Posted on 08/07/2015 7:10:35 AM PDT by Will88
Much is being made of Trump's refusal last night to pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee if it is not him. But it seems to me that he did not provide the most valid reasons for his refusal, at least not the details.
Many news stories and past discussion threads here concerned an attempt a couple of weeks by "Big Donors'" to concoct a scheme to force Trump out of the first debate. Then this week, other stories about how more "Big Donor" were demanding that Trump be "taken out" in the first debate.
Trump probably won that exchange with Chris Wallace, but he could have won it much bigger.
This is a stupid issue. Most states already have “Sore Loser” laws or regulations in place that prevent a loser in the primary from being an independent in the general.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/opinion/perverse-primaries.html
Less well known is this: 44 states have “sore loser” laws of one form or another. These laws effectively block a candidate who fails to win a party primary from appearing on the general election ballot, as either an independent or as the nominee of another party.
There sure are a lot of people talking about it. If someone dropped out before any primaries took place, they could probably be on most ballots. Trump will have decided by late this year whether he was treated fairly.
Trump had the opportunity to be specific. He could have said:
“If Bush, Paul, Christie or Kasich are the GOP candidate, I will run as a third party candidate”
It would have been a bingo. But that isn’t what he did. He shrugged his shoulders and gave some bs statement about keeping options open.
It came across as self-serving.
DITTO! Exactly my take on the candidates. The debate didn’t change anything for me, but maybe a few folks who had not seen the candidates before got something out of it, even though Fox did a LOUSY job.
Lol, now that would have brought the house down. Don't know how the three Foxes would have reacted.
It doesn’t matter what he personally decides.
He (and everyone else) is already blocked from running GOP primary and Independent General election.
But don’t let the facts stop the press from using a non-issue to bash a conservative or two.
The GOPe want Trump out because they don’t want to have to admit the illegal aliens should be deported and others prevented from coming here..
they want to continue to push AMNESTY..they want to be th popular kids in the playground...they want to be like the Democrats, the cool kids...
they want Rubio or Bush who was their fair hair darling of the debate..
He should have thrown that ? right back at them! “How many of you nine candidates up here will back me when I’m the nominee?” lol
I’ll bet you backs Cruz.
Not unless he gets the election laws/regulations changed in a lot of states.
Conservatives need to understand this is a non-issue being used to beat up GOP candidates by the press.
He shouldn't, but he could have given irrefutable evidence that he had so far not been treated fairly, and he could have slammed those "Big Donors" whose money he does not need.
He has not yet run in a primary. Are you the only person in the US who knows what the laws are? Why is the question even being asked if he would run third party if he is absolutely prohibited from running?
He's been asked about third party numerous times since he announced.
I's do's backs Cruz.
:)
Well. That leaves 6 states he can steal. Thus GOPe losing those electoral votes.
Who is going to win the general election for presidency with ONLY the electoral votes from 6 lessor important states?
No, I gave you one link, how many do you want?
Why is the question even being asked if he would run third party if he is absolutely prohibited from running?
Because he is leading and could take the election away from Hillary if he isn't bashed down. The vast majority of the population doesn't question what is the leading topics in the main stream media.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/24/florida-eyes-sore-loser-election-law/?page=all
http://www.newser.com/story/181253/sore-loser-laws-are-ruining-elections.html
“Sore loser” laws prevent a candidate who loses in a primary election from running in the general election as a candidate of another party. In 2012, this mechanism prevented Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst from considering a run for U.S. Senate as an independent after he lost to Ted Cruz in the Republican primary election.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/the-canvass-march-2014.aspx
That little article is far from thorough. I don't know the law in all the states and territories and you don't either.
The point you just pass right over is that no primaries have been held yet. And people who cover politics for a living are constantly asking Trump if he would drop out and run third party. So, that possibility is there.
I'm sure Trump has several months to decide whether to stay in the Republican race or drop out and start qualifying for the state ballots as an independent.
You're just muddling this discussion and have no specific facts.
“Pledges” are gimmicks. I also admire people that can say “ya know, I was wrong. I’ve changed my mind”. Way too often people admire “sticking by their guns” when sticking by ones guns only confirms they are a fool,
I don’t want Don Quixote for President.
That Trump wouldn’t agree to not run as a 3rd party candidate is a good thing?
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.