Andrea Mitchell and Mark Halperin Discuss Palin, McCain, and Brokered Convention

Exciting Time For All?

This should provide some interesting discussion, as there are really a few things to note here. One is John McCain seemed to have vigorously defended Sarah Palin in his recent interview with the BBC.  To his credit, Halperin points out that McCain’s defense is justified, and that his conclusions about Palin’s effectiveness as a candidate are right on.  More, Halperin discusses the question of  Sarah Palin’s overwhelming reception by the crowd at CPAC, and how this is effective evidence of Governor Palin’s understanding of the conservative base of the party.  The other tidbit to be examined is the very brief discussion of another video clip of Sarah Palin discussing brokered conventions at CPAC, different from the other I provided Saturday.

Here’s the video:

The important quote about which the entire buzz is circling is this:

“If it ended up in a brokered convention, at the end of the day, well that would be a really exciting time for all.”

Of course, notable is how Andrea Mitchell tries to minimize her statement as a “tease,” and suggesting that McCain defended Palin only because he was “dancing with the one who you brung,” or some nonsense, but as Halperin points out aptly, this is certainly a case supported by the facts:  She energized the party more than any other McCain could have added to his ticket, and I daresay, more than McCain himself.

As I said, I’m reporting this to you because it is news, and I am personally fascinated by it, but as one commenter opined, we shouldn’t get our hopes up over this.  A brokered convention has all sorts of dangers as another comment suggested, and to go off down that trail may not serve us at all.  There’s no telling how such a thing could come out in the end, but I’ll admit this much:  It certainly does put a little more of an unknown into this whole race.

Advertisements
Leave a comment ?

4 Responses to Andrea Mitchell and Mark Halperin Discuss Palin, McCain, and Brokered Convention

  1. PalinSupporter2012 says:

    The clip of McCain was edited for their report. Here is a link to the full interview with McCain. He had more to say and ended the clip with saying the myth of Palin being the reason of loosing the election is not true.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/96

  2. yea??? well remember that a brokered convention means that your vote did not mean SQUAT!!

    • MarkAmerica says:

      I wouldn't go that far, but you definitely have a point. One of the things people tend to forget about voting is that it has more than one effect. Sometimes, voting is about the alternatives one did not select. You can bet that at the moment, the most important thing in this race is the number of votes Mitt Romney is not getting. Were Mitt Romney getting a slightly higher proportion of votes, this would by now be academic. What you are proposing is that in a bipolar election, where two candidates are all there is, votes count directly, but let us be honest: This race contains at least three candidates who will not be the nominee. For instance, given the state of things with the Virginia ballot, if I were a Virginia voter, I would cast mine for Paul as a matter of tactical denial to Romney. I expect that many Santorum and Gingrich supporters in that state will do the same. Yet they know that Ron Paul is entirely unlikely to be the nominee. They would do so knowing their vote doesn't mean "squat" in the sense of the affirmative proposition, and yet, their votes are not meaningless in such a case.

      My point to you is that votes can be seen as a direct effect, which is how we tend to view it, but it can also be viewed as a tactical tool, particularly in a primary, that is almost as powerful as an affirmative vote, and in some ways moreso.

      Your argument is that a brokered convention throws all of that out, but i would contend to you that those who look at the current slate of candidates may simultaneously see that as their only hope to get a nominee they can support, or support wholeheartedly. In that sense, if a brokered convention had been your goal, given the slate of candidates, your vote DID mean something if you used it tactically to arrive at that goal. It may be a little convoluted in the sense that it is not the direct path, and yes, as you rightly point out, there are plenty of risks, but that's not the same as saying "your vote did not mean SQUAT." It means only that your vote took on a different meaning. In the end, it all comes down to those delegates in the convention hall anyway. People tend to forget that in this primary process, you're voting for delegates who will do your will at the convention. In that sense, your vote "doesn't mean squat" either. Not all delegates in all states are bound to support a given candidate, with respect to the primary returns. If this winds up in a brokered convention, it will be, as gov. Palin here asserts, "an exciting time for all."

      That much is clear.

  3. Brian Dani says:

    Just a thought here Mark. Palin has gotten people fired up with her speech, a brokered convention could elevate this into a roaring blaze and get people motivated to support whoever the GOP candidate is. We all know that she will support whomever that will be and she will be on a major attack on Obama (he has no defense against her that will be effective so she can fire at will). I am smiling at this cause they all took their shots at her unjustified, not that she is getting even, she will just be highlighting his errors and shortcomings with facts, not lies, will be interesting to watch him squirm.