Up to this point in the campaign, New York real estate developer Donald Trump has been relatively guarded about his choice of a ticket mate for the November election. He's said there are four or five people under consideration. He's said his primary concern is finding a potential vice president who would be ready on minute one of day one to assume the responsibilities of office if the unthinkable occurs. Other than that, though, he's pretty much kept his own counsel.

That hasn't stopped the Washington pundicrats from tossing names around. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is believed by many to be under consideration, as is Ohio Gov. John Kasich. The fact of the matter is no one really knows whom he's thinking about or if he's already made his choice, as some apparently believe.

Editorial Cartoons on Donald Trump View All 455 Images

The folks over at Americans for Tax Reform, the group headed by uber-activist Grover G. Norquist are running an online poll to get a sense of the nation. While unscientific, Americans for Tax Reform's prominence in conservative circles makes the poll an of indicator of what conservatives may be thinking about the fall ticket.

The potential candidates included in the poll are:

Dr. Ben Carson, the Maryland pediatric neurosurgeon and former GOP presidential candidate whom Trump bested in the nominating contest.

Chris Christie, governor of New Jersey, another one-time presidential candidate and establishment favorite whom Trump also bested in the nominating contest.

Bob Corker of Tennessee, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Doug Ducey, the Republican governor of Arizona whose successes in his state have put him on the cover of the current issue of National Review.

Joni Ernst, freshman Iowa senator and Iraq War veteran.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, the man behind the Contract with America, which is credited with leading Republicans out of 40 years in the congressional wilderness.

Nikki Haley, the reform-minded governor of South Carolina.

John Kasich, the sitting governor of Ohio, a state most consider essential to any chance the Republicans have for victory in the fall.

Jeff Sessions, the Alabama senator who is not only Trump's main congressional cheerleader but who is reportedly helping staff his policy team.

Ryan Zinke, the freshman congressman from Montana who, during his 23 years in the United States Navy, headed up SEAL Team Six and served as former acting commander of Joint Special Forces in Iraq.

It is, to be sure, an eclectic list. Each would bring different strengths to the ticket, but all would, in their own way, provide a useful balance to Trump in the areas where he is perceived, by the professional pols and the consultant class anyway, to need reinforcement.

What makes the Americans for Tax Reform poll unique – aside from the fact they are the only ones at the moment conducting a survey of this kind – is that participants are not limited to a single vote for a single candidate. The group is using a metric called "preferential voting," something found in Robert's Rules of Order and elsewhere to produce a kind of "instant runoff" in cases where having multiple candidates on the ballot produces a first ballot result where no candidate wins a majority.

It's an idea that some people now find attractive following the chaos that was the 2016 contest to choose a Republican nominee. "In our future primary and caucus elections, preferential voting could be used to eliminate the lowest-performing candidates until all remaining candidates were above the threshold established in that states to win delegates, with the tally continuing to see who should earn bragging rights for winning the state," said Saul Anuzis, a former Michigan GOP state chairman and RNC committeeman who backs the idea.

"Winners of primaries and caucuses earn extra delegates and outsized media attention, but no primary was won this year with over half the votes until April 19," Anuzis said. "Analyses of polls and votes suggest that preferential voting would have changed outcomes in several states. In other words, Republican voters often wanted one outcome, yet received another."

It's an idea that's probably worth considering, and in both parties, each of which has just come through a fractious nominating process that has left a lot of egos bruised and a lot of voters dissatisfied with the outcome. It's not at all clear "preferential voting" would have made much of a difference on the final outcome. Perhaps it would have mattered in those states where so-called early voting is common and candidates dropped out of the race after voting had started but before the actual primary, and perhaps not.