[FreeReign]

What would you have your party do? A run off election, that the states certainly wouldn't want to pay for? Give the nomination to the person with a plurality of the vote?

I already did when I told you that Trump is beating Ted no matter how you try and slice it. As to what would my party do? They would obviously try and steal it from trump as they are doing now. Playing what if doesn’t change reality.

I'm asking you outright what rules would you want in a situation were a candidate gets a plurality of the vote in the primary.

That's the situation that we have now. Trump is leading with a 38% plurality of the vote.

Would you prefer a delegate system where the delegates vote until a candidate reaches a majority, or would prefer no delegates, where the candidate with the plurality simply wins?

[chris37]

I would prefer that the person who won the most delegates by people voting be awarded the nomination.

[PapaBear3625]

Would you prefer a delegate system where the delegates vote until a candidate reaches a majority, or would prefer no delegates, where the candidate with the plurality simply wins?

The delegates currently do not represent the voters. In most states, the delegates represent only themselves, and the party bosses who appointed them.

My preference would be for the candidates to appoint the delegates which they have "won". On the first few ballots, the delegate is bound to vote as the candidate requests, either for the candidate, or to whoever a candidate decides to align with. After some number of ballots, but at least the first 10, the delegates would be freed.