<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brokered Convention?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:23:30 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Soccer Dad</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-260564</link>
		<dc:creator>Soccer Dad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:23:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-260564</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Submitted 01/02/2008...&lt;/strong&gt;

The Watcher Council&#039;s nominations are in: Witness - Done With Mirrors reflects on the history of how American dealt with &quot;good&quot; dictators and finds a lot to like with President Bush&#039;s approach. One quibble: didn&#039;t Aqino return to the Phillipines d...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Submitted 01/02/2008...</strong></p>
<p>The Watcher Council's nominations are in: Witness - Done With Mirrors reflects on the history of how American dealt with "good" dictators and finds a lot to like with President Bush's approach. One quibble: didn't Aqino return to the Phillipines d...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KVNU&#8217;s For The People &#187; The Pipe Dream of Pundits</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-257817</link>
		<dc:creator>KVNU&#8217;s For The People &#187; The Pipe Dream of Pundits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Dec 2007 16:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-257817</guid>
		<description>[...] going to see a brokered convention this year, or anytime soon. Such a convention has not occurred since 1952. In 2004, talk of a protracted nomination fight on the Democratic side quickly dissipated into the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] going to see a brokered convention this year, or anytime soon. Such a convention has not occurred since 1952. In 2004, talk of a protracted nomination fight on the Democratic side quickly dissipated into the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beldar</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254798</link>
		<dc:creator>Beldar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:13:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254798</guid>
		<description>Am I wrong that -- by convention -- delegates selected by primary elections are only bound on the first ballot?

It&#039;s not at all hard to imagine a scenario in which no nominee has a majority at the end of the first ballot.  And if that&#039;s likely to be the case, that&#039;s likely to have been obvious for some days prior to the start of the convention (meaning that the first ballot will only be a formality to unleash and expose the horse-trading that will already have been going on before the convention).

Now, then, what is there to trade? In the olden days, it was &quot;Okay, Candidate X is from the Old South, the Old South states want a seat at the table, therefore, [Lyndon Johnson] shall be the Veep in exchange for our releasing our votes to [John Kennedy] for the top slot.&quot;  But I don&#039;t think that&#039;s going to happen this time.

Instead of being regional, the horse-trading is more likely to be issue-based, as in:  &quot;McCain is anathema to us because of immigration, Gang of 14, and McCain-Feingold. But we can live with Thompson instead of Romney.&quot; Or &quot;Giuliani is anathema to us because he&#039;s pro-choice, pro-gun control, and pro-sanctuary city, and we&#039;re hard-core GWOT partisans, but we can live with Thompson instead of McCain.&quot;

In a brokered convention in which delegates are encouraged, even obliged, to cast aside their first choices, their second choice is likely to be the candidate who has the longest record of noncontroversial (among the party faithful) positions. That&#039;s Fred. And thus might he go from, say, 28% on the first ballot to 53% on the second.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Am I wrong that -- by convention -- delegates selected by primary elections are only bound on the first ballot?</p>
<p>It's not at all hard to imagine a scenario in which no nominee has a majority at the end of the first ballot.  And if that's likely to be the case, that's likely to have been obvious for some days prior to the start of the convention (meaning that the first ballot will only be a formality to unleash and expose the horse-trading that will already have been going on before the convention).</p>
<p>Now, then, what is there to trade? In the olden days, it was "Okay, Candidate X is from the Old South, the Old South states want a seat at the table, therefore, [Lyndon Johnson] shall be the Veep in exchange for our releasing our votes to [John Kennedy] for the top slot."  But I don't think that's going to happen this time.</p>
<p>Instead of being regional, the horse-trading is more likely to be issue-based, as in:  "McCain is anathema to us because of immigration, Gang of 14, and McCain-Feingold. But we can live with Thompson instead of Romney." Or "Giuliani is anathema to us because he's pro-choice, pro-gun control, and pro-sanctuary city, and we're hard-core GWOT partisans, but we can live with Thompson instead of McCain."</p>
<p>In a brokered convention in which delegates are encouraged, even obliged, to cast aside their first choices, their second choice is likely to be the candidate who has the longest record of noncontroversial (among the party faithful) positions. That's Fred. And thus might he go from, say, 28% on the first ballot to 53% on the second.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254761</link>
		<dc:creator>Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254761</guid>
		<description>My suggestion is for the GOP to put 100 names in a bowl- 50 of them liberals, 40 of them RINOs and 10 conservatives -five of each of the latter category must believe in God, family, the constitution, be pro-life, and support personal as well as fiscal responsibility: then draw a name the day before the election. It should relect the present day GOP exactly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My suggestion is for the GOP to put 100 names in a bowl- 50 of them liberals, 40 of them RINOs and 10 conservatives -five of each of the latter category must believe in God, family, the constitution, be pro-life, and support personal as well as fiscal responsibility: then draw a name the day before the election. It should relect the present day GOP exactly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Soccer Dad</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254628</link>
		<dc:creator>Soccer Dad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:16:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254628</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;A brokered record...&lt;/strong&gt;

I know that supposedly Republicans can&#039;t make up their minds. Because of that, next year there will be a brokered convention. I wasn&#039;t sure, but I was pretty certain I&#039;ve been hearing similar things over a number of campaigns over the past 20 years ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>A brokered record...</strong></p>
<p>I know that supposedly Republicans can't make up their minds. Because of that, next year there will be a brokered convention. I wasn't sure, but I was pretty certain I've been hearing similar things over a number of campaigns over the past 20 years ...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Taylor</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254543</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Taylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:55:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254543</guid>
		<description>I simply don&#039;t see it happening--and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=12987&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;I discussed why last night&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I simply don't see it happening--and <a href="http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=12987" rel="nofollow">I discussed why last night</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick Moran</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254416</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick Moran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:56:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254416</guid>
		<description>Pardon me pimping my own posts, but I am conducting an experiment in blogging at my site. I am blogging an event that has yet to transpire - the GOP convention next September that is, in fact, brokered.

I&#039;ve blogged two days of the convention so far:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2007/12/18/that-was-a-convention-to-remember/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Part 1&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2007/12/19/that-was-a-convention-to-remember-part-2/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Part 2&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pardon me pimping my own posts, but I am conducting an experiment in blogging at my site. I am blogging an event that has yet to transpire - the GOP convention next September that is, in fact, brokered.</p>
<p>I've blogged two days of the convention so far:</p>
<p><a href="http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2007/12/18/that-was-a-convention-to-remember/" rel="nofollow">Part 1</a></p>
<p><a href="http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2007/12/19/that-was-a-convention-to-remember-part-2/" rel="nofollow">Part 2</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Schuler</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254385</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Schuler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:26:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254385</guid>
		<description>Call me again after Feb. 5.  &#039;Til then--no predictions on a brokered convention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Call me again after Feb. 5.  'Til then--no predictions on a brokered convention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yetanotherjohn</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254359</link>
		<dc:creator>yetanotherjohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:17:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254359</guid>
		<description>Assuming for a second that the primaries/caucuses broke just right to produce no clear leader even after Feb 5th, I still would doubt the brokered convention idea. Instead, I would suspect some one would accept the VP slot if the combined total of their votes would add up to a nomination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Assuming for a second that the primaries/caucuses broke just right to produce no clear leader even after Feb 5th, I still would doubt the brokered convention idea. Instead, I would suspect some one would accept the VP slot if the combined total of their votes would add up to a nomination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anderson</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/brokered_convention-2/comment-page-1/#comment-254354</link>
		<dc:creator>Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:05:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/brokered_convention-2/#comment-254354</guid>
		<description>The only way I see a brokered convention is if the favorite going in is either (1) grossly unacceptable to the party faithful (McCain or Huckabee, perhaps), or (2) utterly unelectable, perhaps due to scandals that broke into the mainstream after he&#039;d secured a large no. of delegates.

It&#039;s hard to imagine the publicity&#039;s being anything but unfavorable in such an event, tho given the media&#039;s fawning over the GOP, I am probably mistaken.

Anyway, as JJ says, very unlikely to happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only way I see a brokered convention is if the favorite going in is either (1) grossly unacceptable to the party faithful (McCain or Huckabee, perhaps), or (2) utterly unelectable, perhaps due to scandals that broke into the mainstream after he'd secured a large no. of delegates.</p>
<p>It's hard to imagine the publicity's being anything but unfavorable in such an event, tho given the media's fawning over the GOP, I am probably mistaken.</p>
<p>Anyway, as JJ says, very unlikely to happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
