Posted on 04/11/2016 9:18:12 AM PDT by firebrand
All the rules could get changed before the convention starts, making everything you’ve just read irrelevant.
What?
The rules for each convention are ultimately decided at the convention itself. In 2012, for example, a rule was passed stating that a candidate could only have their name placed in nomination if they had won a majority of the delegates in eight or more states. At the time, this was widely seen as an effort to thwart possible machinations from supporters of then-Rep. Ron Paul (Texas). But the rule — Rule 40 — is a leading contender to be changed, since it would seem to limit the number of alternatives to Trump who could be put forward. Right now, no one else would qualify, although Cruz might well get across the threshold by the time the primaries end.
But all of the rules could be changed?
[The] rules could be changed to enable delegates to immediately unbind themselves. This isn’t so outlandish as it sounds — on the other side of the partisan divide, supporters of then-Sen. Edward Kennedy tried this maneuver in 1980, aiming to oust sitting President Jimmy Carter as the Democratic nominee. The Kennedy effort failed, however, and any similar effort would be hugely controversial among Republicans this year. Trump has already predicted there could be riots if he fails to win the nomination.
There is only one flaw in the article, Cruz met the threshold after winning in CO. Giving him the eigth victory, Co, WI, ND, UT, TX, KA, ID, WY.
I frankly at this point DON’T give a DAMN about their down ticket, EVERYONE of these bastards deserve to lose their seats!!! Do you remember the DEMS fight over Obamacare, has our side EVER fought like this for ANYTHING on our side......NOT!!!! They couldn’t even muster up enough of a fight to defund PP!!! Trump is NOT good enough because THEY could lose their seats I hope EVERYONE of these BASTARDS loses their seats regardless!!!
This is from The Hill. I didn’t write it. I posted it again—that’s why I called it a semi-vanity. I wanted to point out what I thought was the most pertinent section of a rather long article from last night, posted by 2nd Div.
But that wasn’t the part of the Hill post I thought was important and being ignored.
Good points for sure. The ending of this “story” is totally unknown. I don’t think I’ve seen a primary or general so unknown.
The eight-state rule can be changed too. But my point was the first-vote rule can be changed.
I was listening to Rush today...even he defended Cruz as to the way they were doing it. I got so p.o.’d I turned him off. Is everyone going insane? I am 78 years old; participated in politics since before Kennedy and have never seen anything like this. I can’t stand Cruz and what he has done to the election process. I know he’s just using the loopholes to his advantage, but it’s a rotten way to do business.
If Levin and others were bought, Rush may have been also. He changed very suddenly about a month ago.
Whoever said we would sell the enemy the arms with which they could destroy us was partly right, but what we are seeing now is our very wealth destroying us. There are people with enough money to corrupt our whole electoral process. I know I sound like a Democrat but believe me I am not. We have too much money for our own good. When there’s nothing left to buy in the marketplace, you buy power. That’s corruption. Without morals, without love of country, it’s going to happen.
sorry. Misunderstood “semi-vanity.”
So, I’ll answer my questions: (A) neither Republicans nor Democrats have changed the rules so dramatically. If Trump hits the number (perhaps after some deal making), he’ll be the nominee. If he is at the number (after any deal making), it would be wrong to deny him the nomination.
(B) Craziest number of ballots with simple majority rule: 1880 (36); otherwise 1848 and 1860 (3), 1884 (4), 1940 (6), 1876 (7), 1888 (8) and 1920 (9). So, a long time ago, multiple ballots weren’t rare. Even back then, in all but one case, the nominee was chose after a few ballots.
They haven’t changed them drastically—just enough to change the candidate. And they haven’t YET changed the rules about delegates being bound on the first vote. Did you get my point?
If they do this, there will be so much pandemonium at the convention and in the country at large, that they may be able to squeeze any kind of consensus vote through just to stop the chaos.
I know what your saying, I think that we should not change to delegates voting conscience on the first ballot. I think rules should be changed as infrequently as possible.
Did I get “your” point? I thought you were extracting something from somebody else.
You apparently want the rule changed from majority to plurality. To advocate this change in our Republican rules, you cite a Democratic Party convention of 1924. I realize that Trump used to be a Democrat, but I didn’t think he went that far back. We Republicans have always had a majority rule and we have had multiple ballots in the past to achieve a majority, just not recently.
Since you say “They [the Republicans gathered in convention] haven’t changed them [the rules] drastically,” I gather you think changing the rules from majority to plurality isn’t “drastic.” That wouldn’t be Trump “stealing” the nomination. You think playing by the (current) rules is “stealing.”
To have come this far are great accomplishments already for both Trump and Cruz. They are in the Final Four in a tournament bigger than the NCAAs.
My point is . . . oh I give up.
DugwayDuke has an interesting posting history. Anyone can check it out.
IMHO he is purposely trying to discourage people, the idea that Hitlery would win (if she manages to not get indicted between now and November) against Trump is laughable.
Maybe, DD, you’re just a member who doesn’t post much, but you have interesting gaps.
And firebrand, I think Cruz knows he can’t win, and the GOPe knows he can’t win, and his sole purpose is as a spoiler so Trump doesn’t win. I’m sure Cruz has been promised “stuff”. I suppose Cruz might somehow not realized he’s being used as a tool against Trump and the GOPe doesn’t want him to win, because Cruz is obviously a psychopath with delusions. Any person in the GOPe even if very ill-intentioned, has to know that Cruz can’t possibly win the convention by any sane method, and very likely not even against Hitlery or Burnie.
Anyway, if by some wretched twist of fate Cruz managed to get the nomination, the Dems would trot out all the dirt they have on him, of every kind, and take him down before November.
You are so right. If Trump gets the magic numbers and they steal it from him, I won't vote at all. Why waste my time? At that point it all just needs to BURN TO THE GROUND.
I don’t think it’s JUST to dump Trump, although everyone seems to have their rifle trained on the frontrunner. It’s to get the anointed New World Order person in there, by hook or by crook.
This is why I am still fighting. They will probably win in the end, but we are supposed to keep fighting for our freedom until the end.
Cruz is definitely a globalist, with his own little flavor. I refuse to be a defeatist. We can’t see the future, and I refuse to give up. Not that I myself can really do anything, other than vote, have my say, and get mad....
I don’t think the polls showing Sanders or Clinton winning are correct. As I’ve posted before, the general election is too far away for most people to know who they want. I know we have to do these polls but I don’t trust them.
I’d love to see a debate between Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders. Maybe they could do this even if neither of them is running. It would help to sharpen everyone’s wits about Bernie and could help a more conservative candidate no matter who it is. There’s so much ground to cover before November—everyone’s been wrapped up in the insult circus and the gossip and we haven’t begun to crack the deeper issues.
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.