Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
SPOILER ALERT: DON’T READ THIS UNLESS YOU’RE UP TO DATE WITH HOUSE OF CARDS.
THE TALE OF an outspoken political maverick’s lust for power has been gripping the world this month. And even as the drama’s events have become less and less believable with each passing episode, still we can’t stop tuning in.
But enough about Donald Trump.
Has anyone been watching House of Cards?
Stranger than fiction
The folks at Netflix obviously couldn’t be seen letting a US general election year go by without producing a season of the hit drama.
And while the story of Frank Underwood’s against-the-odds ascent through the political ranks clearly has a parallel in the real-life GOP battle this year, the show has been prescient in another area too.
The main political deck-shuffling set-piece in Season Four of the series concerns an ‘open’ convention – as delegates cast their votes for a vice-presidential nominee to run alongside Frank (Kevin Spacey) in his upcoming re-election battle.
But as always with House of Cards, there’s non-stop action behind the scenes, and the main players’ public comments on the situation rarely tally with what they’re really planning: the preferences of state delegates shift erratically from vote to vote at the mass party meeting – but all the while Frank’s back there in the shadows, pulling the strings.
Back in the real world
In the wake of events this week, there’s every chance we’ll see similar convention floor scenes play out later this year as the Republican Party meets to select its presidential nominee in Cleveland in July.
While Donald Trump continued to rack up the delegates in last Tuesday’s primary votes, he’s still a pretty weak frontrunner – lagging well behind the pace set by John McCain in 2008 or Mitt Romney four years ago.
John Kasich’s win in his home state of Ohio means he’ll be sticking in the GOP race alongside Trump and Texas senator Ted Cruz – and both will be snatching delegates at the businessman’s expense in the remaining contests of the primary season.
Trump needs to pass the magic 1,237 mark the clinch the nomination outright.
If he doesn’t, things will get interesting.
House of Cards interesting? Perhaps.
We’re not sure whether the Trump Organisation founder has caught up with the latest exploits of Frank and Claire Underwood just yet. And while he’ll no doubt be sending someone down the library to put together a reading list on US party conventions, The Donald could also learn a thing or two from how the most terrifying couple ever to stalk the hallways of a fictional White House got on this year…
Or at least make sure the people around you are.
Trump will have a fairly good idea of what he might be in for before he arrives in Ohio this summer.
After Kasich’s win this week, it’s looking ever more likely that nobody will reach that magic 1,237 number before July. If that’s the case, the outcome would be what is known as a ‘brokered’ convention in which the delegates – who normally play a purely symbolic role, effectively rubber-stamping the results of primaries – take on a new significance.
For the first round ballot, party rules oblige delegates to back the candidate to whom they were pledged in the primaries. Those tied to candidates no longer in the race, such as Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush, would not vote.
However based on the results of the primaries, that first round would not produce a majority, and the vote would go to a second round – after which, other candidates come back into play.
In House of Cards, of course, things were slightly different. Secretary of State Catherine Durant went into the convention expecting to emerge as Frank’s running mate, and assuming enough work had been done behind the scenes for her to win.
Which brings us to our next lesson…
It’s worth noting here that, in additional to one party conference happening in real-life and the other being fictional, the politicians in House of Cards were Democrats not Republicans. There are obviously differences between the two parties’ methods for choosing a nominee.
Anyway… As we discussed, based on the results of the GOP primaries it’s unlikely the first round of this summer’s convention vote will produce a majority, in which case the vote will go to a second round.
The majority of states free their delegates after the first ballot: that means those delegates could change their votes and may gravitate towards an alternative candidate in subsequent rounds. That’s when the backroom deal-making starts and things start becoming less and less predictable.
In the Netflix show, one delegate’s decision (the result of some behind the scenes wrangling, courtesy of Frank) to cast his vote in favour of First Lady Claire Underwood as vice-presidential nominee sets up the chain of events that lead to her eventual nomination.
It may seem a little odd that someone who hasn’t expressed any particular public interest in the job could end up being a nominee, as happened in House of Cards.
But, yes, it could really happen.
Names like 2012 vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan and even ticket-topper Mitt Romney are being mooted as possible establishment candidates who could be parachuted in as part of of a GOP ‘Stop Trump’ effort.
“It’s not going to be me. It should be somebody running for president,” Ryan, who’s now House Speaker, said this week – pledging to be ‘Switzerland’ as he oversees the process this summer.
You never know what could happen – and while such a scenario remains a possibility, it would require a rule change (see below).
The conceit in House of Cards was that the Underwoods’ publicly supported Durant’s candidacy, but all the while they were scheming behind-the-scenes to get Claire the number two position on the ticket.
“There are rules regarding all sorts of aspects of nominee selection,” Columbia University professor Greg Wawro told Entertainment Weekly, in their fact-check of the show.
One of the things I think House of Cards has been good at is focusing on how institutions and rules can be manipulated in order to produce certain outcomes.
An obscure GOP panel, the 112-member Rules Committee, will have tremendous power to influence the outcome of the vote in the run-up to the convention.
‘Rule 40′ is something the party establishment will be concerned about too. It states that a candidate needs to win the majority of delegates in at least eight states to be deemed viable at the convention. That could be changed, however, if the powers-that-be want to clear the way for a Romney or a Ryan to enter the fray.
Expect all manner of positioning, arm-twisting and backroom dealing as campaigns and factions bid to change the rules, or maintain those that give them an advantage.
Claire had some help from an award-winning novelist as she prepared to make the ‘speech of her life’ accepting the nomination (said novelist had a much closer relationship with the First Lady than most speechwriters would with their employer, but that’s not our concern here).
Although the Underwoods, via their usual Machiavellian shenanigans, managed to skew the convention overwhelmingly in their favour, Claire still had to win over the viewing public with a speech aiming at putting to bed any accusations of nepotism or patronage.
Trump (who doesn’t appear to have much of an affinity for scripted speeches) will have a similarly steep mountain to climb if he emerges with the nomination.
Can the businessman expand his appeal beyond his base of viscerally angry, mostly white supporters? What can he say to ease the concerns of foreign leaders, unnerved by his irascible demeanor on the campaign trail?
The nominee said this week that he mostly consults with himself on foreign policy issues because he’s said a lot of things and has “a very good brain” (this is true).
So, yes. Pre-written speech definitely a priority.
- Some additional reporting on the GOP race via AFP.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
No it dosent I left school when I was 5 1/2 old I worked in a coal mine then on a milk float when I was 8yrs old I started work in Dublin airport sweeping the floors, they obviously liked what they saw cause by the age of 11 I was flying trans Atlantic flights, I didn’t want to get stuck in a rut so I left to become a kitchen porter in great ormond street hospital, I was quickly moved up through the ranks to become "head of difficult and really complicated brain surgery" i was the inspiration for the hit tv show doogie howser (I directed three episodes) in my spare time while not doing difficult and really complicated brain surgery I invented the Internet. At the age of 15 I left the hospital and started up a small company called "apple" by the age of 16 I swam around the world twice, then I became a race car driver, an astronaut, a professional footballer and i built a hadron collider, I helped steven Hawkins out with a couple of his Theories, I wrestled a lion , beat a gorilla in an arm wrestling match, out swam a shark and beat a cheetah in a race. I’ve reinvented how we think about quantum physics and the space time continuum, to name but a few things I’ve done without my leaving cert
Forrest? Is that you? ;-)
It used to matter. For most it won’t, because there is no future.
Please, less of the melodrama.
What a ridiculous question. Of course it bloody does – it determines your future.
Of course there’s always an exception to every rule but it’s probably the most important exam in your life.
What a ridiculous comment, that’s just what you have been led to believe.
I know some guy who left school at 16, did an apprenticeship then went into engineering and had a masters at 25 and he is very well off. Said he hated school.
It can be beneficial to do well in your leaving but I will stand by my words when I say …….
"it does NOT always determine your future!"
I failed mine twice! I went on to get a Bachelors Degree in Engineering followed by a successful career.
The leaving cert is important. It’s not critical, it’s just important.
As i said – there’s an exception to every rule. And your examples are the exceptions. For the other 99% who aren’t exceptions, yes , the LC is the most important exam they’ll do in their life.
If it’s so unimportant, and the results don’t matter, and you can do whatever you want without it…
…why the hell did we make them do it in the first place?
Of course it matters. Until a college admissions office says that they’re abandoning the points system to determine if you can enter college, it’s always going to matter, unless your chosen profession doesn’t require a college degree (and we don’t have as many of those jobs as other countries do).
The fact that where you are at 40 is something that nobody in the world can predict at 18 is the thing to keep in mind here, not some patronising platitude that something you’ve spent two years of your life or more working towards suddenly doesn’t matter on the day you get your results from those years of work…
I left school at 13 I am 40 now and heading into my final year of a honours degree in psychology with aspirations to continue on to master an phd level. I wouldn’t say missing the leaving or junior cert held me back if any thing getting out into life has giving more life experience for the field I aiming for.
These articles are just for people who didn’t do so well so they don’t feel so bad today. I needed my leaving, i did ok, not brilliant, not terrible, I’m now doing a PhD in engineering. I never thought i’d get to that stage but life throws you up some weird opportunities. I also failed first year in college. Some people don’t need a leaving but to be fair they are the minority. i think the way the construction industry is now, not going to college is a poor choice if you have the ability and drive to succeed in life. I might finish my PhD and travel the world or work as a shop assistant, but at least i have a fall back. If i dropped out or did poorly in the leaving i wouldn’t have choices like that to make. I would have two choices, work in a minimum wage job or the dole. Maybe a low paying job will spur people on to great things in the future but the vast majority will be stuck in those jobs for a looong time.
Sorry to disagree Aidan, I’ve a friend who didn’t go to college. Sat A levels in England and moved over here to work. Started as floor staff in a shop within 4 years he had been elevated to district manager through his own drive and initiative. I’ve friends who dropped out and are doing quite well as mountain guides for climbing companies in Scotland following their passion. And I’ve friends who finished degrees with 2.1 or 1.1 results and have been working in Dominos and been on the dole for the last few years. For all of these people the LC was worthless.
For those who do badly and join the dole que and spend their lives not trying the leaving cert was a bit of a pointless venture and they probably did badly. For those who will go on to perhaps go to college, or do an apprenticeship or try to work their way up a few ladders from the ground and who’ll make some effort and do a little work it may count, but those people will always succeed anyway to some degree or another. Those people are admirable. They’re the people who will have done at least reasonably today.
After just finishing a BSc I was just sitting around a few nights ago with friends from my year (school) thinking about where life was taking us all. It’s weird. People you always had pegged as triers, go getters, likely to do well. With very little plan to do anything. So few of them are following the path of their degrees. People who got first class honors, struggling to find work. Everyone who went through college emmigrating for a half decent job. It’s the ones who flunked out at some stage that are now not forced to go abroad. But they’re also the ones who don’t have the initiative and guts to pack up and go in search of their fortune.
No the leaving cert isn’t that important, after college the interest in what you got in it is pretty minimal. Employers seem more interested in your references, work experience, the impression they get of you in an interview and how you do in tests they give you. Jobs tend to be too specific to care about how you did in such a broad set of exams. And if you get through college on your first attempt (which is actually pretty important), you’ve got a lot of time to play around with to find out what it is you need to do to make yourself employable to the right people, or to get what you need to start your own business. You’ll be 17/18 after the LC. That’s very young indeed.
It counts now. How much it defines the direction of your life in the future is up to you. I do not know one person who knew in any great detail at the age of 17 what they would be doing at the age of 30. It’s a tool to help you determine how to get to where you want to go if you treat it with the right attitude.
Failure at LC level will not define who you are unless you allow it to. There are ways around a lot of obstacles in life and Leaving Cert results are not that different in the grand scheme of things. You control a lot of your destiny as far as the leaving cert is concerned (although you need to know this before today), not vice versa.
have your say