Posted on 02/16/2016 6:50:54 AM PST by GregoTX
Mysterious outside groups are asking state parties for personal data on potential delegates, Republican campaigns are drawing up plans to send loyal representatives to obscure local conventions, and party officials are dusting off rule books to brush up on a process that hasn’t mattered for decades.
As Donald Trump and Ted Cruz divide up the first primaries and center-right Republicans tear one another apart in a race to be the mainstream alternative, Republicans are waging a shadow primary for control of delegates in anticipation of what one senior party official called “the white whale of politicsâ€: a contested national convention.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Almost every state has 3 unbound delegates, usually state party officials. A couple states send all of their delegates "unbound". It is not nearly as many as the Dems do, but there are enough that it could make the difference in a close race.
Another Politico scare article about something that is not going to happen. We will have a clear winner by the convention and its looking a lot like Trump.
Here we see another example of the insidiousness of the political party system in this country. These corrupt syndicates are the enemy within. With their money, they use the corrupt party apparatus, which they themselves devised, as the means to exercise control over you and I for power and personal greed. Worse yet, their interests are mostly damaging to the best interests of the country.
Both Iowa and South Carolina binds their three “unbound” delegates to the presidential preference vote. The three are the state party chair, and the male and female (mandatory one each) national committee members.
They are not necessarily unbound delegates (it varies by state), but they are automatically delegates.
“But if he only wins a plurality...well, that’s why not being a jerk to every other candidate may not be such a great idea.”
Other than Carson, and Kasich has decided to become righteous (he has no other choice) which candidate has not been a jerk with Trump?
Ah, the press starts this “Brokered convention” rumor every four years. It’s wishful thinking on their part.
Come to think of it, other than Cruz and Jeb, most of the other candidates haven't been jerks with Trump at all. But none of that really changes the point I made anyway. The juvenile, gratuitous insults just make it more likely that more folks will sit home at the general election.
The funniest thing about that is that when that point is made, the response often is along the lines of "screw you. We don't need you anyway", which of course proves the underlying point yet again.
As much as I want to keep Hillary and Sanders out of office, it is going to be worth a chuckle if Trump is the nominee and loses, then complains because too many Republicans stayed home.
“...most of the other candidates haven’t been jerks with Trump at all.”
Trump was referring to the Cruz’s lying ads that he is running in South Carolina. Just because they all walk onto the stage does not mean things are a clean slate.
Remember Trump is a counter-puncher. They were being jerks first by lying and misquoting him during debates. So he stood his ground and defended himself. I like people who fight for truth even if some may think it comes off as a jerk.
It’s not just the rudeness by the candidates themselves, though I think Trump still wins there. It is the rudeness here, and how so many Trump supporters are flat out nasty to anyone who doesn’t support their guy. It is counter-productive as hell, and I’m amazed more of you can’t see that.
Cruz will take Texas. Lots of delegates. Super Tuesday will reveal a lot.
At this point thats the most likely scenario. It doesn’t eliminate the ability of Cruz upsets in a bunch of states, or a Rubio one in a couple/few. But the upsets would actually have to happen at a statistically improbable (given the polls) level for Trump to not win a clear majority of delegates.
That having been said, a brokered convention without a majority of delegates pledged to one candidate is absolutely a legitimate mechanism for denying the plurality winner the nomination by seeking a coalition/consensus between the majority of delegates pledged to other candidates.
Long way to go before then.
Cruz will have a massive amount of delegates. He will take Texas.
Cruz is not going to win any other primaries and he will be likely hard pressed to take even TX. After SC and NV he will become a footnote.
The republican voters are starting to coalesce around Donald Trump. They see him as the best chance to win the general election and be a change agent in the Whitehouse.
Short of asking people, I don't think there is a way to know what they see, if anything.
I suspect others will come along and level a similar criticism (rudeness) running against Trump and those who support his candidacy, and perhaps also express amazement that more people don't see that side of the battle.
At bottom, this is an internet forum, and some amount of juvenile sport is an inevitable part of this sort of environment. That's not to excuse the conduct, merely to observe that it exists, and naturally the volume increases when there is an issue that divides the population of people posting.
“It is the rudeness here, and how so many Trump supporters are flat out nasty to anyone who doesn’t support their guy.”
If you want to be disabused of that notion:
I invite you to peruse my forum page and see who is more rude, Cruz-bots or Trump supporters.
A number of Cruz-bots, you can notice, will state that anyone who supports Trump is a fool.
It applies to both sides, so saying “well, he does it to!” really doesn’t address the problem
“Cruz is not going to win any other primaries and he will be likely hard pressed to take even TX.”
You contradicted yourself there. Texas is the biggest red state. Whoever wins that gets a big bump.
“The republican voters are starting to coalesce around Donald Trump.”
Until he started talking about the many wonderful things Planned Parenthood does for women and how he can get along with Pelosi and Reid. Conservatives are rightly nervous about Trump’s late joining of the conservative movement.
Those who prefer Trump still need to insist that he pledge to govern conservatively, otherwise you may find yourselves more disappointed than the Tea Party members who supported Rubio before he back stabbed them.
If Trump wins AND picks a conservative VP, I will vote for him. Until then I will not be “coalescing”.
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.