Regarding Lindsay Graham, why were there four or five challengers in the SC Primary? Thats 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.
Point taken - I was amazed that Graham did so well, so was grasping at straws ;)