This is getting annoying.
No. He (or she) just can’t be named “DOnald Trump”.
Yes. These clowns grow wearisome.
Is it too much to ask in a news article like this that they provided the exact full text of the rule? Sometimes I suspect the media want to start arguments among readers rather than provide enough information for one to settle the argument.
Where’s that “Not this @($%! again” guy?
The people that make these rules couldn’t win a debate with my parakeet, and all it says is “Pretty boy.”
Here it comes.
Trying to redefine what “it” means.
“demonstrate support of the majority of eight states “
No matter how you slice and dice that statement, Kasich, Rubio, Bush, etc...none of them except Trump and Cruz can in any way come close to that threshold.
Of course not, you don’t need to win anything. The GOPe leaders can just pull anyone out from a drawer and make him the nominee. Elections are for entertainment purposes only.
I don’t think this changes anything really.
The disciples of deception and decline in D.C. have achieved the pinnacle of arrogance. Their masks have been blown off their deceitful faces.
You have to demonstrate support of the majority of eight states
as opposed to you have to win eight states,” Evans said.
-
Do what?
Had a call from a GOP money beggar just now... (get them constantly) so this time I just said “We’re supporting Trump”. He hung up instantly without saying a word.
I’ve made this point a couple of times. The rule doesn’t say anything about how many delegates a candidate has won in each state - it is whether a majority of delegates from eight different states are willing to sign a statement of support for the candidate. Theoretically, if enough Trump delegate spots were filled bu Cruz or Kasich supporters in states where Trump won a majority of the delegates, and those delegates refused to sign the statement of support, Trump could wind up not having enough states to be nominated. Now, I don’t see that happening - but the way the rule is written, it would be possible.
“All animals are equal . But the pigs are more equal.”
New GOP Math
8 - 4 = 8
I guess they’re changing it so Jeb can win...
OK, so we stretch the definition of “win a majority” to “win a plurality”. No one got 50% outright, but someone got 40%, more than the others, so that’s a “state support” and counts.
How many States has Kasich won even by this definition? One - Ohio.
The rule change is to allow the Establishment to put a person into play who has not won eight States... or many any states. This might not be the last rule change...
They might as well make a ‘rule’ that says if 10 of them jump up and down while saying ‘boogly wooglly’ that they can nullify every Republican voter in the country.
Why go half way? We’re NOT fooled.
Behild he bureaucratic mentality and loopholes they manufactured. Only them can win through technicalities, booting out Rand for being too little and Trump too big. Ridiculously arcane and bizantine
I’m for Trump. And I’ve posted several times here that rule 40 does not say you have to get your 8 state majorities by primary or caucus wins. People need to download and read the rule.
Look, if there is no winner after round one, the chair can reopen nominations. THEN all you have to do is turn in a paper wherein you are nominated by 8 state’s majority delegates. It doesn’t sat you have to come into the convention with 8 majorities. The rule was designed to keep out Ron Paul ON ROUND ONE. There was never going to be a round two, so the rule was never worded to keep out round 2, 3, etc. nominations. They just didn’t want the embarrassment of Paul being nominated, because then there would be a speech, etc.
Most people, including the majority of people on TV who purport to be experts, haven t even read the rule. I have no idea what rules will say by the time the convention is underway, but I can tell you now that rule 40 does not bar Kasich, or even a “parachute” candidate from being put into play.