Tag Archives: Brokered Convention

Revenge of the TEA party?

While drinking a creamy pint of Guinness this morning, and deciding how I was going to destroy yet another corned beef brisket something occurred to me.
In the back of my head I was still wondering why the Establishment Republicans were spending all of their political capital trying to end the primaries prematurely… and there it was.
Governors appoint the delegates that go to the convention! (Stop and re-read that sentence.)
OK. There are currently 29 republican governors, many of whom were swept in, or re-elected, during the TEA Party takeover of the house of representatives. Are you with me so far?
You can count on the Democrat governors sending, let’s just say not the most fiscally conservative republican delegates to the convention. But the Governors owing their election to the “Taxed Enough Already Party” will most likely send delegates reflecting a fiscally conservative mindset. These delegates have the ability to vote however they see fit and will most likely favor a candidate with a verifiable fiscally conservative track record… it’s hard to find one of those in Massachusetts.
With this in mind it is not difficult to understand why 65% of the republicans continue not to vote for Romney and polling data regarding the “fear” of a brokered convention is declining the more people learn.
If this goes the distance it will be fantastic to watch.
I’ll need to buy more Guinness!


Keep on goin’!

Why would a brokered convention be exactly what needs to happen? Well…

let me explain a few things for those of you who are buying into the idea that the nominee should be chosen by now.

First, if that were the case then there would never be a need for a convention.
Second, the Primary process is the way we handle “multiple party” issues without having multiple parties and ending up with leaders like Hitler.
Third, the ultimate nominee will have to adopt the party platform which is hashed out during the primaries. It is this process that determines what the base wants.

Since all you are hearing are the negatives regarding this process from no less notable figures as Barbara Bush and Dick Morris I will not bore you with listing them.
But what I will do is tell you the enormous benefits outside of what I listed above.

First, having multiple candidates stay in through the convention prohibits the Democrats from focusing their energy and money demonizing a single specific individual thus watering down their message.
Second, it allows the candidates to keep the President on the defensive from multiple angles leaving him to try to answer various attacks rather than a single foe.
Third, what better way to create huge ratings for a convention than to have it brokered? So… what better way to get conservative messages out for the public to consider? Nobody stops to watch a party, but everybody stops to watch a fight. Even the Leftists will be tuning in… and they might learn something… doubtful, but there is a chance.

Finally, this election will be about Obama… it has long been my opinion that we could run Bozo the Clown and win given the horrible results from our current presidents socialist “solutions”. Whomever the nominee is will win regardless. It is certainly no threat that we might not know who that is until September 1st… in fact it is to our advantage. That would give the Leftists less time to create issues that don’t exist like a “war on women”.  (I seem to remember all of these brilliant political advisors telling us over the years that no-one pays attention until three weeks out anyway.  So what has changed?)

I think I can speak for all of us when I say the base doesn’t really need to know these candidates any better than we currently do given the 20+ debates and endless surges and coverage we have enjoyed over the last number of months.
Stop buying into the conventional wisdom… or in this case the non-brokered conventional wisdom.

If you’re thinking clearly… a brokered convention is the answer… and we may finally get it right.