On Fox News last night, Newt Gingrich imagined what a brokered convention might look like, and said the hammer should drop on Florida and Arizona for violating RNC rules.
(Btw, It strikes me that you would never hear Mitt Romney riff for over a minute about a brokered convention, but such is the difference between Newt's discipline and Mitt's).
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: What does that brokered convention mean, though? Suppose we do get that to that point, and the four of you are in a room, are going to just like, what, duke it out? I mean, like tell me how this resolves.
GINGRICH: Well, you don’t -- you don't know. I mean, if Governor Romney is short, and the other three have more votes, there are a couple of different ways it could play. First of all, if the other -- if the three of us have more votes, I suspect we’re going to revisit Arizona and Florida, both of which ought to be proportional.
And where Romney currently is counted as having an overrepresentation because they’re violating the RNC rules in claiming that they’re, in fact, you know, winner-take-all, which they’re not supposed to be under the RNC rules. So start there.
Second, I think the question becomes, then, how do you write the platform? What’s the platform going to be? And does the platform have pieces out of Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum? Is there -- is there a Romney-only platform? What kind of coalitions emerge? And I don’t think we -- we have not seen anything like this, I think, since 1920, and on the Republican side.
You could argue 1940, as a historian, but I think really you may have to go back to 1920. This is a very different environment. And you have to, you know, be candid. Governor Romney has the most money, he has the biggest organization. You would think he has lots of advantages. But on the other hand, you look at the percentage he gets, with very rare exception, he has a hard time really putting together anything close to a majority.