You Political Junkies

[Fred Garvin]

All this talk about Clinton and Obama going to the convention for all the marbles has got me wondering. I realize the drama of the old days. Smoke-filled rooms and handshake deals. But I'm wondering about the recent past.

Some say the Repubs locking up the nominee would be an advantage vs the Dems going down to the wire. I'm wondering in the last 20 years what's the biggest gap between one party making their nom and then the ensuing nom by the rival party. And did it even have an effect on that race?

I could be wrong but I thought Bush41 went till May before he conceded to Reagan. Does the later you get the nod actually have an effect on the success of your candidacy?

[DC Muskie]

Being the minor presidential buff that I am, I can tell you want to secure the nomination quickly, but not too quickly. This is the problem for sitting VP's whose turn comes up to run. Only Bush41 was the sitting VP to win the general election. Four years later he sputtered, decided that Clinton wasn't a threat, then pulled James Baker into the fold to rescue him after Labor Day and lost.

I think you are right about 41 conceding in May.

The Democrats I think have a serious problem. If they don't pick a nominee after march 4th, then we wait in April for Pennsylvania. Then we wait until the convention. Then it gets really interesting to watch.

I think McCain has the right amount of time spent. He locked it up, but not first getting a little heat from rivals. That should benefit the GOP in my opinion. Because now he has time to shape his campaign and not have it defined by others.