It's starting to look like old time politics

@burrito88 (2779)
United States
March 6, 2012 11:35pm CST
Super Tuesday has come and gone, and it looks like it hasn't really decided anything. Romney is still ahead but you have to wonder how much stronger Santorum would be if Newt dropped out. Ron Paul doing well in Virginia heads up with Romney also makes Romney look vulnerable and one has to wonder what might have happened there if Newt and/or Santorum were in the primary. This whole thing reminds me more of presidential politics back when I was a kid in the '60's and earlier. Back then there was some mystery or question as to who might be a parties nominee. The delegates might be split so that was no clear cut favorite going into the convention. In those days, some states would play politics by assigning all their delegates to a 'favorite son' who might be a governor or senator from their state. The favorite son could then throw his support behind the candidate who promised him the most. Democracy in action, probably not. Back room politics, yes. I don't profess to like 'backroom politics' or deal making but I do like extended primary campaigns. This probably comes from my own frustration of usually residing states where the primaries came late and the nomination has been decided by the time I got to vote. Of course, that never stopped me from voting for my candidate, even if I knew he was already a loser. So how do you feel about the current republican campaign? How would you feel if we wound up with a brokered convention?
1 person likes this
3 responses
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
7 Mar 12
I too remember the 60"s and states would elect a favorite son and they would pledge themselves to one or another candidate. In many respects the Democratic Party still has a brokered convention. IF you remember in the 2008 primary season neither Senator Obama or Senator Clinton had won enough delegates to get the nomination. It was the Super Delegates or the People who were in elected offices and the good old boys who backed Senator Obama at the end many of whom switched back and forth during the primary season.
1 person likes this
@burrito88 (2779)
• United States
7 Mar 12
Because of the way the primary caucus system has worked over the past 30 years or so, political conventions to me have lost their meaning because their has been no drama. For that reason, I've lost track of the rules governing delegate selection. My memory says that one or both parties used to give delegate seats to state party leaders and elected officials (such as state party chairmen, governors, senators, and congressmen.) That would seem to fit in with the Democrats super delegates but I don't know if the Republicans did or do the same thing. Also the parties used to give more delegates to states they carried in the previous presidential election. The Iowa caucuses seemed different than my memory. In the past I thought that only the 3 candidates with the most supporters in local caucuses would have delegates go on to the next larger district caucus. Because of that, the supporters for the 3 leading candidates would lobby to get the supporters of the alsorans to come over to their side before the end of the meeting. Perhaps that was a Democrat thing. Also the conventions used to be different. There were favorites sons and there were candidates whose names were put into nomination who had no delegates or chance of winning. The most prominent of these was Harold Stassen. Starting in 1944, his name was put into nomination 12 times. In the early years, he was a legitimate candidate. Later he became the butt of jokes. How things have changed.
@marie2052 (3697)
• United States
7 Mar 12
I don't think a brokered convention would be good with all that is going on in the country right now. A couple of the candidates do need to drop out and realize they are not going to make it. If this is not settled soon we may have the "O" for another 4 years. That sickens me more than who is going to be the nominee for the republican party. Have to agree its just a mess!
@burrito88 (2779)
• United States
7 Mar 12
The worst thing in politics now, I think, is money. I think the quality of a candidate takes a back seat to how much money they have. You have to wonder, if Santorum had been declared the winner in Iowa right after the caucuses, would he have gotten more money then and made the race closer? Certainly, if Newt was being bankrolled by super PAC money (coming primarily form one person), a lot of his support might go to Santorum or Paul, again making the race closer.
• United States
8 Mar 12
I do think that Newt needs to drop out. If you looked at the results from Ohio last night if Perry and Bachmann's names hadn't been there would Santorium have won? It is really hard to look at the candidates and figure out who would be best as all they can do is snipe at each other. They should be showing how they would take on Obama and let the people see what they really can do. In my opionion none of them look or sound presidential on a daily basis, let alone a weekly basis. We need someone strong, articulate and smart.