nomination

It doesn't matter how he polls against Clinton, if he has no chance of winning the Republican nomination.

Yes, and if he even comes close to getting the nomination it will signal a huge change in American politics.

Romney did not have access to the national Republican infrastructure until he won the nomination.

Such a shift occurred last in the wake Pat Robertson's failed bid for the GOP nomination for the presidency in 1988.

The chances of him getting the nomination are probably not good, but you never know.

If he won the nomination he would have a solid position in the general election.

The article deserves at least a nomination for bad technology writing, because it doesn't explain why this is such a good thing.

Neither Sanders nor Trump will come within a mile of the nomination.

I'd be less offended if he had any chance at all of being a top 5 contender for the nomination.

It will be amazing if Bush doesn't end up with the nomination.

But at this point Paul is more likely to get the nomination for his party than Sanders so it seems like a moot discussion.

Republicans picked up the Horton issue after Dukakis clinched the nomination.

So it wasn't "assuming the results to make my argument", so much as "pointing out how much worse it will be in a fairly probable future." It's bad enough now that we've had 4 terms of bushes, and that hillary's a lock for the democratic nomination.

(And yet I work for the Michael Badnarik campaign for a little while and he was "anti-abortion") Rand is going to have a tough time getting the republican nomination because that party hasn't quite realized that it's being to conservative and not responsible enough.

Nomination is interesting, but what if the person nominated doesn't want the house?