a "brokered convention"

[Jonathan Lighter]

Of course, it's conceivable that an "open convention" might, after many
ballots, become a "brokered convention," with Gov. Palin or Donald Trump or
Grover Norquist acting as kingmaker, but that's far less likely than an
"open convention."

More exciting, too, and I suppose that explains it.

JL

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Victor Steinbok <aardvark66 at gmail.com>wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Victor Steinbok <aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Re: a "brokered convention"
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> They might go back to "open convention" if we start calling it the
> "brokeback convention".
>
>     VS-)
>
> On 3/18/2012 11:40 AM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
> > The news world is rife with yak about the possibility of a "brokered
> > convention" if no Republican candidate wins a majority of delegates in
> the
> > primaries.
> >
> > After a few days of this, some journalists had the decency to point out
> > that they don't mean a "brokered" convention, in which some kingmaker
> > wangles his preferred candidate into the catbird seat; they mean an
> "open"
> > convention with everybody wheeling and dealing for himself.  (I don't
> know
> > the last time an actual "brokered convention" occurred.)
> >
> > Nevertheless, the preferred term for "open convention" still seems to be
> > "brokered convention."
> >
> > Hopefully it will fade away. But it seems worth noting.
> >
> > JL
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>



--
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org