Now, how is FOX going to spin this??? (chuckle)
33% don't think We the People should have a voice.
62% is a big number.
Does the GOP really want to anger 62% of their voters?
If so, the GOP will get slaughtered from top to bottom in the coming election.
Isn’t it amazing how people always want to change the rules while the process is already in play? And usually in a majoritarian way? This reminds me of the people who want to elect POTUS by popular vote.
Thanks to the Founding Fathers we’re not a democracy.
Second, the party ought to charge $100 to vote in the primary. Then use the money to help win the general election :)
Third, since you've limited the primary to repubs only, and charged them $100 to vote..... then count their votes. If you don't want to get invested in the thing... then stay home and let someone who does pick the nominee. :)
Cruzlims don’t care what Peasant voters want.
What the heck does this mean, exactly? Of course the one with the "most votes" should be the nominee. Within the confines of the majority, in Cleveland, the one with the "most votes". If Trump gets this majority, aka, the most votes, So-be-it... he has my vote, and I hope he has yours. But, Trump may not be the first to get over 1236.
Or whoever was prophesized by his daddy
62% of Republicans would have preferred Al Gore as President?
If they decide to have a contested convention, when the voters have clearly showing who they prefer by a huge margin, its the end of the Republican party as any sort of power for a generation or more.
The republican brand is dying, other than the re-election of a wartime president they have not won the popular vote for president in 28 years... and even then they only won by less than 2.5%!
They finally have a candidate that is clearly attracting new voters and growing the republican party and they are just bound and determined to fight it.
The Republican Party has been on a slow death spiral for nearly 3 decades, if they turn their back on Trump should he go into the convention with millions more votes and just shy of the 1237, and they wind up giving the nomination to someone else, yes they can do that, but if they do do that... the Republican party will be decimated up and down the ballot in the fall and have zero chance at any major wins for at least 2 decades.
Time will tell.
Poor Tead. He can’t win anything legitimately.
An extreme unrealistically exaggerated case to illustrate: suppose Bernie Sanders ran as a Republican and managed to make it to our convention with 100 delegates. The vast majority of Republican voters despise Bernie, but they split their vote among other candidates such that none of the others got more than 99 delegates.
Of course Bernie does not have a majority but he has a plurality, and its too late to for a run off election from the people. So what to do? That is why we have the delegates who are supposedly loyal to the candidate that sent them there sort it out by more rounds of voting and compromising til somebody who is the closest to reflecting the majority of Republican voters preference emerges.
This is a fine system PROVIDED the delegates were not switched out for one's loyal to Bernie because the Democrats had their operatives inside the Republican party system and engineered what is euphemistically being called a "great ground game" to fill delegate slots with delegates hostile to the candidate who won them. Add this unlikely scenario to our extremely unlikely illustration, and Bernie could by a "great ground game" win by getting no delegates at all. Imagine after all our voting, the delegates sent to our convention are Berine supporters, and no candidate got a majority. Obviously then it is critical that the candidates get to pick their own delegates among people loyal to them, otherwise the people are not properly represented in the contested part of the process.
In summary going to additional unbound votes by the delegates if there is no majority is a fair system, but ONLY provided the delegate selection is up to the candidates who won the slots. Sadly in the current round, this basic pillar of fairness in the process has been intentionally violated (and shockingly praised by some). Hopefully in not too many places.
In the current case, its clear Trump should win, but not automatically. The rules ought be followed. And in the next election cycle, the officials who did the underhanded bull crap of switching delegates out should be relieved of their duties.
BOOM!
So stupid. ....Like saying that after a 9-inning baseball game the team with the most hits should win rather than the team with the most runs.
“the nominee instead should be the candidate whom convention delegates think would be the party’s best standard-bearer.”.....
because these “delegates” are supposedly sooooooo much smarter that the voters? I’m buying that one, remembering how delegates are selected.
That sounds about right for republican support for Cruz at this time - he can't get his own base to keep him afloat so he resorts to the GOPE (that he claims to want to undo) in order to shove it up the People's collective arse...
It doesn’t work that way in the general election, but hey what did those founding father’s know anyhow? They are just losers. /sarc