Quote

A great many of us have been concerned about the presidential nomination system... whether or not we have drifted into a system that simply doesn't work so well any more.

If you had found the right candidate in 2000 or 2004, and you could have put that man or woman, given them ballot access in September of the election year, they could have won the election.

I hadn't given much thought to the prospect of a Hugo nomination at the time it happened, but obviously once you're nominated, winning one seems a bit less far-fetched than before.

I could have possibly beaten Senator McCain in the primary. Then I could have been the candidate who lost to Barack Obama.

Sometimes in this country, we don't focus a lot on people's experience and their resume. Mitt Romney would be the most experienced executive to be nominated since 1952. The fundamental task for the next president is going to be fixing things, cleaning things up, being a turnaround artist, if you will.

In Europe and the United States, you've got different systems to select candidates, and no system is perfect.

There aren't many strong or charismatic candidates today, because many people can't withstand the scrutiny.

So if 1960 had occurred under the old convention system, Kennedy would have had a very hard time getting the Democratic nomination because he would have been rejected by all those people who had worked with him in Washington.

I've always believed in supporting the best candidate at the time.

I started to get very well recognized in the early seventies as the only man in the United States who had been elected three times to the board of NOW in New York City.