Will There Be a Brokered Deal for the Dem Nominee?

I’ve said here recently in the comments that I didn’t think it would be a good thing for the Dems to have to take the fight for the nomination to the convention floor this summer. Howard Dean weighed in on the possibility of a floor fight for the nomination or brokering a deal:

The idea that we can afford to have a big fight at the convention and then win the race in the next eight weeks, I think, is not a good scenario,” he said.

If there is no nominee selected by his predicted mid-spring date, or by Puerto Rico’s June vote – the last presidential primary on the Democratic calendar – Dean said the party would likely bring both sides together to work out a deal.

“Because I don’t think we can afford to have a brokered convention,” he said. “That would not be good news for either party.”

If or when, McCain emerges as the Republican nominee, it will be tough, very tough to compete with them having the advantage of a chosen nominee long before us. Taylor Marsh has very good post on why McCain will be tough to beat. I suggest readers here go read it. It’s thought provoking.

The Obama camp has set up their expections for the rest of the primaries for all see, predicting they won’t be able to take Ohio or Texas. I guess they haven’t learned about keeping their powder dry.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Will There Be a Brokered Deal for the Dem Nominee?

  1. CognitiveDissonance says:

    I shudder at the thought of a brokered convention and the fights sure to go on before reaching any kind of consensus. Especially the fact that it won’t give the eventual nominee a lot of time to fight for the general election. But I know a lot of the other bloggers out there are relishing the thought. I just want to win cleanly, as quickly as possible, thank you. Unfortunately, with the contests left, I have a hard time seeing it happening. Especially if they don’t get those Florida and Michigan delegates seated. They’ve got to do that, or this will be another ugly fight.

  2. Brian Luce says:

    I read Taylor Marsh’s post and totally agree. While the democrats fight over who they assume will get the Whitehouse (Clinton or Obama), the Republican Party is involuntarily reconstituting. The hateful anti McCain rhetoric of Limbaugh is the death rattle of the Bush/Rove version of the GOP. John McCain has a Rambo like bio and sports the most compelling of all political traits: authenticity. He told the Michigan autoworkers “The jobs ain’t coming back” and told Iowa farmers that “Ethanol is bs”.

    Everyone, the GOP, the media, the dems were all laughing at McCain last summer. No one is laughing any more. McCain’s balls are so big he needs a wheelbarrow to carry them. Beware!

    I believe the democrats will turn the convention in to bloodbath. If Hillary is annointed, Blacks with not show up in November, If Barack is annointed Hispanics may lose interest. It’s lose-lose.

    Democrats will once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

  3. Brian

    I give Democratic voters, Latinos and Blacks far more credit than you. We will turn out no matter who our nominee is. Hillary Clinton gets that and it’s too damn bad for the party that Barack Obama and his supporters like you don’t get it.

    Maybe all the women who support Clinton need to start stomping their feet like the petulent Obama supporters and say we won’t vote for Obama if he wins the nomination. Now that would be a BIG problem for the party.

  4. I think that Brian’s observation that,democrats will turn the convention into a bloodbath”, represents wishfull thinking. Historically our presidential conventions never chose their nominee on the first ballot. It has been, more of less, a recent trend that the winner emerged following the first ballot.
    As for myself, I would prefer the nominee be selected from an open. transparent, process. Pehaps the convention process should revert to selection in closed, smoke fillled rooms. The very fact that some would consider a floor fight as scary,is in itself scary to me.
    Democrats have never been fearful of bickering among themselves. Historically the democratic party has been viewed as the party of: change, open discussion, and diversity. The republican party, on the other hand, has been viewed as the party of the status-qou. So, is it any wonder that democrats, representing folks of diversity, would exhibit more bickering than republicans? It really doesn’t take public in-fighting, if your party simply represents staus-quo positions. Have you heard any of the GOP candidates have the “balls” to denounce the nightmare of “The Decider” (George W. Bush’s) tragic administration? Of course the answer is no and you probably won’t.
    Brian’s hope that democrats won’t vote for “their” particular favorite if someone else is selected–again is wishful thinking.
    Although we don’t mind fighting in an open political arena, most of us have ALWAYS rallied around the eventual nominee. I, and most of my friends, are ardent Barack Obama supporters. ALL, however, state with conviction that they will actively work to get Hillary elected if she becomes our standard-barer. Although we democrats have big mouths and can go after one another, 99% of us have the intelligence of supporting our candidate whole-heartedly!!!

  5. Pingback: The Democratic Daily

  6. William A. Stoddart

    Well said my friend… with lots of truth and common sense.

    I would be concerned that we might not have the edge we need if we go into the convention with out the nominee, but hey, think of how interesting it will all be. It’s been years since we’ve had such an exciting process. And some time soon we will all come together and put a Dem in the White House!

  7. Brian Luce says:

    Pamela, how are you going to feel if Hillary wins the popular vote, has more delegates, wins more states, and has more superdelegates but Obama is annointed by the democratic hacks for no other reason than he offers the hacks a better package?

    Your girl wins, fair and square, but the nomination goes to a dude. That’s unfair and is the very thing women have been fighting against for generations. It’s also undemocratic. Yet it may happen. Think that will excite and inspire you for November?

    It’ll make me think, what’s the point of engaging in democracy if the insider hacks are making all the decisions. It’s not “wishful thinking” and it’s not a stretch to argue that a lot of people will just stay home. And that wouldn’t be cynical, it’d be analysis, if that’s how this breaks.

    It’ll make 2008 feel like 2004 all over again which felt like 2000 all over again. What’s the point of elections? Are they mere guidelines for the insider hacks?

    The Democratic party never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Look at the genius move they started the cycle with: disenfranchising Florida and Michigan. Floridians were showing up on Tuesday with ballots asking where to vote. That’s shameful.

    William, all the oldtimers, like Dan Rather, who has covered elections since 1952, are saying there’s never been an election like this. People are coming out of the woodwork to engage. The internet, GWB, the economy have created a creature no one has seen before–assuming past performance is indicative of future results may be a big mistake.

  8. When “The Straight Talk Express” rolls into town and promises 100 more years of Iraq, and no real soultion for any real problem it should be a short journey back to where it came from.

  9. My sense is that most countries do their entire elections in the time left after the Convention. The key is going to be to fight loud and hard for a large number of debates, and make the other side pay the price for not giving the people a chance to engage that way.

    It’s heresy in some circles to say this, but Sen. Clinton got more total delegates from their home states combined than did Sen. Obama. Add in California and this thing doesn’t even look close.

    Of course it is close and I actually expect Obama to slip through. My only point, then, is that all of this talk about there being only one “correct” candidate seems to be misguided. Will all of the Obamaites go into a snit and sit out the general if their guy doesn’t pull off the top spot? Does it even matter given the fact that the Republican base is at least as unhappy with the choice of their party as the left side of the Democrats are?

    (Full disclosure: I’m far to the left of either of the two choices, both of which I conider to be slightly right of cnter.)

  10. Brian: There is no such thing anymore as a true ‘brokered’ convention.

    Howard Dean is using old language and old thoughts. If we went to the convention undecided there would be a rules fight over when the delegates would be released from promises.

    Usually this is just one vote.

    Then the voting is in the open. It would be a chessgame and dealmaking game of enormous proportions but it wouldn’t be a group of backroom people making a decision.

    The delegates are no longer lead by the nose by Party leaders. They think for themselves. If released from their promises I think it could be very interesting indeed.

    And if anyone can figure out how to have more delegates on less votes it’s Barrack Obama. He’s a consummate organizer and he’s figured out the caucus game completely. I have no doubt the evangelical fervor of his rhetoric and campaign would drive huge numbers of people to any caucus in any weather. Substance doesn’t matter to the voters that are carrying him….emotion does.

    Very old school political techniques with old school fundraising combined with an effective online money raising tool to run what he wants us to believe is a new and different kind of campaign. Only his soaring rhetoric, when he’s got his teleprompter s, is new.

    See a post I will make later on that topic. Age and Political Memory.

  11. Pingback: BobKrumm.com » John McCain really could win . . . maybe that’s why some Republicans are so scared

  12. alrudder says:

    The worst possible outcome to this dream Primary season would be for one side (particularly if it is the Clintons) to wrest the nominaitno, if they get less popular votes.

    Superdelegates have to think in their own interest. Would they risk a convention fight for their favorite presidential candidate even if it means losing strength in Congress?

  13. Brian Luce says:

    Guys, as someone who has worked in TV production, as someone who has operated teleprompters, let me disavow you all of this notion he relies on them. He doesn’t.

    Why would he? Like Hillary, they basically give the same speech 6 times a day. I think they have it down by now.

    Hillary has come a long way in her delivery, you guys can relax, no need to keep trying to diminish Barack’s speeches.

    MSNBC is reporting Hillary is about to drop another 20 million of her own money into the campaign. Who would ever have imagined working in the public sector could be so lucrative! That’s an amazing figure. And no, she didn’t make that money off book sales. The Clintons aren’t as dirty as the Republicans would have us belieive, but that’s not the same thing as being clean. 20 million. WOW. $20,000,000. Some hero for the little guy. I wonder what strings are attached to that $20,000,000. The Clintons sure have a lot of money. Damn. I wish I had $20,000,000. I shoulda entered politics I guess. Looks like a great way to get rich.

  14. john stone says:

    We have to support whover gets nomination. I know that I will and strongly!. I wanted John Kerry, but when he decided not to run , I had to pick someone else and a lot of people I know wanted Kerry but went for Clinton or Obama, but we all agreed we will support the eventual nominee!

  15. Pingback: John McCain really could win : BigMouthFrog