Maybe practicality dictates taking that option off the table. Still, it seemed to me that pliability cuts in more than one way. Keep the conservative, Tea Party attention hot upon a putative President Romney, and some of the worst may be averted. Better not to have the worrisome Romney there in the first place, but who knows what the 50 pop stops ahead are going to bring. Tea Party may have to choose between taking its ball and going home, or else trying to make lemonade out of a lemon. A third candidate, unless so popular that he/she will manage to beat the pants off of Obama, will be counterproductive.
There is another possibility.
Romney seems stuck at 25%. Paul likely captures his 10%. Say, Cain's ceiling is at 30%. Gingrich creeps up to 15%. Everybody else splits the other 20%.
Who wins?
Recall that, in 2008, most of the primaries were winner-take-all. Remember that McCain was able to lock up the nomination without ever gaining a majority of the Republican vote in any state.
But, in 2012, I believe most states have dropped the winner-take-all structure and switched to a proportional allocation of delegates.
So, I ask again "Who wins?"
In the circumstance described, the answer would be "nobody". We'd go to convention without a nominee.
Used to be that all the primary-allocated delegates were locked in for one ballot, many for two. At which point, everybody becomes "uncommitted".
To me, this seems an increasingly plausible outcome. Yet, I haven't seen any speculation toward this end at all.
Who knows who a deadlocked convention might nominate (draft)? Who knows what additional names might be placed in nomination? Wanna see a real knockdown, drag out fight between the base and the establishment? Wanna see Karl Rove get mugged on the convention floor...
It could happen...