Posted on 03/18/2016 9:37:56 AM PDT by Redwood71
Just got done listening to an idiot box msnbc transmission that made it a point to try to scuttle Trump by saying the delegates that he won in the numerous caucuses are not locked into voting for him at the RNC convention. It amazes me that so many sides, to include our own, are trying so hard to make him disappear when so many of the people out there that are displaying their decisions by voting for him and want him to get into the white house are being ignored. Exactly what is the purpose of caucuses other than the establishment of the peoples’ choice? And didn’t we “elect” our representatives to represent us and not play along with their opponents allowing them to choose their own opponent? And I’m willing to bet that the only republican candidate who is willing to display Hilary’s illegal actions would be Trump as the other opponents of Trump are politicians and not businessmen with the political experience of working his business in numerous countries? This is why governors have made the best presidents because they run states before they run the country. Our reps need to get with the program and act for the people rather than themselves or their benefactors. The republican party used to be the party of law. Let’s expect them to get that down to the basics, like the will of the people.
Call the wambulance.
I was listening to talk radio this morning - several pa delegate candidates were being interviewed. They are NOT bound to any candidate and there are 3 from each congressional district. PA does have some state delegates that are bound but these congressional district delegates are not. One prefers Cruz, one prefers Trump. The Trump guy said if his district goes for Cruz he will change his vote but the Cruz guy will not, no matter what the voters do.
How dare ‘the people’ pick someone other than who they want us to pick????
Who do we think we are???
Exactly what is the purpose of caucuses other than the establishment of the peoples’ choice?
Trump’s the only one with the stomach to point out that the Empress has no clothes.
There, I said it. Now for some mind-bleach.
That is my question. But unfortunately it is on record that a representative of the national convention does not have to vote the way the popular vote of the primaries was accomplished. They, even though they are there to represent us in the selection of the nominees of candidates for our parties, a number of them can vote any way they want or abstain. Kinda takes all the work of finding who the people want out of the plan, doesn't it? red
Sheep if you let them.
I have no problem with it as long as the first round of voting assigns delegate votes by the primary election in their state. If no winner emerges from the first round, then restraints have to be loosened or the second round will be just like the first. What is disturbing is the disenfranchisement that takes place when unassigned delegates are allowed in the first round.
sparklited,
If it would only happen that way. If there is to be a legitimate election, don’t place it in the hands of the delegates at all. The opportunity to “scuttle” a delegate vote is easily provided by an RNC rule used at republican conventions to keep a delegate from winning a state based upon majority rule:
RULE NO. 38
Unit Rule
“No delegate or alternate delegate shall be bound by any attempt of any state or Congressional district to impose the unit rule. A “unit rule” prohibited by this section means a rule or law under which a delegation at the national convention casts its entire vote as a unit as determined by a majority vote of the delegation.”
No majority rule, no majority vote which is what our “elections” should be based upon. It places it into the hands of a select group of delegates from states to vote against their choice on the first designation because someone has to vote for someone else because a group of people voted for them during the primary. Not all the delegates are voting their position and people are being applied that did not win the state. Therefore, the convention can be rigged and changed from the popular vote.
red
sparklite2,
I would agree with you but the number of delegates are assigned not be who they voted for but by population. If you have a state that overwhelmingly goes for a candidate, and they have few delegates, then how do you dispose of them? How do you do half a person?
Additionally, rule 18 clearly allows those people choosing your candidate to vote any way they want. There is no control of them and the state representatives can “overwhelmingly” vote in anyone they want. Whether the primary identified a favorite or not. So the possible pandering of the party is available. And you may see it with Trump. (Notice the liberals don’t have a rule like this)
red
sparklite2:
“Exactly what is the purpose of caucuses other than the establishment of the peoples’ choice?”
The many primaries that happen across the US prior to a major general election are supposed to give the party a knowledge of the candidates(s) the public wants. the unfortunate side is that in this case, the RNC wants a status quo politician and the public wants a rebel made of up both parties. So I am expecting them to manipulate the process. And if they do, they should expect a liberal president, possibly a socialist wishing wealth equality rather than free market. The liberals get richer, and gain more power, and the conservatives get stupider, and taken like sheep.
red
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.