Does the RNC Have a Legal Obligation to Nominate a Winning Fall Candidate?

[Avatar4321]

The rnc is not legally obligated to nominate anyone let alone a winner. If it did we could sue them for McCain

 

[Silhouette]

Democrats More Excited Than GOP About A Clinton-Trump Race

Democrats More Excited Than GOP About A Clinton-Trump Race - Rasmussen Reports™

I wonder if any of them actually did what they were talking about in the OP here and voted Trump with no intentions of voting for him in the Fall?

 

[Silhouette]

The rnc is not legally obligated to nominate anyone let alone a winner. If it did we could sue them for McCain

How about having to vote in a nominee they know ahead of time, for a fact, will lose? One that say, offended outright millions of women and Hispanic voters? Would they still be required to nominate him if they have statistics in front of them telling him he doesn't have a chance against Hillary therefore?

 

[Syriusly]

The rnc is not legally obligated to nominate anyone let alone a winner. If it did we could sue them for McCain

How about having to vote in a nominee they know ahead of time, for a fact, will lose? One that say, offended outright millions of women and Hispanic voters? Would they still be required to nominate him if they have statistics in front of them telling him he doesn't have a chance against Hillary therefore?

The GOP can do whatever they want- can nominate whoever they want..

They have no legal obligation to do anything.

 

[Avatar4321]

The rnc is not legally obligated to nominate anyone let alone a winner. If it did we could sue them for McCain

How about having to vote in a nominee they know ahead of time, for a fact, will lose? One that say, offended outright millions of women and Hispanic voters? Would they still be required to nominate him if they have statistics in front of them telling him he doesn't have a chance against Hillary therefore?

No legal obligation. But then no one is suggesting that nominating Kasich is a good plan

 

[Silhouette]

The GOP can do whatever they want- can nominate whoever they want..

They have no legal obligation to do anything.

Except to win. And between the two eligible candidates, Kasich is the only one projected to do so against Hillary, by double digits.

 

[Ravi]

A political party is more like a private club than a government entity. They can do pretty much what they want to do.

That is why they can get away with having no black people.

Attempted strawman ^^ The topic is making Ravi nervous.

Are you kidding me? I'd love to see the RNC sued for promoting a losing candidate. That would make this the best campaign season EVER.

 

[Avatar4321]

The GOP can do whatever they want- can nominate whoever they want..

They have no legal obligation to do anything.

Except to win. And between the two eligible candidates, Kasich is the only one projected to do so against Hillary, by double digits.

Do you know know what a legal obligation is? How do you have a legal obligation yo win? Obligation to whom? How do you enforce such an obligation?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Kasich, yeah, would beat HRC by double digits, while Trump will lose by 15 points to her.

None of that has anything to do with the legality of how the convention is run.

 

[Syriusly]

A political party is more like a private club than a government entity. They can do pretty much what they want to do.

That is why they can get away with having no black people.

Attempted strawman ^^ The topic is making Ravi nervous.

Are you kidding me? I'd love to see the RNC sued for promoting a losing candidate. That would make this the best campaign season EVER.

LOL......absolutely!

 

[Syriusly]

The GOP can do whatever they want- can nominate whoever they want..

They have no legal obligation to do anything.

Except to win. And between the two eligible candidates, Kasich is the only one projected to do so against Hillary, by double digits.

The GOP has no obligation to act rationally.

 

[miketx]

No, they're not. Considering that millions of those millions had no intentions of voting for Trump in the Fall, the numbers are false and he will lose to Hillary. That was the plan all along. Consult the OP for details..

Now here you have the classic libtard smoke blowing shill. You have no idea, NONE, what those people are going to do, and yet you comment like they they have all confided in you! You are guilty and I mean guilty of trying to sway the opinion of people voting for Trump because you think, like the media puppeteers conditioned you to, that we are all knuckle dragging retards. We are not. You sir, or what ever you are, are disgusting and the stupid is going to be on the little libtards faces come soon.

 

[Silhouette]

Idiot ^^ hasn't read many of my threads. Fill him in Syriusly on how chummy you and I are..

Kasich, yeah, would beat HRC by double digits, while Trump will lose by 15 points to her.

None of that has anything to do with the legality of how the convention is run.

It might...

 

[JakeStarkey]

In the realm of possibility, sure.

In the realm of probability, not at all.

 

[Silhouette]

In the realm of possibility, sure.

In the realm of probability, not at all.

Yeah, it's not likely that the RNC will want to pick a man who will win this Fall as opposed to a man projected to lose by double digits. After all, Trump merely offended women and Hispanics. It's not like he offended the ENTIRE electorate. Just most of it..

 

[JakeStarkey]

In the realm of possibility, sure.

In the realm of probability, not at all.

Yeah, it's not likely that the RNC will want to pick a man who will win this Fall as opposed to a man projected to lose by double digits. After all, Trump merely offended women and Hispanics. It's not like he offended the ENTIRE electorate. Just most of it..

Your thread is about if the convention is legally obligated to support Trump, not if it is the wise thing to do. I wanted Kasich, and I am not going to have him as my candidate.

 

[Anathema]

Which one would you nominate if you wanted to win in the Fall?

That depends..... is this a party willing to sacrifice whatever small amount of morals, decency and values it may have left for the hope of a political victory OR is it a party that listens to its members and is interested in Right and Wrong over winning an election.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Which one would you nominate if you wanted to win in the Fall?

That depends..... is this a party willing to sacrifice whatever small amount of morals, decency and values it may have left for the hope of a political victory OR is it a party that listens to its members and is interested in Right and Wrong over winning an election.

The far hard right has no or little morals, decency, or values, period. We will take the defeat in order to expel the trash.

 

[Silhouette]

Your thread is about if the convention is legally obligated to support Trump, not if it is the wise thing to do. I wanted Kasich, and I am not going to have him as my candidate.

Correct. Then what exactly is the RNC leadership's function when it comes to insuring a win for their party in the Fall?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your thread is about if the convention is legally obligated to support Trump, not if it is the wise thing to do. I wanted Kasich, and I am not going to have him as my candidate.

Correct. Then what exactly is the RNC leadership's function when it comes to insuring a win for their party in the Fall?

Their function does not include a legal obligation to nominate a winning candidate.