The way the primaries are staggered but leaning toward front loaded now, I doubt we will have one. There may be big split in the delegates at first, but as time goes on, candidates will drop out from either lack of support or they lack funds, this will hand some of the bigger delegate counts to candidates near the end and even push a split over the top. Here is the primary calendar.
http://frontloading.blogspot.com/p/2012-presidential-primary-calendar.html
As you can see, in January and February, we have a few that will make it look pretty divided but as time goes on, bigger states come into play and as we know, the more time that goes on, the fewer candidates there may be to choose from. In March, those who have lasted fight for Texas, April, New York, by June, you get California in play.
Voter also tend to follow herd mentality. Early primaries people look for a leader who is actually winning, if one or two emerge, the herd follows. With our primaries being more front-loaded than in the past, the herd will find a path to take rather quickly.
In other words, the chances are slim to none.
>> Voter also tend to follow herd mentality. Early primaries people look for a leader who is actually winning, if one or two emerge, the herd follows. >>
This is provable by history of course - but really irritates me and confuses me. This is why I never get too riled up about what “they” at the “GOP” is doing. It is the herd mentality of the average American, not Karl Rove and a few sinister plotters in some smoke filled room - who gives us our candidates. Without the stupidity collectively of the herd mentality, attempts to manipulate would be useless. I think this causes a lot of misplaced anger around here and other message boards.