Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Peter Robinson ·
February 26, 2012 at 12:59am
From an email in which a friend discusses the possibility of choosing a new candidate at a brokered convention:
I have to say, though, I 'm not enthralled with the lineup. I'd h ave a hard time going with someone who didn't have the guts to run in the first place.
My friend has a point, wouldn't you agree?
- Comment (72)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Feb '12
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
billy
Paul has announced that he isn't running for Congress this year regardless. · 0 minutes ago
Thanks. I didn't know that.
Dec '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
It would have been presumptuous and hubristic for Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan and a few others to run. They rightly deferred to those with better résumés.
As well, no sensible person would choose to suffer the criticism, disparagement, denigration and lies that a presidential candidate has to endure nor choose to spend most of his time begging for money. Mitch Daniels has more productive ways to spend his time and no doubt cultural conservatives and others persuaded him that he would not be an attractive candidate.
As well, additional conservatives candidates would have split the not-Romney vote even finer making it more likely that Romney would face no serious challenge.
The vetting of Romney, Santorum and Gingrich has revealed little more than what we already knew. In my judgment, Romney's performance has made him even less attractive and less tolerable. Also in my judgment, we know enough about Rubio, Ryan and Daniels. They are less risky than Romney's cluelessness.
If Republican can send enough anti-Romney delegates to the convention, it seems likely they could settle on one of these three. In my judgment, most Republicans would be happy with this outcome.
Feb '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
I think a brokered convention that chose a non-candidate would be a disaster. It would anger as many conservatives as it pleased, and it would make the non-conservative electorate doubt the capability of the GOP to lead.
But it seems to me that the lousy candidate problem the GOP is laboring under is a sign that the Alisnsky tactics of the left have succeeded. So we get people with squeaky-clean tough-to-attack personal lives but who are horrifically bad politicians ( e. g. Romney) or people with nothing to lose (e.g. Gingrich).
The really good potential candidates look at what they and their families will face and decide they have better things to do with their lives.
The country is worse off for that, but I can't blame them.
Feb '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Albert Arthur
ultra vires: Simply put, nearly any one of those candidates could say something along these lines, " I tried to serve my Country in other ways (in the Congress, as a Governor, etc.), it was not my intention to run for this nomination, but my Country has requested my service; and as an American and a Republican, I now see that it is my duty to lead a united Republican party to victory in 2012...." · 14 minutes ago
Edited 12 minutes ago
Bollocks! A convention hall of a few thousand delegates does not come close to the millions who will have participated in primaries or caucuses prior to the convention, let alone the entire country of citizenry. · 13 minutes ago
That is true, but a brokered convention assumes that those "millions who will have participated" did not agree on any of the present candidates. The brokered convention is an attempt to unite the different factions, with someone who hasn't been attacked by nor been attacking the current crop of candidates (Christie is the exception).
Mar '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Romney has been ready to be whatever it takes, except conservative enough consistently enough for long enough to convince me that he means it, or even understands what it means.
That said, I'm voting not-Obama, if nothing else. But if Romney gets the nomination and holds a campaign rally between me and where my car is parked when I'm headed out to my job, I'll figure out a way to blow it off.
Mar '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Lincoln and Garfield come to mind.
Nov '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Landfall: From a purely career path perspective, Mitt, Rick and Newt can easily run for POTUS and not be concerned about its impact on their careers. However, if Ryan choses to run and loses, there could be an impact on his 2012 election in Wisconsin. A loss there, and he's out of DC completely, at least for two years. Not saying it should prevent him from running, but it's certainly something he has to weigh that Mitt, Rick and Newt didn't. Ron Paul has a similiar situation as Ryan, but he serves in a more conservative district and is at the tail end of his career. Plus, the knocking Ryan out of congress would be a huge scalp for the Dems to claim in 2012. They will throw tons of $$$ into if they believe they have any shot of beating Ryan. · 13 minutes ago
Edited 11 minutes ago
It's more than just that -- his agenda would be on the line. An unsuccessful run could have set back his cause by splitting the party over it, even if it increased his personal following.
May '10
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
At this point a brokered convention is the projection of our political fantasies caused by the unhappiness of our political realities.
Look at the history of Parties who went to their convention without a candidate having the nomination all locked up:
*Brokered
Feel confident?
Feb '12
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Leigh: That's true, but aren't the Dems going to hammer the GOP house members that passed Ryan's agenda anyway? What better way to defend against the attacks than have it explained from the biggest platform (POTUS candidate) and from Ryan himself, who does a better job explaining his plan than the rest of the house members. I agree with the premise of Ryan's speech at CPAC that the GOP needs to go bold in 2012 with its ideas and vision for our future. If not now, then when? I could be wrong, but I sense from your other post that you agree.
Edited on February 26, 2012 at 2:42amApr '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
In order to get a truly brokered convention we would need to see "favorite son" candidates in the larger, late states. Someone like Duncan Hunter in Calif. or Giuliani in NY would have to get on his home state ballot and hoover up enough delegates to have a say in the convention.
I don't see any prominent Republican doing that sort of thing.
More likely scenario: No one gets enough delegates on the first or second ballots so the candidates strike a deal. Romney gets the nod, Rand Paul gets the VP slot, Santorum gets AG or State, and Gingrich gets a policy role- head of the transition team or an important special commission or somesuch.
Jun '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Haven't we all watched the Republican and Democratic conventions on TV? Half the delegates are doofuses with home made elephant hats or "Madly for Adlai" buttons attached to a sash they have been wearing since the '52 convention. They all look like they have been up late the night before enjoying the open bars. They'll make a decision for us based on what?
Now the primary process itself could use some cleaning up - consistency among the states would be nice, and no open primaries would be nicer.
Jul '10
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Jimmy Carter: You want brokered convention? You want vetted? You want tested?
McCain '12! · 1 hour ago
Heck, if that's the direction you want to take, Jimmy Carter has eligibility left!
Nov '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Oh, I see, you're talking about the risk of Ryan as a general election candidate. I was looking at plausible reasons for Ryan to not have run for the Republican nomination. Yes, I think we agree -- I'm all for running on his plan in the general. And the party is essentially unified around it.
If Ryan had run, there would have been a risk that Romney or Gingrich would have attacked him from the left and that the party would have split over it. (Picture the Florida food fight with Medicare in the midst of it -- not good.) Or that he would have been caught in a tug-of-war with Bachmann over purity and leadership in Congress (he'd have been a direct threat to her whole rationale). I'd rather have Romney as the nominee having tied himself to Ryan than Romney as the nominee having defeated Ryan. He might have been able to unify the party better by staying out -- that's what my head says. But I would probably have rather had him in the general than anyone else, too.
Edited on February 26, 2012 at 3:15amNov '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Sisyphus
Jimmy Carter: You want brokered convention? You want vetted? You want tested?
McCain '12! · 1 hour ago
Heck, if that's the direction you want to take, Jimmy Carter has eligibility left! · 9 minutes ago
Hey, if it isn't over on the Republican side, it's not too late for someone to jump in on the Democratic side, is it? Why should we have all the fun? Go for it!
Apr '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
Sisyphus
Jimmy Carter: You want brokered convention? You want vetted? You want tested?
McCain '12! · 1 hour ago
Heck, if that's the direction you want to take, Jimmy Carter has eligibility left! · 8 minutes ago
Awww, shoot, Sisyphus, you beat me to it. :-)
Dec '11
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
EJHill: At this point a brokered convention is the projection of our political fantasies caused by the unhappiness of our political realities.
Look at the history of Parties who went to their convention without a candidate having the nomination all locked up:
*Brokered
Feel confident?
Actually, more confident than nominating Romney. Divide the results the way Rush does between the true conservatives that can make principled conservative arguments and the clueless like Ford, Dole, McCain and Romney. I will grant you that the clueless sometimes win, but what are the consequences. What did Nixon produce? Bush I? Bush II?
No doubt this comparison is unfair. Reagan was the rare exception. We should at least aim high rather than aim for the clueless.
May '10
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
More importantly Ralph you have to pay attention to the years. What you find are parties in disarray.
Oct '10
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
katievs: Yes. I agree. I think both Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have proven something important about themselves by their commitment to this point.
Further: consider what unhappy surprises Pawlenty and Perry turned out to be. How are we to have confidence that that wouldn't happen again?
Further, I was appalled by what Jeb Bush (often mentioned as a prime contender) said the other day. "I used to be a conservative, but...." But now he's clearly embarrassed by conservatives.
No thanks. · 2 hours ago
Edited 2 hours ago
the case against a brokered convention on Special REport with Bret Baier.
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
EJ, you very nearly gave me a stroke.
May '10
Re: Should We Even Be Hoping for a Brokered Convention?
That would make you the Woodrow Wilson of Ricochet. I hope your wife is up to being the power behind the crown... (as if she isn't already...)