So if Trump gets the most votes.......

[Pogo]

I read a few days ago that Romney has been waiting in the wings secretly, and plans to run himself. Dems and GOP do NOT want Trump in there. Period.
But...if voters want Trump..don't they get a say? I guess not. And lo and behold...here comes the news that Romney is going to give a speech. Looks like what I read was correct some days ago.

And...if Romney does get in the race....Hillary wins.

Well, I wish him lots of luck with that. America didn't want him when he went through the whole primary process; can't imagine what makes him think he's suddenly become a political rock star.

Actually he wouldn't need to be a political rock star, or even attractive. All he'd need to be is an "anybody but" alternative.

It's like that old joke punchline: "I don't need to outrun that bear. All I need is to outrun you".

We already have people who are "anybody but Trump". And again, Mitt wasn't that popular before. He has no reason to think he has the ability NOW to sweep in and dominate an election.

If the GOPe didn't hate Cruz even more than Trump, we wouldn't be having any of these problems. Dumbasses.

Yes we do but from what I've discerned, none of them are very palatable. The thinking must be that Mitt would be more palatable (less fringe-y) and thus more electable, than the present alternatives.

Palatable to whom? The voters, or the establishment? Because the one thing true conservatives like me have in common with Trumpettes is that the establishment can go diddle itself, and be damned to them.

To the voters. I'm reading polls and commentaries and there's a lot of negative baggage as far as palatability. The one guy that doesn't have that kind of negative baggage is Kasich, and look where he is. That's because sensational hair-on-fire sells and rationality does not, which says much about our values as a people.

One wag here actually suggested Mitt Romney's a loser because he "didn't get a CNN or Fox show", that's the degree to which the concept of "political discourse" has deteriorated -- whether or not you get a frickin' TV show.

I don't have a horse in the race though, just analyzing what the thought process might be.

 

[Gracie]

Kasich is the only sane one. But...nobody is really listening to him or seeing him. All they see is Clinton and Trump and Cruz and Rubio.

Kasich is the answer. But everyone is too blind to see.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is just....wrong. If the PEOPLE are to "vote" in who they want as POTUS...how is it a group of other people can say "no, not him/her"? What happened to We The People?

If that happens..whether it is GOP or DEM or whomever....I think there will be another civil war. WE choose. Or we are supposed to, aren't we?

why is that wrong? if he can't get the delegates, that's that.

more wrong than the president losing the popular vote and being appointed by the court?

My question was...IF he gets the delegates...can they (his party) still choose someone else?

So....if Trump wins the primaries, he can still be replaced as winner then by his party, and given to someone else. Right?
Now I am getting all confused.

Sorry. I was typing an explanation of the process for you while I was at work, and then I got stuck on a long call that lasted until time to leave, so I had to abandon it. Lemme try again now that I'm home.

Okay. Forgive me if I cover something you already know, but I don't want to confuse anyone by assuming knowledge not actually possessed.

The Republican Party apportions delegates in a rather complicated fashion. They give 10 "at-large delegates" to each state, and then three delegates to each Congressional district. Places like DC and Puerto Rico get a set number of delegates. With me so far?

On top of this, a state can get "bonus delegates" for having supported the GOP candidate in the previous election, for having a Republican governor, Republican Senators, legislature majorities, and like that. So a deeply red state has more party "oomph" than a blue state does. Also three party leaders from each state serve as delegates.

Now, the states themselves decide if they want to have a winner-take-all contest, or if they want to award delegates according to percentages, who won which districts, whatever. The GOP, however, requires that if a state wants to have a winner-take-all primary, they can't do it before March 15.

Okay, then. A candidate must win 50% +1 delegates to secure the nomination. In this case, that means 1237 delegates out of 2,472. Now, here's the thing. Trump is not winning a majority of votes and/or delegates anywhere. He's winning a plurality. Even if he gets every single delegate available to a candidate winning the state by a plurality, he would still need to win over about 37% of the remaining delegates, and he's only getting about 30% of the votes.

Now, more directly toward where your questions are going, not every delegate is "bound" to vote for the candidate they pledged to prior to the convention. I believe it depends on the state and the type of delegate in question, but like I said, the whole thing's kinda arcane. So it is possible for at least some of the delegates themselves to stage a rebellion against the Trump rebellion, although GOP delegates tend to be reluctant to go maverick that way, because Republican voters are not especially good-natured about that sort of thing.

In answer to your most basic question, I don't believe the party leadership can simply declare, "Screw you, we're appointing this guy as the candidate." They do have to let the delegates vote for the candidate. It's the delegates themselves who have the ability, in potentia, to flip the bird to the voters.

The other way the party can deny Trump the nomination within its own rules is a brokered convention, if he doesn't win the required number of delegates, and no one else does either. A convention is considered "brokered" if, in the initial delegate vote, no candidate receives the 50% +1 that is required. Brokered basically just means that all the delegates who were previously "bound" to one candidate or another are now free to vote as they please. Then they just keep taking votes until someone gets the required number of delegates. In between votes, supporters of each candidate can try to convince delegates to join them. Basically, it's like a giant caucus of delegates.

Oh, and since I believe you asked this in a separate posts, candidates who drop out do not simply "give" their delegates to whomever they personally choose. What happens to those delegates depends on which state they're from. Each state has different rules on the subject. Some states require the delegates to vote for the candidate they're "bound" to, even if he/she has dropped out, at least on the first ballot. Others essentially declare them "free range" delegates. This is a big part of the reason that exiting candidates typically endorse someone else: in order to nudge their delegates in that direction.

I hope this helps answer the questions you've posed, and also any others that might have come up.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Rubio, I think, is out of it. But...he is behind the scenes doing something slimey. I liked him once. Not so much now. And cruz is just...well...cruz. And I really don't want trump in there either to be honest, but....it beats Hillary. However, Trump is going to fuck with shit I don't want him fucking with...so now I am back to Hillary.
This sucks.

Well, ask yourself this: what matters most to you? Is it this party or that party winning? Is it this candidate or that candidate losing? Is it a specific policy? A specific issue? Character?

Determine your biggest priority vis a vis the Presidency, and then choose accordingly.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What does it say about a candidate who's hated by his own supposed party?

Depends on who the candidate is and why the party hates him.

Gotta remember the old saying, "The best measure of a man is the quality of his enemies."

 

[Tom Horn]

What does it say about a candidate who's hated by his own supposed party?

Depends on who the candidate is and why the party hates him.

Gotta remember the old saying, "The best measure of a man is the quality of his enemies."

True but Trump is hated by the Senate Majority Leader and most of the House leadership. McConnell said they'd "drop his proposals like a hot rock". Nothing like this has happened in my lifetime and I go back to the 1956 "I like Ike" days. I was a Peroista in '92 and still think if Ross had been elected we'd be so much better off. But the GOP hosed him and he started losing his temper. Could be Trump blows his stack tonight and stomps off the stage to go rogue.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What does it say about a candidate who's hated by his own supposed party?

Depends on who the candidate is and why the party hates him.

Gotta remember the old saying, "The best measure of a man is the quality of his enemies."

True but Trump is hated by the Senate Majority Leader and most of the House leadership. McConnell said they'd "drop his proposals like a hot rock". Nothing like this has happened in my lifetime and I go back to the 1956 "I like Ike" days. I was a Peroista in '92 and still think if Ross had been elected we'd be so much better off. But the GOP hosed him and he started losing his temper. Could be Trump blows his stack tonight and stomps off the stage to go rogue.

The main difference between Perot and Trump is that Perot's followers were at least marginally sane, and it was actually possible for him to turn them against him. Trump's followers are wild-eyed, frothing cult members who would simply toddle off behind him no matter what he did. If he raped puppies on national television, those dipshits would start arguing about how those puppies "were asking for it", or "seduced him", or something equally asinine.

 

[eagle1462010]

This is the weirdest election I've seen in my life time...........I've seen many..............The establishment ignoring the people have created this...............

it is the weirdest... but the truth is the GOP kept promising things to the far right that they knew they couldn't deliver.

and dems are angry that we elected a president twice and the right held our country hostage.

That is partisan talk................the people smacked you down and turned the States red.............they were hired to stop the Liberal Freight train.........especially Obamacare with driving the train...........choo choo...........

Tell me about Reid's graveyard.....................the dems don't have a leg to stand on here............besides that is not the intent of the OP............You are diverting.......

It's about Super delegates and whether they are right or wrong.

i'm not sure how it's "partisan" when it's my party we're talking about either way. it doesn't affect the GOP.

i don't have problem with super delegates

the reason for it is so that someone who has on shot at winning isn't the standard bearer. they haven't had to use it. it's kind of like the nuclear option for the party. but i'm not sorry it's there. i know my history and i know why it exists.

They are supposed to be the people's party regardless of which side of the fence.............The people decide.................I don't like it either side of the fence..............why............because I see it inherently wrong within our Republic..............

But where do you get that from? that they are suppose to be the "peoples" party? They've never been the "people's" party and have never claimed to be....they are Republican Party members who are giving you candidates they want to give you.... if they ever in a million years thought that they were putting Trump in their mix of candidates for him to be a winner, they would not have the problem they have now.... It's never been our choices for candidates, it's always been the Party's choices.... Dem and Repub.

Exactly.............You don't seem to care at all.............I do not like it................Period.

It's wrong and why this country is screwed...............But go along with their establishment ways........bow to them and SUBMIT...........

I wish we could BREAK BOTH PARTIES...............Tar and Feather them would be nice as well.

 

[eagle1462010]

it doesn't matter who they run as an Independent, Romney running isn't to win, but solely to split the vote so Trump can not win, making the Democratic candidate the winner, without having to vote for them...

I find that unfounded. Why would the GOP install Clinton or Sanders over a Bloomberg or Romney, if the election were passed to the House? It simply doesn't make sense.

swim, they can't win by installing ANYONE, Romney, Cruz, or Ronald Reagan's clone if Trump still runs and splits the Republican vote.

It's an impossible feat, with a split party. Trumpketeers will still vote for Mr. Trump, whether he is an independent or on the R ticket. The numbers would be against the party with this split.

They do not want Mr.Trump to win, and would prefer having Hillary there in office, so they can continue to beat her up and have someone in office that does not carry an R for republican before their name like Donald Trump, that is acting like a Democrat....

They, the Republican Senators and Congress critters, will have free reign to criticize Hillary, block judges, block her agenda, filibuster left and right and not ruin their "Republican Brand", but with Trump as President, the Republicans in office will not have that free reign to disagree with his policies that they feel are liberal...without damaging the Republican Brand....and themselves.

There have been several articles about the Republicans and how they plan to stop him from winning, even articles where Republicans say they will pull the lever for Hillary with their nose closed...and they have stated just what I said above....at all costs, they do not want Trump.... They feel it would be better to have Hillary to depose for these 4 years and a chance 4 years from now than to have Trump turning republicans in to Democrats/liberals.

so to recap, with a split party, Trump can't win and any candidate the republicans put in can't win. The RNC knows this....and knows this means Hillary would be President...but feel that with Hillary as President, they can continue their dog and pony show/do nothing antics in Congress by being able to say 'liberals/democrats are shit and conservatives/repubs are wonderful', and keep themselves in power and winning elections in the future, but with a Republican who is liberal in many ways, like Mr. Trump as President, they can't and lose their 'Conservative Brand' that they have worked so hard to get and define themselves as...

aka you do as we say or we'll screw the voters of this country and their choice via elections.....................

Pick up their toys and pitch a tantrum and say WE RULE YOU DROOL..............To hell with the establishment..............we will continue to target the establishment and mount their RINO heads on walls................................

The establishment needs to be Tarred and Feathered.

 

[Cecilie1200]

it is the weirdest... but the truth is the GOP kept promising things to the far right that they knew they couldn't deliver.

and dems are angry that we elected a president twice and the right held our country hostage.

That is partisan talk................the people smacked you down and turned the States red.............they were hired to stop the Liberal Freight train.........especially Obamacare with driving the train...........choo choo...........

Tell me about Reid's graveyard.....................the dems don't have a leg to stand on here............besides that is not the intent of the OP............You are diverting.......

It's about Super delegates and whether they are right or wrong.

i'm not sure how it's "partisan" when it's my party we're talking about either way. it doesn't affect the GOP.

i don't have problem with super delegates

the reason for it is so that someone who has on shot at winning isn't the standard bearer. they haven't had to use it. it's kind of like the nuclear option for the party. but i'm not sorry it's there. i know my history and i know why it exists.

They are supposed to be the people's party regardless of which side of the fence.............The people decide.................I don't like it either side of the fence..............why............because I see it inherently wrong within our Republic..............

But where do you get that from? that they are suppose to be the "peoples" party? They've never been the "people's" party and have never claimed to be....they are Republican Party members who are giving you candidates they want to give you.... if they ever in a million years thought that they were putting Trump in their mix of candidates for him to be a winner, they would not have the problem they have now.... It's never been our choices for candidates, it's always been the Party's choices.... Dem and Repub.

Exactly.............You don't seem to care at all.............I do not like it................Period.

It's wrong and why this country is screwed...............But go along with their establishment ways........bow to them and SUBMIT...........

I wish we could BREAK BOTH PARTIES...............Tar and Feather them would be nice as well.

And then what?

 

[eagle1462010]

That is partisan talk................the people smacked you down and turned the States red.............they were hired to stop the Liberal Freight train.........especially Obamacare with driving the train...........choo choo...........

Tell me about Reid's graveyard.....................the dems don't have a leg to stand on here............besides that is not the intent of the OP............You are diverting.......

It's about Super delegates and whether they are right or wrong.

i'm not sure how it's "partisan" when it's my party we're talking about either way. it doesn't affect the GOP.

i don't have problem with super delegates

the reason for it is so that someone who has on shot at winning isn't the standard bearer. they haven't had to use it. it's kind of like the nuclear option for the party. but i'm not sorry it's there. i know my history and i know why it exists.

They are supposed to be the people's party regardless of which side of the fence.............The people decide.................I don't like it either side of the fence..............why............because I see it inherently wrong within our Republic..............

But where do you get that from? that they are suppose to be the "peoples" party? They've never been the "people's" party and have never claimed to be....they are Republican Party members who are giving you candidates they want to give you.... if they ever in a million years thought that they were putting Trump in their mix of candidates for him to be a winner, they would not have the problem they have now.... It's never been our choices for candidates, it's always been the Party's choices.... Dem and Repub.

Exactly.............You don't seem to care at all.............I do not like it................Period.

It's wrong and why this country is screwed...............But go along with their establishment ways........bow to them and SUBMIT...........

I wish we could BREAK BOTH PARTIES...............Tar and Feather them would be nice as well.

And then what?

People run as independents period................no parties without the damned ties that bind...............Many countries have 10 dang parties and all have candidates..............Why just 2................

If the people don't BOW to the establishment they will attempt to change the results to get their way...........and they would rather have Hillary because BOTH parties in regards to lobbyist and establishment are really the same....................support their donor class and repay favors..........Which is what we have now.

 

[Pogo]

Kasich is the only sane one. But...nobody is really listening to him or seeing him. All they see is Clinton and Trump and Cruz and Rubio.

Kasich is the answer. But everyone is too blind to see.

He does seem to be the only voice of any kind of rationality.

Had our electoral process not degenerated into in effect selling a commodity, that might be an advantage. Kasich is selling policy while the masses are in the market for soap operas. It's freaking stupid.

 

[Cecilie1200]

i'm not sure how it's "partisan" when it's my party we're talking about either way. it doesn't affect the GOP.

i don't have problem with super delegates

the reason for it is so that someone who has on shot at winning isn't the standard bearer. they haven't had to use it. it's kind of like the nuclear option for the party. but i'm not sorry it's there. i know my history and i know why it exists.

They are supposed to be the people's party regardless of which side of the fence.............The people decide.................I don't like it either side of the fence..............why............because I see it inherently wrong within our Republic..............

But where do you get that from? that they are suppose to be the "peoples" party? They've never been the "people's" party and have never claimed to be....they are Republican Party members who are giving you candidates they want to give you.... if they ever in a million years thought that they were putting Trump in their mix of candidates for him to be a winner, they would not have the problem they have now.... It's never been our choices for candidates, it's always been the Party's choices.... Dem and Repub.

Exactly.............You don't seem to care at all.............I do not like it................Period.

It's wrong and why this country is screwed...............But go along with their establishment ways........bow to them and SUBMIT...........

I wish we could BREAK BOTH PARTIES...............Tar and Feather them would be nice as well.

And then what?

People run as independents period................no parties without the damned ties that bind...............Many countries have 10 dang parties and all have candidates..............Why just 2................

If the people don't BOW to the establishment they will attempt to change the results to get their way...........and they would rather have Hillary because BOTH parties in regards to lobbyist and establishment are really the same....................support their donor class and repay favors..........Which is what we have now.

Riiiiight. You're going to smash the system, and then expect there to just magically be a system still in place, where people will damned well behave the way YOU want them to, instead of the way they actually do, because you're ANGRY, don't we all understand, you're ANGRY, and therefore the world will reorder itself to suit you without any sort of plan on your part.

Check in with the French and Russian Revolutions to see how well that works.

Back here in RealityLand, there are two political parties with enormous power because, whether you like it or not, people like it that way. It may be wrong, and it's certainly quickly corrupted, but it's simple and easy and comfortable, and people like that. You act as though you think there's some law or some secret, shadowy power out there preventing us from having multiple parties, or simply having lone-wolf, independent candidates, but there isn't. The only thing preventing that from happening is that deep down, the people don't really want it to, because of laziness and inertia and human nature.

 

[eagle1462010]

They are supposed to be the people's party regardless of which side of the fence.............The people decide.................I don't like it either side of the fence..............why............because I see it inherently wrong within our Republic..............

But where do you get that from? that they are suppose to be the "peoples" party? They've never been the "people's" party and have never claimed to be....they are Republican Party members who are giving you candidates they want to give you.... if they ever in a million years thought that they were putting Trump in their mix of candidates for him to be a winner, they would not have the problem they have now.... It's never been our choices for candidates, it's always been the Party's choices.... Dem and Repub.

Exactly.............You don't seem to care at all.............I do not like it................Period.

It's wrong and why this country is screwed...............But go along with their establishment ways........bow to them and SUBMIT...........

I wish we could BREAK BOTH PARTIES...............Tar and Feather them would be nice as well.

And then what?

People run as independents period................no parties without the damned ties that bind...............Many countries have 10 dang parties and all have candidates..............Why just 2................

If the people don't BOW to the establishment they will attempt to change the results to get their way...........and they would rather have Hillary because BOTH parties in regards to lobbyist and establishment are really the same....................support their donor class and repay favors..........Which is what we have now.

Riiiiight. You're going to smash the system, and then expect there to just magically be a system still in place, where people will damned well behave the way YOU want them to, instead of the way they actually do, because you're ANGRY, don't we all understand, you're ANGRY, and therefore the world will reorder itself to suit you without any sort of plan on your part.

Check in with the French and Russian Revolutions to see how well that works.

Back here in RealityLand, there are two political parties with enormous power because, whether you like it or not, people like it that way. It may be wrong, and it's certainly quickly corrupted, but it's simple and easy and comfortable, and people like that. You act as though you think there's some law or some secret, shadowy power out there preventing us from having multiple parties, or simply having lone-wolf, independent candidates, but there isn't. The only thing preventing that from happening is that deep down, the people don't really want it to, because of laziness and inertia and human nature.

LOL

With out the 2 party system we are all going to die............the sky is falling................whatever.

 

[Cecilie1200]

But where do you get that from? that they are suppose to be the "peoples" party? They've never been the "people's" party and have never claimed to be....they are Republican Party members who are giving you candidates they want to give you.... if they ever in a million years thought that they were putting Trump in their mix of candidates for him to be a winner, they would not have the problem they have now.... It's never been our choices for candidates, it's always been the Party's choices.... Dem and Repub.

Exactly.............You don't seem to care at all.............I do not like it................Period.

It's wrong and why this country is screwed...............But go along with their establishment ways........bow to them and SUBMIT...........

I wish we could BREAK BOTH PARTIES...............Tar and Feather them would be nice as well.

And then what?

People run as independents period................no parties without the damned ties that bind...............Many countries have 10 dang parties and all have candidates..............Why just 2................

If the people don't BOW to the establishment they will attempt to change the results to get their way...........and they would rather have Hillary because BOTH parties in regards to lobbyist and establishment are really the same....................support their donor class and repay favors..........Which is what we have now.

Riiiiight. You're going to smash the system, and then expect there to just magically be a system still in place, where people will damned well behave the way YOU want them to, instead of the way they actually do, because you're ANGRY, don't we all understand, you're ANGRY, and therefore the world will reorder itself to suit you without any sort of plan on your part.

Check in with the French and Russian Revolutions to see how well that works.

Back here in RealityLand, there are two political parties with enormous power because, whether you like it or not, people like it that way. It may be wrong, and it's certainly quickly corrupted, but it's simple and easy and comfortable, and people like that. You act as though you think there's some law or some secret, shadowy power out there preventing us from having multiple parties, or simply having lone-wolf, independent candidates, but there isn't. The only thing preventing that from happening is that deep down, the people don't really want it to, because of laziness and inertia and human nature.

LOL

With out the 2 party system we are all going to die............the sky is falling................whatever.

Thank you for verifying that you're too big a pussy to read, let alone comprehend, anything except your own opinion, echoing around in your empty skull.

 

[eagle1462010]

Exactly.............You don't seem to care at all.............I do not like it................Period.

It's wrong and why this country is screwed...............But go along with their establishment ways........bow to them and SUBMIT...........

I wish we could BREAK BOTH PARTIES...............Tar and Feather them would be nice as well.

And then what?

People run as independents period................no parties without the damned ties that bind...............Many countries have 10 dang parties and all have candidates..............Why just 2................

If the people don't BOW to the establishment they will attempt to change the results to get their way...........and they would rather have Hillary because BOTH parties in regards to lobbyist and establishment are really the same....................support their donor class and repay favors..........Which is what we have now.

Riiiiight. You're going to smash the system, and then expect there to just magically be a system still in place, where people will damned well behave the way YOU want them to, instead of the way they actually do, because you're ANGRY, don't we all understand, you're ANGRY, and therefore the world will reorder itself to suit you without any sort of plan on your part.

Check in with the French and Russian Revolutions to see how well that works.

Back here in RealityLand, there are two political parties with enormous power because, whether you like it or not, people like it that way. It may be wrong, and it's certainly quickly corrupted, but it's simple and easy and comfortable, and people like that. You act as though you think there's some law or some secret, shadowy power out there preventing us from having multiple parties, or simply having lone-wolf, independent candidates, but there isn't. The only thing preventing that from happening is that deep down, the people don't really want it to, because of laziness and inertia and human nature.

LOL

With out the 2 party system we are all going to die............the sky is falling................whatever.

Thank you for verifying that you're too big a pussy to read, let alone comprehend, anything except your own opinion, echoing around in your empty skull.

Whatever.......bow to your masters...........

 

[Cecilie1200]

And then what?

People run as independents period................no parties without the damned ties that bind...............Many countries have 10 dang parties and all have candidates..............Why just 2................

If the people don't BOW to the establishment they will attempt to change the results to get their way...........and they would rather have Hillary because BOTH parties in regards to lobbyist and establishment are really the same....................support their donor class and repay favors..........Which is what we have now.

Riiiiight. You're going to smash the system, and then expect there to just magically be a system still in place, where people will damned well behave the way YOU want them to, instead of the way they actually do, because you're ANGRY, don't we all understand, you're ANGRY, and therefore the world will reorder itself to suit you without any sort of plan on your part.

Check in with the French and Russian Revolutions to see how well that works.

Back here in RealityLand, there are two political parties with enormous power because, whether you like it or not, people like it that way. It may be wrong, and it's certainly quickly corrupted, but it's simple and easy and comfortable, and people like that. You act as though you think there's some law or some secret, shadowy power out there preventing us from having multiple parties, or simply having lone-wolf, independent candidates, but there isn't. The only thing preventing that from happening is that deep down, the people don't really want it to, because of laziness and inertia and human nature.

LOL

With out the 2 party system we are all going to die............the sky is falling................whatever.

Thank you for verifying that you're too big a pussy to read, let alone comprehend, anything except your own opinion, echoing around in your empty skull.

Whatever.......bow to your masters...........

My masters? You and your nancyboy hero WISH you were manly enough for that.