Replies

By the rules...

There has been no delegate vote.

I will pick Carly as I would have loved to see her debate Hillary.

If there is no majority, at the convention, then some of the delegates will be released. Each of the states have differing rules about releasing the delegates if there is no majority, some after first, some after later balloting. If no one is liked well enough to get a majority per the convention delegates, eventually all with be released to whoever they like.

The rule 40 that establishes the nominee must a winner in at least 8 states (I believe that is just front runner, not majority) is not set for this convention. Each convention has it’s own rules committee and decide whatever rules suits the current candidates, not the past ones. The delegates have not convened the rules committee. The rules committee will present the potential rules to the general delegation for approval and when they pass the rules, they can do the rest of the convention, not before. Cruz and Trump may favor rule 40, but the delegates may not choose to. It still has to be voted on.

Back to Carly. If there is no front runner and the rules committee proposes and the body passes it, a rule that for example a person with any delegates is eligible she could be a final choice. But it is very unlikely, but the mathematical certainty only happens after the rules are set at the convention and passed by the body. Not one minute before.

More likely however, is neither of the two front runners get a real majority on first ballot, I believe there are 300+ delegates dedicated to neither Cruz nor Trump. The more non Trump delegates the more likely it is to have a contested next ballot.

The rules committee will probably put up a rule that controls who will be allowed to be in the running on the second ballot as both Trump and Cruz would really like to be the only two in the running and together they have more than the rest on the realm of 2000 Trump and Cruz to about 400 other delegates. Both will control the rules the delegates will agree to. Trump decided for whatever reason to not think about hiring the best and the brightest for this part of the nomination and now is trying to play catch up. A HORRID MISTAKE AND THERE IS NO REASON FOR NOT PLANNING THIS CONTINGENCY!!! Arrogance is not a reason as EVERY presidential candidate is arrogant. Cruz was active in preparation for this phase as any competent campaign staff should be.

Every ballot is now the mathematical certainty. Not before, and each eligible candidate can never be sure until a vote has been certified with a majority winner.

Of course, assuming that Trump knew all about the above and ignored it, the next question is why. I would say trust a person’s history over their words. Look at his past and his dedication to the principles he talks about now. Look at who he gave to politically and for what purpose. And most of all, look at what his actions are doing. Me, I believe that he has not proven the ability to do simple chess, or he is playing people for fools. He sells people on visiting casinos. Unrealized dreams with vacant promises of gold and the easy way. That is not the path his casinos have left in the past, people lose money to casinos. His real estate deals, done with the buying of politicians like Hillary et. al. That’s not an even playing field. The demonisation of everyone that dares to criticise even to the point of threatening a lawsuit of an opponent playing his televised words from the past, that don’t match his current words...that is a huge issue. If he really did not want to be president and throw the election to Hillary this is a great way to do it. A little bad acting, a lot of hope in his abilities to do the right thing...like in his casinos...

Ted Cruz should have heeded the warning about wrestling with pigs in the mud. But ask yourself this question, how many women has Trump grossly insulted directly? If he were talking about your daughter: Would you accept someone blaming her actions on her period? Telling a pretty apprentice she would look good on her knees? Complaining about Carly’s face? Etc. One is a slip maybe. Two is a question mark. Three is concern and four means he cannot help his nature. He’s past four.

Ronald Reagan would not go into the oval office without a jacket on, out of respect for the office. Where do I go from here?

Sorry Jim for the long post, but it is too important.

DK has a lot of good stuff to consider in his post but if I may allow me to answer your question more simply. You asked:

“Ok, you’re saying Kasich is not mathematically eliminated? Or Rubio? Carson? Bush? Paul? Fiorina? Huckabee?”

There are two ways one can speak of “mathematical elimination” here.

1. One is “mathematically eliminated” when one reaches a point where it is impossible for oneself to reach 1237 bound delegates BEFORE the convention. All those you mention fall into this category, and presumably Cruz will as well after the 19th (or maybe the 26th).

2. One is “mathematically eliminated” when, AT the Comvention, one does not reach 1237 (or more) votes from the delegates there at either the first, second, third etc ballots.

What DK is describing is #2, basically. And that’s really how one is nominated, not by a plurality of delegates before the convention but a majority of delegate votes at the convention. It’s just been in recent years there’s been a candidate who’s gone into the convention already with a majority of delegates bound to vote for him. But this isn’t required to gain the nomination what’s actually required is that a candidate actually does get a majority of votes AT the convention.

So really #1 is a red herring. That’s not how this race should be viewed.

This entire issue is muddied by the misconception that “whoever gets the most votes wins”. No it’s “whoever gets the majority of delegate votes at the convention” wins. If Trump simply secures more than 1237 delegates to vote for him at the convention (as every other candidate has done before the convention they secured a majority of the delegates beforehand) this whole issue goes away.

If no one has a majority of bound delegates before the convention then a second vote is required.

That’s just the way it is. At least for now. If this should change then the delegates seated on the rules committee should be influenced to change it. Otherwise we are really just advocating an anarchistic way of nominating if we are just going to ignore rules (instead of trying to change them) when they don’t suit us.