With the early focus on the potential Republican candidates for 2016 in full swing, I have been waiting for the first article discussing how the GOP will end with a brokered convention in 2016. Those articles about candidates being chosen in back rooms at a convention appear in every cycle. They never make much sense. No party wants to have its nominee selected in a way that makes him or her look unable to rally even the party base to the cause. That is no different in 2016. Nevertheless, over at Real Clear Politics, Sean Trende is out with the first article explaining the likelihood that the GOP nominee will be the result of a brokered convention.
To say the least, it's a bit early to come to that conclusion. Sure, there are a lot of names floating out there at the moment, and they could conceivably split the vote, but really? A brokered convention? Just imagine what happens to the candidates who compete in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada and win none of those contests. Does anyone really think that Chris Christie would stay in the race at that point had he lost? Would Ted Cruz keep running if even South Carolina rejects him? The real point is that after losing four contests, the contributions would dry up and the candidates would drop out. The truth is that even just a poor finish in Iowa and New Hampshire alone would doom most candidacies. There may be an army of potential candidates now, but by March 1 of 2016, there will be just a few left.
Could we end up with three strong ones who split the votes in a way that no one has a majority? that is possible, but even that is unlikely. The candidate running third would be under enormous pressure to drop out and throw his support one way or the other. By the day the convention opens, there will be a likely winner on the first ballot.
Interesting race? Sure. Brokered convention? Not so much.
To say the least, it's a bit early to come to that conclusion. Sure, there are a lot of names floating out there at the moment, and they could conceivably split the vote, but really? A brokered convention? Just imagine what happens to the candidates who compete in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada and win none of those contests. Does anyone really think that Chris Christie would stay in the race at that point had he lost? Would Ted Cruz keep running if even South Carolina rejects him? The real point is that after losing four contests, the contributions would dry up and the candidates would drop out. The truth is that even just a poor finish in Iowa and New Hampshire alone would doom most candidacies. There may be an army of potential candidates now, but by March 1 of 2016, there will be just a few left.
Could we end up with three strong ones who split the votes in a way that no one has a majority? that is possible, but even that is unlikely. The candidate running third would be under enormous pressure to drop out and throw his support one way or the other. By the day the convention opens, there will be a likely winner on the first ballot.
Interesting race? Sure. Brokered convention? Not so much.
No comments:
Post a Comment