct. Romney the Moderate had 7 “conservative” challengers who divided up the conservative vote and Romney waltzed to the nomination. However, in low-ballot Primaries, it doesn’t matter how many are running. If no one gets 50% plus 1 vote, there is a run-off between the top two vote-getters. Unfortunately, Lindsey Graham got over 50% and wins without a run-off. Same with John Cornyn... won over multiple candidates with no run-off. So, actually, in these primaries, it’s better to have multiple candidates challenging the incumbent. That lessens the chances for the incumbent to get 50%; but, two have do it so far this election. And then look at Kentucky; Mitch McConnell romped to victory and he had only 1 opponent.
I say again, in Presidential Primaries, your premise holds true but not in the lower ballot races.