Does the crowded primary work to the GOP's disadvantage?

[All Along The Watchtower]

The reason I ask is that, before we crown Queen Hillary, we must remember that the Republican Clown Car of 2012 was every bit as unintentionally hilarious and not-to-be-taken seriously as the current one. Yet Anyone-But-Romney  turned into Romney/Ryan improving on McCain/Palin's performance in 2008- to the tune of 47% (heh) of the overall vote.

At this early stage in the game, most voters aren't even paying attention to the race. Insert cliche about the general election having higher turnout than the primaries here, etc. And once the Republicans settle on a candidate, you can bet your Dave Leip's Election Atlas subscription that Republicans and their allies in the media* will invest a lot (literally and figuratively) into that person - whomever it may be.

So yeah...don't act like Hillary's epic landslide election is preordained or anything.

_{*not saying that the media is necessarily pro-Republican. But at this point, there's no denying that Fox News, talk radio, and the conservative end of the blogosphere have a lot of influence on the Republican part of the electorate.}

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

I doubt that the "crowded" field works to the GOP's disadvantage because the media spotlight will be only on the annointed "contenders". 

[Famous Mortimer]

It's bad for democracy, it's basically a crap shoot. They need IRV.

[King]

No because it ends up turning the debates into who can drop the most iconic one-liners to get the far-right crowd cheering. The Republicans are going to all come across as completely unprofessional and un-Presidential

[Donald Trump 2016 !]

No. It adds unnecessary competition from joke candidates and gives the general public the impression that the Republican Party is a giant clown car.

[ag]

No. It will be dealt with early enough.

There are only two sets of circumstances (both not very likely) where it would. Firstly, if, because of the crowding, a particularly unsuitable candidate gets the nomination. It is not very likely, because once other candidates start dropping off, the last "normal" guy standing will get ahead. But it could be that in the first few primaries the same dark horse is consistently ahead by small margins in a split field and goes on to become a strong front-runner - before some fatal weakness becomes apparent.  Alternatively, it could be harmful if the field remains unsettled for a very long time, with multiple candidates at the top and refusing to drop out.

I do not think either scenario is likely, and whoever gets the nomination would, actually, be stronger for having won it in a lively primary.