I call your attention to today’s installment of what has begun to seem like daily brokered convention/white knight rumors:
Most reporters still think Romney “will find a way to win Michigan.” Nevertheless, some of the nation’s most powerful Republicans are poring over filing deadlines and pondering worst-case scenarios.
Our friend handed us a printout of FEC deadlines for ballot access, with five of them circled and starred: California (March 23), Montana (March 12), New Jersey (April 2), New Mexico (March 16) and South Dakota (March 27). The point: Even after Feb. 28, it might be possible to assemble a Hail Mary candidacy that could garner enough delegates to force a CONTESTED convention (a different nuance than BROKERED, which implies that someone is in charge).
Under RNC rules, the delegate count builds slowly: just 15% before Super Tuesday, March 6; 19% through Super Tuesday (brings you to 34%); 17% in the rest of March (brings you to 51%); with 48% in April, May and June (21%, 12%, 15%).
Our friend said: “If somebody came on the scene that week after Super Tuesday with, ‘I’m coming in. I’m taking a look at this,’ there are enough delegates. He would suck all the oxygen out of the race.
At this point, the unfolding of this race has so often taken me by surprise that I no longer place much stock in predictions even by me. But, for what it’s worth, I’ll opt against categorically ruling out a brokered (or contested, as the cited article suggests) convention.
Of course, the conversation then turns to who (or is it “whom”?) would benefit from the unrest in the party and become the white knight. For my money (keep in mind how poorly I’ve fared with foreseeing the proceedings of this race), I can’t see the GOP rallying behind Jeb Bush, with his toxic last name and the treasure trove of campaign material it would bring. Mitch Daniels doesn’t seem to have the personality to clear the “intensity” hurdle the base clearly seeks in a potential nominee. Nor does Bobby Jindal. Chris Christie doesn’t seem to want it. Neither does Marco Rubio (nor does he likely feel ready). Mike Huckabee appears too comfortable in his media role. Sarah Palin generates too much uneasiness among much of the party faithful. And for the nostalgic, Rudy Giuliani would have a difficult time convincing voters of his relevance.
Thus, for my money, I’ll have to agree with my esteemed colleague Matthew Miller and argue that Paul Ryan seems like the most logical and realistic choice. As Matthew frequently notes, Ryan still has one of the highest profiles of anyone in the party, especially when budget season rolls around. And both the grassroots and upper levels of the party hold him in high regard. What do you think? Agree? Disagree?
February 18th, 2012 at 10:43 pm
Ridiculous post!
Mitt will win well over 50% of the delegates when all is said and done.
And if there is a brokered convention whoever has a pleurality of the delegates (Mittens) will simply tap the second place getter (Rick) for VP.
February 18th, 2012 at 10:45 pm
Well, I agree that Ryan would be the only plausible outside pick at a contested convention, but it will not happen anyway.
If we have a contested convention, either Santorum or Romney is the nominee.
February 18th, 2012 at 10:50 pm
There is NO way Ryan’s getting in this thing. He couldn’t be talked into it when the race was wide open. He has no SoCon cred, and he’s a Representative. Matt’s talking about him because he got tired of talking about Jindal, who also could not have won.
The only function bringing someone in at this point would be to tilt the contest to someone else, and split the Party even worse. Ryan is a lot likelier to endorse Mitt before Wisconsin.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:05 pm
A vote for Santorum is a vote for Ryan.
Lets do it.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
will never happen because Santorum will win the nomination outright
February 18th, 2012 at 11:11 pm
G.D. Phony Rombots. You are all so desperate.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:17 pm
The only one really is Chris Christie since he has the name recognition.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:21 pm
Well, given that you’ve cited me here, it’s pretty obvious what I think. Nonetheless, I’ll add to (and probably repeat) my argument, simply because if a draft movement’s possible, it’ll begin with a lot of people saying essentially the same thing again and again. A late entrant can’t possibly emerge with the most delegates, at this point. A well-funded, well-organized late entrant, who entered immediately after Michigan, probably wouldn’t be able to win a plurality of delegates even if they won 90% of the states where they were on the ballot. That means, that a late entrant is going to have to be a grower. What do I mean by that? Well, imagine an election system where every voter chose a first, second, third, fourth, and fifth choice. And rather than the candidate with the largest number of first choice votes winning, instead, the rankings were weighted. Maybe 1st was worth 5 points, 2nd 3 points, 3rd 1 point, 4th -1 point, and 5th -3 points. A contested convention works SOMETHING like this. Candidates who are broadly acceptable- consistent second choices- are more likely to emerge than are candidates who are more polarizing. Jeb Bush SOUNDS good to the establishment because it’s relatively easy to see how he wins a decent number of delegates in a short amount of time. But Jeb is not going to be everyone’s second choice. Grassroots conservatives will resent him because he’s a Bush, foisted upon the country at the 11th hour. It’s hard to imagine why, say, a Gingrich supporter would abandon Gingrich for Bush when Santorum’s available. And vice versa. Most Romney delegates are likely to prefer Jeb to Santorum or Gingrich, but given Jeb’s inability to rally a significant portion of the grassroots delegates, they’re not going to have any incentive to abandon Romney. It’s true that there are any number of Republicans who could easily clear the “broadly acceptable” threshold. But, ideally, we’d want a nominee with SOME legitimacy. That means either he or she needs to be a broadly acknowledged party leader or he or she needs to be able to accumulate a large number of delegates- a plurality- in the states they’ve contested. Ideally both. There are only 3 people that might be able to pull all that off. Christie, Rubio, and Ryan. Christie is supporting Romney and probably couldn’t plausibly abandon him. Rubio would be awfully risky. That leaves Ryan. Who will have a large platform all Spring, whether he runs or not, and will be able to turn the discussion away from the (tepidly) recovering economy and towards the fiscal reckless and cowardice of the Obama administration.
Side note: if Romney loses Michigan, and the “establishment” fetches another candidate, Santorum will have a perfect argument in the remaining primaries. If it’s Bush, he’ll be in 7th heaven. The dynastic fat-cats who’ve run the party and the country into the ground are now trying to steal the nomination and prevent real change. In fact, if “the establishment” was that dumb, I’d probably cheerily get on the Santorum bandwagon because he might actually be electable after beating the pants off a Bush. If another candidate enters- especially if the current “establishment” candidate looks fatally weak- it’ll have to be someone of whom Santorum couldn’t say “this fellow is just more of the same, peddling the status quo, trying to prevent real conservatives and honest Americans from having their say”. The Path to Prosperity makes such attacks on Ryan preposterous.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan will do.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
My preference is Daniels, but I could easily support Ryan, Jindal or Christie. Any of them would be preferable to Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, or Paul.
A scenario in which Christie is a consideration presumably means that Romney has withdrawn — and in that case Pawlenty would also be an option (and one I could support).
February 18th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
There will be no brokered convention.
Typically, nobody even notices, cares, or even thinks about the California primary. But this year I think everybody is overlooking how much importance that California’s primary will have. I’m almost sure that the most populous State in the nation has a winner-take-all primary & it’s a state that is perfectly suited for a candidate like Romney. There are many wealthy Republicans in Orange County & San Diego & almost 1 million Mormons that live throughout the state as well. Plus, there aren’t the quirks that we see will see with Southern states that would be so opposed to Romney for reasons of religious superstitions.
Romney will win Arizona, Idaho & Utah with their large Mormon populations. Romney will win California as I stated above. He will also run through the northeast. He just needs to break in to a few more states to win the nomination. All in all though, Romney has been planning for a long, drawn-out primary fight all along & he is very well suited to win this thing. It would definitely help Romney if Ron Paul started his anti-”Big Government Santorum” attacks again soon. But, I think Romney will win regardless.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:27 pm
After listening to Rush all season, Palin on FOX, Palin @ CPAC and reading the stuff I get from Freedom Works, there is something ugly afoot, IMO.
Rush has ranted for months against the Evil Elite Establishment. Palin does the same. Matt Kibbe at Freedom Works is worse. They have created a HUGE breach between the traditional GOP “Establishment” (most elected officials, it seems) and the “Constitutional Conservatives” or whatever you might want to call them represented by the conservative media.
The breach runs along culture cue lines (NorthEastern Elites vs. Southern populists), education (Ivy League vs. Whatever) and religion (mainline moderates vs. hard-core SoCon evangelicals.) The Rush/Palinites have co-opted the original Tea Partiers which have morphed into Teavangelicals.
Rush has deemed Rahm-nee as part of the East Coast Elite Establishment and therefore hates his guts. Same with Palin, whom Rush claims he has never met. Palin has thrown down the gauntlet: She refuses to “sit on the back of the bus” ie. be forced to accept Elite Establishment Romney as the nominee. She made this pretty clear in her CPAC speech.
Freedom Works Matt Kibbe has a new book out: “Hostile Take-over of the GOP.” They are mad as hell as will NOT accept any candidate not acceptable to them. Apparently not any now in the running, least of all The Establishment Romney, whom Kibbe ran around denouncing early on on Fox.
The Freedom Works people (Dick Armey) are absolutely done “being the junior partner” of the GOP and are going to kill it and remake it in their own image or die trying. Palin seems on board. FW has for some time been lobbying for a fresh new face at the convention to fun as a candidate–someone acceptable to the entire party.
I don’t yet know how Palin, Rush, Kibbe and Levin feel about Santorum. Maybe he’s acceptable to them and will fight for him. Or maybe they will look for someone new. I got an email from FW with a list of possibles: Jeb Bush was on it, I believe Rubio and Ryan. Not Santorum.
This is what I do know. Most of the conservative media has decided to hate, hate, hate Mitt and there are some in the far conservative right who will refuse to accept him as the nominee no matter what. Rush most of all has heated up this division; Levin and Palin are on board.
Now, none of these media personalities hold office or are officials in the RNC. But they do hold sway with a lot of voters. It would be interesting to talk one-on-one with Reince Priebus and see if the RNC is ready to slit their wrists yet.
But IMO they/we have a real problem on our hands.
The hate against the GOP Establishment is greater than their hate against Obama and the Dems.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:29 pm
#11 Tyler M.: There are also a lot of Rush/Fox listeners and evangelicals in CA and in all states. That’s why Santorum is doing is well now.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:32 pm
#11: Don’t count on the Mormons. They let us down in CO.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:34 pm
Dave,
I stopped talking about Jindal because Jindal doesn’t have the stature in the party to win the nomination without having won a sizeable number of delegates beforehand. In January, any decent late entrant had a chance of winning a plurality of delegates. And before you say “preposterous” note that Rick Santorum beat the pants off Romney in 3 states on the same day, like a week after Romney had notched up 2 nearly 50% victories. And this after Santorum had disappeared off the face of the earth for a month. Note also that Newt Gingrich got 4th in Iowa, 5th in NH, and then won an enormous victory in South Carolina, after the media decided he was important. Any late entrant would have been a big enough story to immediately gain some ground in the polls, pushed by a media that loves drama. So in late January Jindal, who I prefer politically, still made a fair amount of sense. He had a decent excuse for waiting- he had running for re-election and was sworn-in 2 weeks before Florida. Now Jindal makes a lot less sense. Now any late entrant has to be a major party figure. Jindal is not that. There are only 6 people who qualify: Jeb, Palin, Huckabee, Ryan, Rubio, and Christie. I still prefer Jindal. But since I’m already dealing with wildly unlikely scenarios, I prefer to focus on the least unlikely of the wildly unlikely.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:40 pm
K.G.,
The faction you describe needs to be put in its place. When Romney gets the nomination, which he will, let’s see what they do. Limbaugh has said that if this happens, he will be with Romney….as hard as that is to envision.
Anybody who bucks the Party at that point will be trivialized, and will lose influence. Fox would have to go the Romney route….or a new network would have to be established.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:40 pm
#9
Good guys, but they will not do. Daniels appears to be milque toast and vanilla. Ryan looks like the mean accountant that threw granny over the cliff.
If someone new is to take this thing, they have be a sensation and star–not just another white guy in a suit. The only one I can see that would captivate the nation would be Rubio. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just like Obama; 1 1/2 years in the Senate. But that’s what wins election. Sensation.
My feeling has always been that Mitt is the most prepared and would make the best POTUS of any plausible person on the scene. But he can’t win unless the entire party gets behind him and it appears that just the opposite is happening. They are fighting him tooth and toe nail.
Mitt would graciously step aside if he thought he could not win and someone who would make a good POTUS could beat BO. But who is it with name recognition that would ignite a fire in the little time we have left–that would do it? I say it’s Rubio. Or stick with Mitt and make it happen.
It’s a big fat mess and somebody’s going to have to budge off their adamant rears or say hello to obamaCare forever and more judges like Soto, Ginsberg and Kagan.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:41 pm
Paul Ryan, I could go for Paul Ryan. Why not?
If Rand Paul just more experience, I would be clamoring for him.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:45 pm
#16: I am praying my head off that you’re right. But the voters are going to have to choose: Limbaugh or Mitt. I was a 20 year Rush listener and I’m finally on to him. A bunch here @ Race are too, but I suspect we are very few. Fox and Frenemies still hold a lot of clout; that’s why Santorum is rising and Mitt is falling.
Even O’Reilly and Krauthammer, generally at least fair to Mitt, have turned on him. I guess they got their orders from Murdock. Only Dennis Miller is brave enough to say: “Mitt is a good man and would make a good president.” The rest are scared spitless to anything positive whatsoever about Mitt.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:46 pm
Wait..
How about Scott Walker?
February 18th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
Matt,
Last comment before going to bed. Frankly, you seem obsessed with a brokered convention. We don’t know how it would work out, but it’s highly unlikely to not yield a candidate already in the race. It’s even more unlikely to take place in the first place.
Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri have all been overhyped. None of them had bound delegates, and Missouri had no delegates at all. Santorum had 22 campaign stops in them….mostly while Romney and Gingrich were in Florida and Nevada, both of which had BOUND delegates. Romney had 3 stops in Colorado, but didn’t spend much of anything on ANY of them.
Kudos to Santorum on doing what he needed to do, but don’t assume that when Mitt spends money and works hard in non-Caucus states, that the result will be the same.
It won’t.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
14. kg. as a mormon in colorado i will tell you that we didnt let Mitt down. unlike utah, arizonaa, washington, idaho, california, nevada, there arent a bunch of mormons here in colorado. we rallied the best we could but santorum owns the evangelicals in this state and once county basically swung it all his way.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
#18: I would love Paul Ryan. But to get national recognition from a standing start–and beat Obama? Well, maybe. I loved the way Ryan clobbered the heck out of Obama during that dumb health care debate.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:53 pm
#22: Then I’m so sorry that I falsely accused CO Mo’s and thank you for stepping up and doing the best you could. I had heard that on the Cougarboard they thought there were a lot of church meetings being held and people couldn’t get to the caucuses.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:54 pm
Once upon a time, party leaders would take the candidates into a back room, talk about loyalty, and do what was in the best interest of the party.
Now they’re leaking stories about a brokered convention, and letting the Democrats know the Republican Party will be led into 16-20 years of darkness.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:57 pm
If we have a brokered convention…I’m sorry, but considering how those who have appeal seem to have no interest in running, we’ll just have to draft someone to run whether they like it or not.
1)Scott Walker
2)Rand Paul
These are my two top picks, but hey…Paul would need to finish at least one term before I would feel comfortable with him. But I have been imagining him running in the future. I’d file behind him in a heart beat.
February 18th, 2012 at 11:59 pm
#25: Classy: No one is in charge. They have a good candidate (or at least a good POTUS if he could get elected), but one whole part of the party has decided they won’t have him, won’t follow him. Rebellion. “Going Rogue” which is not turning out to be a good thing. Mutiny on the Bounty.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:02 am
Dave,
I’m obsessed with the Republic. Until 2 weeks ago, I was adamantly opposed to a brokered convention in which the eventual nominee hadn’t received a single vote. But as someone obsessed with the Republic, I’m not too eager to watch two dismal candidates blow maybe our last chance of saving it. Ideally, we’d get another candidate who’d accumulate a sizeable number of delegates before the convention. I think we DO have a fairly good idea how things would play out in that scenario. The 1860 convention is a decent model. Seward was well ahead of Lincoln on the 1st ballot. But Seward could not unite the old whigs and the new republicans. And so the prairie lawyer and one-term congressman became the nominee of a major party in the most important election in American history. Conventions that are genuinely contested tend to either A.) Result in a unity ticket of some kind or B.) See a stampede towards a broadly acceptable candidate, regardless of pre-convention delegate counts.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:03 am
#26 Ha! Scott Walker would probably looove to get out WI right now. They are trying to impeach him.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:05 am
#12 KG
Yes, something foul is brewing…
If the people formenting the witches brew outnumber regular mom and pop Republicans, we’re in a whole lot of trouble.
I’ll be looking for a new right of center party of practical Republicans and Democrates to form.
I’ll join it in a heartbeat.
Seems as if the “true conservatives” (barf, puke) don’t want me anyway…
February 19th, 2012 at 12:05 am
29.
I’m really hoping he survives though. He’s one of the FEW politicians that I have respect for,
(And I think you mean they are trying to “recall” him.)
February 19th, 2012 at 12:06 am
#28
It seems obvious the hand of God was in Lincoln’s election. The good folks at Evangelicals for Mitt are calling for a water fast every Monday to fast and pray for the country. Sounds right to me.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:08 am
#31: Yes, recall. It’s getting late even here in CA. He’s an American hero and I truly hope he wins this battle. If he doesn’t, it’s bad news for a lot of states and their unions.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:11 am
#30: I would love for that hateful wing of the party to just get trounced and be marginalized to the point where they don’t matter.
I’m a hard-core conservative but these people are pscyho.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:11 am
Who are the GOP leaders again? Palin? Rush? I’m quite confused.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:17 am
#27KG
I think the establishment is afraid of the conservative movement and the Tea Party…
Palin, Limbaugh and conservative radio have the airwaves from A.M to P.M and will say whatever it takes to destroy whoever gets in their way. Even Krauthammer has fallen in line.
How far are they willing to go, and what they expect to happen?..Maybe they don’t even know.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:19 am
30.
Yeah, the “true conservatives” [1] seem determined to alienate the Moderate and Libertarian wing of the party. — I mean, hey, do they want our vote, or not? If they want our vote, they better act like it.
I ran into far right wingers that marginalize Ron Paul supporters and mock them, and then these same people get upset all of a sudden when the Paul supporters react by saying they will only vote for Paul. Well, when I look at it from the view of the Paul supporters, I cannot really blame them; They would naturally not feel like falling in line with the same people who marginalize them.. All of a sudden, the far right wants their vote? Give me a break. — Do not marginalize a person if you want his vote. Period!
————
[1] When some say “true conservative,” they really mean the far right wing purists. There ARE true conservatives are are more tolerant than that.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:19 am
I do not know who the GOP leaders are. There don’t seem to be any in sight. They get lambasted by Rush et al, but I have no idea who they are talking about.
The ANTI-GOP leaders are Rush, Palin, Dick Armey, Matt Kibbe, Levin, several Tea Party groups and anybody they can get to follow them. Palin is constantly railing against the “Esbablishment,” the “Elites,” the “business as usual” people.
Palin took them out in AK and is going to take them out in DC–even tho we don’t know who they are.
Gingrich’s PAC is running radio ads against Mitt here in SoCal: “He’s not one of us; doesn’t think like us; we don’t think like he does. We’re done having the Establishment force moderates on us like Dole, McCain and Romney.”
Pretty much sums it up. It doesn’t even mention voting for Newt; just don’t vote for Romney.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:23 am
Santorum would not be pwning the 2008 field. How many more lessons do Republican power brokers need to realize how pathetic this field is?
February 19th, 2012 at 12:23 am
I think most speculation is something along the lines of, Mitt Romney comes in the convention with the most delegates, votes, and states but because he doesn’t have the necessary 50+1% majority of delegates, he’s not going to be the nominee. Do you really think that means Santorum or Newt is going to be our nominee, with fewer delegates and votes? I just don’t see how they deny it to the guy that comes in with the most delegates, even if it’s slightly under 50%.
If Romney wins Michigan, I think that translates into enough momentum into Super Tuesday that the math then becomes (realistically) impossible for the other candidates to actually garner over 50% of the delegates (assuming even a lousy performing Romney will still be finishing in the top 3 of every state until the end). They might be able to deny Romney a simple majority of delegates by going on in a bloody fight, but they have to know that they’re not going to be able to take his place when they come in with far fewer delegates.
I could only see a new person being at the top of the ticket if all of current contenders come in with basically a 3 way tie. If Romney loses Michigan, that’s when I see a protracted war until the end.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:24 am
38.
Their definition of “establishment” seems to be any Republican that can be classified as a moderate.
When people say “the establishment has the fix in for Romney,” I don’t even understand how such a conspiracy from the top can even work, especially since I don’t know how all the “moderate Republicans” can have such a coordinated effort for one candidate.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:25 am
#36
That’s always been my gripe with them. They offer NO viable alternatives. They were dedicated to taking Mitt out from the get-go, but offered nothing in return. Nothing. Still don’t.
Go the convention and find a fresh face? What fresh face? How’s that supposed to work? They decided that no way would they accept Mitt and that’s all there is to it.
It’s completely mindless. I thought months ago when I first caught on Rush was trying to take out Mitt, why? You don’t have anybody to support in his place. Oh, yeah. He touted each new ABR–but somebody as savvy should have seen the folly in that.
None of makes any sense to me.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:28 am
38.
And to expand:
When Chris Christie came out to endorse Romney, Rush Limbaugh said that was “proof” the establishment was pushing for Romney..
I mean, really? Just two years ago, Christie was not in the GOP establishment at all. He was a new-comer. He was just newly elected, and just months before, Rush sang his praises.
And now that he endorses Romney….and lets remember that he is a moderate….so he is therefore all of a sudden part of the evil establishment.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:31 am
The GOP powers that be (whoever they are) still have power. If Mitt cannot pull this off, the nominee will not be Santorum or Newt. The GOP knows neither can win. Even the anti-GOP knows that. Ergo, the search for a fresh face. Somebody acceptable to all factions.
I will have to search my emails for the Freedom Works list: But it was the usual list of suspects, sans Newt or Santorum.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:34 am
Rush may be insane. And like the Pied Piper, he’s taking all the lemmings over the cliff with him. I don’t say this facetiously. A lot of stuff he says is just fine. But about this election? He’s gone off his rocker. There doesn’t seem to be any rhyme or reason. Like Palin, he’s just pissed.
I guess Peggy Noonan and Kathleen Parker shouldn’t have been so mean to Palin.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:35 am
If we have a brokered convention…
1)Rand Paul
2)Scott Walker
These are the top two picks, in order.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:36 am
46.
Copycat
Oh well, I had no regard for order XD
February 19th, 2012 at 12:36 am
The fact that you guys are ready to ditch Romney makes me a little ill. He’s the best qualified candidate we’ve had in a long time. He’s the only reason I’m looking at voting republican this year. Do not make me vote the other way because you loonies brought in some one who does not have the experience to keep our economy from failing.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:38 am
48.
Oh I don’t want to ditch Romney. But if we have a brokered convention, it will be next to impossible for him to win that, since there will be loads of opposition.
I want Romney to win. I say it, I mean it.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:41 am
It’s been Romney vs. Palin since before Nov ’08. The rest is/was window dressing.
Looks like Palin’s Oct 5 2011 move is bearing the most fruit vis a vis Romney.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:43 am
There will not be a brokered convention. That’s just a bunch of rabble rousing from the likes of Sarah who I bet would love to be that mystery guest. Adn please, will you people stop taking the pundits as gospel? Its their job to make it exciting so they get more viewers. Where would they be if they all jumped behind Romney last summer and just sang his praises for a year and a half. No where. Everyone would have changed the channel. There is a “try everyone else but…” because the media has said there is so their flavor of teh month is up to keep ratings exciting.
You guys are so manipulable.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:54 am
If Romney picked Rand Paul to be his VP earlier rather than later, would that put him over the top with delegates? Would that give him more votes during these primaries?
If these people think that we are going to line up behind their candidate whoever they choose, after all this, they are sorely mistaken. Third party candidate for me. Republicans had better get behind Romney, or we’ll be looking at another four years of Obama.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:56 am
Every time i see a discussion like this, I become more dishusted. If Republicans nominate a candidate with no global business experience, we are dead. That and only that is our edge over Obama. How many jobs has Gingrich, Santorum, Ryan, Christie, Mitchell, and all the others created? About as many as Obama…who would actually now win the spin on this issue. These are all fundamentally politicians…and the country is pretty sick of the whole lot, from either side of the aisle. Only Romney stands out in marked contrast. He has run something…more than once…and successfully.
Brokered convention, contested convention, tea party revolt, anti-GOP establlishment..all really stupid. My party and many of its most prominent spokespersons on the right are an embarrassment to me. And the lack of courage from those who should be speaking out – who know that Gringrich and Santorum can’t win a general, who know that Palin is a cartoon, that Limbaugh is nothing more than an ambitious talkshow host, and that most of the others have their own agendas that have little to do with the good of the country and everything to do with 24/7 news cycles – is saddening.
And get religion out of this campaign – Santorum’s blundering comments are killing the GOP. Romney’s religion is manageable; he understands how people think. Santorum doesn’t seem to have a clue. We care about values – keep your dogma to yourself.
Though not perfect but pretty darn good, Romney is the best chance we’ve got. He actually could compete with Obama and his machine. But we are beating him to a bloody pulp. We will be left with a nominee that will drive Independents away in droves. And I, for the first time in my life, may consider leaving my party to become one of those Independents. Many Republicans, like me, are disgusted to the breaking point.
Wake up, GOP…man up…move on.
February 19th, 2012 at 1:00 am
53.
Well said and I concur.
February 19th, 2012 at 1:03 am
Romney is still the only candidate that has a chance beating Obama. It seems that Gingrich and those in the party who don’t like him would rather wound him so bad that he will be defeated for sure, that hasn’t happened yet but it could if they continue.. Santorum is not electable in a general election and Ryan, Rand Paul, or Walker are worst in the eyes of Independents and Dem’s. How many seniors would vote for Ryan, after his budget proposals were fully vetted by the Dem’s? No one that claims affiliation with the tea party is electable, Walker is about to be removed from office and five Republicans around him are out and in big trouble, they are the worst of all on general election scene.I don’t understand the mindsets of Republicans who think these kind of people who are so far out of the mainstream of conventional thinking can ever get elected. Yes that might be possible if the only voters were those who thought like themselves. There is a whole other world of different thinking people outside of their view of what reality is.
February 19th, 2012 at 1:17 am
just an FYI, I live in Wisconsin and Walker is 100% to be re-elected and survive the recall. I even signed a recall petition to benefit his national profile. The Unions are running Falk against Walker, a horrible candidate.
February 19th, 2012 at 1:45 am
The ginned up, pitchfork yeilding teavangelicals wouldn’t like Mr. Ryan for long. For starters, he’s a Catholic and nothing but an evangelical would do for them. He’s also from the north and if one digs deep enough, surely he’s been just a wee bit leftist.
See, they aren’t at all realistic. They teavangelicals believe they can pick the most looney hard right candidate out there and red and blue America will follow right along.
It’s actually pretty hopeless. The former Republicans need to form a new party and try to win and let the Tea Party try running Sharon Angle for president.
February 19th, 2012 at 1:55 am
I wish there was a reasonable, middle of the road party. And no, there isn’t one. Our third party candidates are all looney.
Can we make a “actually will do the work” party?
February 19th, 2012 at 2:00 am
#57:
150 prominent evangelical leaders endorsed Rick Santorum a month ago and he is a Roman Catholic.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:12 am
#59 Bob,
True enough but why did it take them so long? Why the hesitation? This race has been going on since last summer. The truth is they still aren’t at all happy about Santorum. He’s far from ideal and they likely wouldn’t be too thrilled with Ryan either.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:16 am
If the haters succeed in beating down Romney. There will be a third party. Maybe four or five parties.
Romney winning is the only chance the party has of staying a party.
I know if the liars, haters, and hypocrites win… I will be looking for anyone but a Republican to support and win.
Anyone but a Republican.
AT very least the Donald will run. He has said if Republcans are too dumb to nominate Romney he will run third party.
Yes Obama will win. But no one but Romney has a chance to beat him anyway so there is no point in saying you are voting for Obama.
Not choosing Romney is when that choice will be made.
I’ll be looking for a good conscience vote, not to win.
It is absolutely despicable what the party has done and is doing to keep out Romney and if you succeed it is the end of this party.
February 19th, 2012 at 2:26 am
Very interesting thread.
Yet it looks increasingly likely Mitt will win Michigan.
Is he pushing postal votes like he did in Florida?
February 19th, 2012 at 2:34 am
Romney has been systematically going through the states that they think they have good chances in. Why raise all that money if your not going to use it?
February 19th, 2012 at 3:00 am
#60:
Who can say why then? The only thing I know it went to 3 ballots, Newt was in the hunt and Rick Santorum won 2/3 of the votes? And that anytime something monumental like this occurs there is always some lag time between the decision and when it filters down to the rank and file. A month later I think everybody is up to speed and you see that reality reflected in the national and state polls over the last 10 or so days.
February 19th, 2012 at 6:53 am
C12eye,
Ryan has a lifetime 92.67 ACU rating and a 96 rating 2 sessions in a row. Santorum has a lifetime 88.1 ACU. Ryan’s American Tax-payer Union’s given Ryan and 90 and a 92 over the last 2 years. Santorum managed 83 and 69 over his last two. These are fairly big differences, even if they don’t seem like it. Ryan has a handful fewer really bad votes, from a tea-party perspective. Plus, while Ryan’s not known as a so-con warrior, he’s managed to earn a 100% from the National Right to Life every year he’s been in Congress and a 0% from NARAL. You can’t get more unblemished than that. And indeed, Santorum is less unblemished, having received a 20% from NARAL in 2000. So yeah, I’m pretty sure the tea-party would abandon Santorum for Ryan and I’m pretty sure the establishment would abandon Romney for Ryan.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:01 am
58. . . they tried that with Perot’s Reform Party. Remember what happened to that? Buchanan and his right wing brigades took that over and gone was the reform part of the movement. Interesting how the evangelical wing of the GOP needs to take over established popular movements rather than succeed with their own.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:05 am
This perfectly summarizes the pathetic excuses that have become the last resort for Romney’s failure to appeal to a broader coalition within the Republican party.
The comments on this thread from the Mittbots are all in the same lament: Mitt can’t break through because of Teabaggers, talk-radio quacks, Fox News personalities, bigots, loons, morons, and other miscreants.
The sad reality is that it is Mitt himself who consistently fails to connect with what the Rombots (and his campaign?) apparently think of as a party base that doesn’t actually deserve him. Rather than coming up with a positive reason for supporting Mitt, the entire campaign is centered on making everyone else unacceptable. It is a campaign that relies almost exclusively on subtraction.
Folks, that’s never going to work as a method of unseating the incumbent president.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:26 am
To the main topic of the thread: There simply isn’t any obvious candidate who has a broad enough base to swing a contested election.
The one with the largest potential geo-demographic base — after Perry left the race — is Jeb, who is still seen favorably in his state. Jindal’s Louisiana is small population. Christie’s New Jersey is too blue to offer a substantial base. Indiana might be big enough, but Daniels clearly has no interest, and he isn’t rockstar material.
Ryan’s natural base is a single Wisconsin congressional district, and a bunch of fiscal conservative wonks and wags along with an assortment of Beltway conservative pundits. Paul Ryan is best known for a budget proposal that congressional Repubs didn’t defend, and that the Bam administration used as a weapon.
Moving to the Senate, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio have at least won statewide elections, but both are far too green to have built records of conservative accomplishments in terms of laws passed and policies enacted.
In short, the GOP bench is too thin — too green or too unwilling — to offer any realistic alternatives with enough native support to swing a contested convention.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:30 am
MarqueG,
Right. Since one-term as a Kentucky Congressman was an absolutely enormous base with which to displace Seward. Anyway, off to mass.
February 19th, 2012 at 7:56 am
Matthew #69, I appreciate your romp through Republican Party history. However, I don’t think you can compare that period to today’s. The year 1860 may as well have been the Bronze Age compared to now: As one historian noted, no person or object, and only a few ideas, could move faster than the speed of a horse. Aside from that, the GOP was a nascent party that had yet to establish its own internal hierarchies and processes. Never mind the fact that the general election outcome relied on the entire Dem party to split in two. There are no two relatively even factions within that party pulling in opposite directions today.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:02 am
“She refuses to “sit on the back of the bus” ie. be forced to accept Elite Establishment Romney as the nominee. She made this pretty clear in her CPAC speech.” Ah yeah.
“Anybody who bucks the Party at that point will be trivialized, and will lose influence.” I guess that is why Mr. Romney is losing influence and it melting down.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:06 am
The GOP seems determined to figure out a way to ensure an Obama re- election. They daily imagine scenarios which continue to increase Obama’s winning electoral margin. The image of a brokered convention with daily picketing by the anti wall street crowd and ongoing negative media coverage must surely remind all of us of the Hubert Humphrey convention in 1968. Obama is certainly favored to win in November as an incumbent, but the GOP and the political zeolets of the far right seem to be working overtime to reduce or eliminate any uncertainty about the outcome. Thus, we may be treated to another 1000 days of hand wringing by Sean Hannity as we count down to 2016. What a pathetic debacle.
February 19th, 2012 at 8:41 am
Ohio Joe so if the team were Romney/ Huckabee would you jump on board?
February 19th, 2012 at 8:47 am
If it at any point looks like Santorum is going to be the nominee, I would be calling Paul Ryan’s office and sending him mail to get him in the race before it’s too late.
Until then, I’m pulling for Mitt. It’s not too late for him to shore up the party before the summer. If he loses Michigan, it probably will be too late.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:03 am
I’m not sure how all this convention talk helps our chances against Obama?? For the sake of argument, lets say this goes to convention and we are “forced” with a nominee not currently running. How does that help us? Most of the GOP voters are going to be pissed that their guy wasn’t considered. Nominating someone that did’t get one single vote is very, very risky, it’s just going to upset 2/3 of the voters in this party. Then on top of that we are asking this new nominee to consolidate the party, organize a campaign (hire staff etc), fund raise (hundreds of millions), get a campaign message out…etc. We would be asking the impossible of a candidate that has to go up against a billion dollar war chest and a sitting President. As an example: Palin people don’t realize how despised she is with Independents and “right center” republicans, she will never be acceptable enough to garner the votes she will need to take out Obama. Bottom line, why a convention when we already have someone with experience, name recognition, organization, Lots of $$$… and the ability to take down Obama? WHY risk it by nominating someone no one voted for in the Primaries? Is it really worth the risk? If we nominate someone other then Mitt I think our chances of winning the Whitehouse drops to less then 10%
February 19th, 2012 at 9:20 am
Tired of suggesting, voting for politicians that have little or no executive experience, examples of bringing diverse groups together, and/or examples of accomplishing great things in crisis management. (or life experience for that matter).
Obama should be reason enough to stop this.
Give it up.
P.S. I think Ryan is on his way to possibly being our nominee at some point and possibly a great president. Just not now. He is only 42. He has time.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:22 am
Ohio Joe,
Sarah is not even on the bus.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:23 am
RayinRI,
No nominee in recent party history, including McCain, has been as unpopular WITHIN the Republican Party as Romney, Gingrich and (presumably, once he’s vetted some more) Santorum are. The percentage of Republicans unsatisfied with the current field approaches 50% and has only gone up as the primary process as worn on. Also, polls have shown absolutely outlandish swings from one candidate to the next. There’s simply not a whole lot of evidence that a substantial number of Republicans are really wedded to one candidate. This is not the ’08 Democratic race, where you had two politicians who were perfect fits for their respective segments of the party. Romney wouldn’t even place in the top 5 on the “establishment Republican favorite sons” list. Santorum wouldn’t even make top 10 on the “true conservative grassroots heroes” list. We can replace either of them with someone more congenial to both sides of the party and Race is about the only place we’ll see substantial gnashing and wailing.
February 19th, 2012 at 9:47 am
#1 Huckabee — top name recognition, gets the socon vote of santorum without losin people that thing RUM is too far right. Governed in a state with a democrat congress with success. Knows how to attract both sides and his favorability is super high.
#2 — Jindal….id love to see this guy run. Anyone who would give the death penalty to rapists is a friend of mine.
February 19th, 2012 at 10:02 am
WE. ARE. NOT. DITCHING. ROMNEY. He would far and away make the best president!!!!!
But there are a bunch of people who are saying: WE. WILL. NOT.VOTE.ROMNEY. They are saying: What is it about ANY.BODY.BUT.ROMNEY. you don’t get?
Will these forces win out? It looks like it. And the chances of beating Obama are getting slimmer by the day. Thank you, Fox. Thank you, Rush. Thank you, bitter Sarah. Thank you Hostile Take-overs. Thank you angry rogues and rebels. Thank you anti-Mormon pastors. Thank you, all.
February 19th, 2012 at 10:31 am
How ironic it would be for my first choice, Paul Ryan, to end up getting this thing after test-driving just about every candidate in this race and ending up with Romney again, as in 2008. Ha! I’ve got my early Arizona ballot filled out for Romney, sitting on my dining room table. Maybe I should throw it away instead of mailing it in.
February 19th, 2012 at 10:39 am
81
MAIL IT IN.
The odds of us getting someone other than Mitt or Rick are 5% or less. Chances are, if Santorum wins Arizona, he’s the nominee. You need to stop him.
February 19th, 2012 at 10:44 am
Yes Virginia, there is a establishment. What they want is power. They want to be able to spend the money. According to Rasmussen, the political class is much more supportive of Obamacare that the general public. The reason is simple. Obamacare consolidates more power in Washington. That means more money for the establishment.
Coincidentally, Romney’s people are saying that Obamacare will not be repealed but tinkered with.
The reason why conservatives don’t like Romney is because he is a political weather vane. When he was running in Massachusetts, he was pro-choice and for combatting global warming. Now that he is running for the GOP nomination, he is pro-life and against combatting global warming. He is still a crony capitalist.
Ronald Reagan was not a businessman and he did pretty well.
The reason why they would never turn to Palin is because she would threaten their gravy train. Palin has made it clear that she is against the special interests on both sides. Her message against crony capitalism has been supported by liberals like the NY Times and Ralph Nader. She fits in perfectly with the disgust that exists with both sides in Washington. For example, Romney has suggested taking the corporate tax and replacing it with possibly a VAT tax while Palin has suggested getting rid of the corporate tax and getting rid of corporate subsidies.
February 19th, 2012 at 10:49 am
83
All the issues you raised have been discussed ad nauseum already except one.
Can you explain your claim that Romney is a “cony capitalist?”
February 19th, 2012 at 10:49 am
crony*
February 19th, 2012 at 11:01 am
86
You are a crony capitalist for favoring the bailout of GM and Chrysler.
February 19th, 2012 at 11:21 am
I am sure if Rick does well thru Super Tuesday something will happen.
However, I suspect it more then likely will be a third party then
a attempt to push someone thru the last few primaries. They have a
break that there is a going to be a 50 state open spot on the ballot
in November.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:02 pm
If things go South for Mitt, a Hail Mary would be a Romney/Ron Paul ticket. I personally think it would be a masterstroke for the campaign if it were on the ropes, they would easily be able to cobble together over 50% of the delegates. I think you would be amazed how many independents and disaffected Democrats it would bring in.
I certainly would prefer a Romney/Paul ticket to a Romney/Santorum ticket. If Romney has to put Rick on the ticket, it’s going to be a HUGE drag. Most of Santorum’s support is simply as NotRomney, even Ricks supporters will admit he’s basically a pro-life Democrat.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:07 pm
89
Where is that coming from? Have I demonstrated at ALL that I am emotionally bound to him or willing to jump off acliff for him?
I think it’s clear to anyone with a brain that I’m supporting him on merits, not emotion.
Now as for you, you need to rid yourself of your continued bigotry, which you have PROVEN with your comments over the past year. Some of the stuff you have said is downright disgusting and appalling.
February 19th, 2012 at 12:50 pm
92
No, everything is not fair game. In addition, some of the crap you spew is unpatriotic and reflects very poorly on you and those who think like you do.
February 19th, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Stop…please…just stop. Let me say this again – there is one powerful question that can and will drive this campaign: How many jobs have you created, Candidate X? Not government jobs with tax-payer money, but real, private sector jobs. How many, Santorum? Ryan? Palin? Paul? Gingrich? Jindal? Bush? Christie? What businesses have you turned around? What is your comprehension and direct experience in the global economy? Why should any American conclude that because you know politics, have passed some bills, or run a state on the backs of taxpayers, that you would know how to make this country financially great again? For that matter, where’s YOUR wealth? If you’re so good at this, how come you’re not worth a fortune? In short, why would you be any better than Obama at getting this country on the right financial track? Please, Republicans, nominate experience this time – not government experience, but real, successful, life experience. Romney, the only one with the cred to hammer the questions above (and who can make Obama look weak) just also happens to be Christian enough, political enough, erudite enough, charming enough, attractive enough, vetted enough, squeaky-clean enough, presidential enough, and smart enough – in fact, way smart enough – to be our nominee and win. This country is in big economic trouble – don’t be fooled by the stock market and an incomplete report that skews real employment numbers. We need Romney if we hope to win. And I want to win – for my generation and many more to come. Do this right, GOP. Good grief.
February 20th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
[...] on the subject of a brokered convention. I was about to post my thoughts on the subject, just when Anthony Dalke beat me to it. Now Chris has added some additional thoughts, so I will limit myself to a slightly [...]