Seriously, what if the Republicans end up 40-30-20.

[techs]

This could be an interesting Republican convention. I don't see either Guiliani or Thompson getting to the covention with over 40 percent of delegates.
I also think that Romney may hang on til the end, on his own dime, in the hopes of getting the VP nod by selling his votes to either Guiliani or Thompson.
It really makes for interesting theater. If Guiliani has 40 percent and he gets Romneys 20 percent, Romney as VP completely alienates the religious right.
If Thompson has the 40 percent and makes a deal with Romney, the rr might not be as completely alienated, but the 30-40 percent of Guiliani voters will feel alienated. Especially if Guiliani has the 40 percent and Thompson and Romney join forces to deny him the nomination.
Of course Thompson and Guiliani could join up. But I don't think either would want to be VP under the other.
On the Dem side, it doesn't appear that Obama can even crack 30 percent, much less the 40 percent he would need to deny Clinton a first ballot nomination.

 

[ProfJohn]

Never happen. As the lower tier candidates drop out one of the big ones will be seen as having ?momentum? and will start to gather these votes.

I don?t see Romney taking the VP spot under Rudy; he doesn?t bring anything to the ticket. Really overall Romney is not a good VP candidate being from the Northeast. I don?t think he puts any of those states into play.

Right now the most likely VP choice for the Republicans is Huckabee. Solid conservative from a southern state. Will help to balance out a Rudy and his northeastern liberal social policy ways.

 

[UberNeuman]

Huckabee is a darkhorse in the race, but I doubt he'd want Rudy as a running mate....

 

[Lemon law]

Given that the nominee of the democratic or Republican conventions is always the person who decides who to give the VP nod to, that gives added credibility to the the techs position. And that in the event of a convention in which no GOP candidate has a raw majority of the delegates after the primaries, other holders of delegate blocks are in an excellent position to play lets make a deal king maker even if they have no hope of getting the nomination itself.

Just because no republican or democratic convention has experienced that kind of deadlock recently does not mean it will not happen now. In fact its far more likely now that primaries are front loaded at exactly the time unknown future events may radically alter the political landscape. So we could have one candidate in either party rolling up a decent delegate lead, and then some unknowable future event could occur that totally discredits the position of the current delegate leader. And then it may be imperative for the party to stop the current delegate leader because they guessed wrong on a new reality. Far easier in the event no one has a majority.

 

[Moonbeam]

Evangelical Christians need to break with the GOP and form the POG.

 

[nageov3t]

too early to tell... if anyone sweeps the early primaries, the rest of the country will probably fall in line behind their momentum.

I still hold that Thompson is dead in the water, even if he's too lethargic to realize it yet.

I can't see either Rudy or Thompson walking away with a VP slot, though. I've got this secret theory that GW asked Rudy to be his VP in 04 and was turned down

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: loki8481
too early to tell... if anyone sweeps the early primaries, the rest of the country will probably fall in line behind their momentum.

I still hold that Thompson is dead in the water, even if he's too lethargic to realize it yet.

I can't see either Rudy or Thompson walking away with a VP slot, though. I've got this secret theory that GW asked Rudy to be his VP in 04 and was turned down

Thompson my appear to be dead in the water, but he is polling #2 in early primary states.

 

[fskimospy]

It's not momentum, it's strategic voting. The Republicans won't split like that. After the first few primaries there will emerge an obvious front runner, and an obvious alternative. The remaining Republican primary voters will line up based on which one of those 2 candidates they like better, because they will feel like those are the only two who have a chance of winning. Remember this is also a winner take all system, which in accordance with Duverger's law will go towards a two party (or in this case candidate) choice.

As far as the Democrats go, Hillary has it locked up barring some sort of huge catastrophe. Everyone else is just playing for second place.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: techs

-snip-

Everything I've seen disagrees with your assumptions about the RR. Contrary to your assumptions, they appear to be badly split in their votes.

Some can't stand Rudy for liberal stance on social isues, others back him because of his (assumed) electability.

Some back Thompson because of conservative stance on social issues. Others dislike him because fo his (apparent) unelectability (lack of charisma and boring speaking performances. I think Dobson trashed him big-time lately).

I hear they are split on Romney.

They are diluted as a voting block, and command no *national Voice*. IMO, the real issue concerning them is will those who are dissatisfied split off and go 3rd Party, or just stay home?

Fern

 

[piasabird]

You can never tell what will happen in a primary. With no clear front runner it is up for grabs. There is still lots of time to make mistakes. It is like a football game. You can drop the ball or catch and get a touchdown, or get lousy calls from the sidelines. I have never seen an election so open and so hard to call. Hillary obviously has only one opponent to beat. Polls say that if Hillary wins she may not beat the Republicans. People will voter against her who are not even republicans. She has a real uphill battle due to her corruption. She also voted for the war. On the other hand, her opponent Obama is an unknown and has a better chance of winning in the polls if he gets the nomination. If the Democrats Nominate Hillary they may end up with nothing.

 

[Jamie571]

Originally posted by: piasabird
You can never tell what will happen in a primary. With no clear front runner it is up for grabs. There is still lots of time to make mistakes. It is like a football game. You can drop the ball or catch and get a touchdown, or get lousy calls from the sidelines. I have never seen an election so open and so hard to call. Hillary obviously has only one opponent to beat. Polls say that if Hillary wins she may not beat the Republicans. People will voter against her who are not even republicans. She has a real uphill battle due to her corruption. She also voted for the war. On the other hand, her opponent Obama is an unknown and has a better chance of winning in the polls if he gets the nomination. If the Democrats Nominate Hillary they may end up with nothing.

I agree with you, except I dont think it will be because of corruption. I would rather see Obama as the democrat candidate simply because I'm ready for a change and he would deliver. An Obama vs. Huckabee race would make for a good election.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Jamie571

Originally posted by: piasabird
You can never tell what will happen in a primary. With no clear front runner it is up for grabs. There is still lots of time to make mistakes. It is like a football game. You can drop the ball or catch and get a touchdown, or get lousy calls from the sidelines. I have never seen an election so open and so hard to call. Hillary obviously has only one opponent to beat. Polls say that if Hillary wins she may not beat the Republicans. People will voter against her who are not even republicans. She has a real uphill battle due to her corruption. She also voted for the war. On the other hand, her opponent Obama is an unknown and has a better chance of winning in the polls if he gets the nomination. If the Democrats Nominate Hillary they may end up with nothing.

I agree with you, except I dont think it will be because of corruption. I would rather see Obama as the democrat candidate simply because I'm ready for a change and he would deliver. An Obama vs. Huckabee race would make for a good election.

It could make for a very polite election

"So let me return the favor and say that since he's been so gracious to me, I will say, you know, I find him to be the most interesting Democrat and maybe we'll end up on the stage together one day," Huckabee said.

Asked if he admired any of the Republican candidates, Obama offered faint praise: "Yeah, I think some of these folks are decent people."

Obama cited only former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee by name.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's not momentum, it's strategic voting. The Republicans won't split like that. After the first few primaries there will emerge an obvious front runner, and an obvious alternative. The remaining Republican primary voters will line up based on which one of those 2 candidates they like better, because they will feel like those are the only two who have a chance of winning. Remember this is also a winner take all system, which in accordance with Duverger's law will go towards a two party (or in this case candidate) choice.

As far as the Democrats go, Hillary has it locked up barring some sort of huge catastrophe. Everyone else is just playing for second place.

I find it interesting that you mention the importance of early states, then go on to say Hillary has it locked up...

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's not momentum, it's strategic voting. The Republicans won't split like that. After the first few primaries there will emerge an obvious front runner, and an obvious alternative. The remaining Republican primary voters will line up based on which one of those 2 candidates they like better, because they will feel like those are the only two who have a chance of winning. Remember this is also a winner take all system, which in accordance with Duverger's law will go towards a two party (or in this case candidate) choice.

As far as the Democrats go, Hillary has it locked up barring some sort of huge catastrophe. Everyone else is just playing for second place.

I find it interesting that you mention the importance of early states, then go on to say Hillary has it locked up...

They are important in competitive elections... the Democratic nomination is not competitive.

Hillary is running at numbers currently that are more often reserved for incumbents, and so barring some sort of major shift or huge gaffe on her part she has the nomination locked up in my opinion.