Tennessee GOP aproves anti-TRUMP delegate slate.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

[Erc]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

I agree.  If they're going to play dirty, shouldn't they keep everything quiet for now and then just have the rules committee repeal Rule 16 (binding to primary/caucus results) on the 1st day of the convention?  As it stands now, they will have to keep doing sketchy stuff 30-40 times at the state level, have it blasted all over the news, and give Trump advance warning so he can find some way to retaliate (3rd party signature gathering?).  I don't get it.

There are relatively few states (AR, IL, TN among them) where it's a "State Central Committee" doing the choosing rather than a State Convention, if that makes a difference in perception.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

I agree.  If they're going to play dirty, shouldn't they keep everything quiet for now and then just have the rules committee repeal Rule 16 (binding to primary/caucus results) on the 1st day of the convention?  As it stands now, they will have to keep doing sketchy stuff 30-40 times at the state level, have it blasted all over the news, and give Trump advance warning so he can find some way to retaliate (3rd party signature gathering?).  I don't get it.

There's no Republican Illuminati, and no one singular "they" to rig things. What there is, is a lot of party insiders, in lots of different places who really don't like Trump and don't want to see him as the nominee. If all Trump's various opponents in the party hierarchy did nothing until the rules committee meets, it would be utterly dominated by Trump and Cruz delegates, and that would be that.

These "shady" delegate shenanigans are as much a part and parcel of how the party process in the US works as Trump's uses of bankruptcy law are of legal business practices in the US. And if they mean that one populist demagogue  cannot seize the nomination with a weak plurality of votes, that's literally the way its supposed to work.

[MK]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

I agree.  If they're going to play dirty, shouldn't they keep everything quiet for now and then just have the rules committee repeal Rule 16 (binding to primary/caucus results) on the 1st day of the convention?  As it stands now, they will have to keep doing sketchy stuff 30-40 times at the state level, have it blasted all over the news, and give Trump advance warning so he can find some way to retaliate (3rd party signature gathering?).  I don't get it.

There's no Republican Illuminati, and no one singular "they" to rig things. What there is, is a lot of party insiders, in lots of different places who really don't like Trump and don't want to see him as the nominee. If all Trump's various opponents in the party hierarchy did nothing until the rules committee meets, it would be utterly dominated by Trump and Cruz delegates, and that would be that.

These "shady" delegate shenanigans are as much a part and parcel of how the party process in the US works as Trump's uses of bankruptcy law are of legal business practices in the US. And if they mean that one populist demagogue  cannot seize the nomination with a weak plurality of votes, that's literally the way its supposed to work.

I keep hearing this from anti-trump folks.   So explain to me what other candidate has more votes?  You talk as if there somebody out their with way more votes yet last time i check you run your campagain to beat the other candidates on the ballot for votes.  The person with the most votes win.. isn't that the process?    It doesn't matter if its with 39% or 35% .   Did Cruz somehow get more votes and still lost? 

 " well he hasn't got over 50%"    I don't recall a single full primary in which Kasich or Cruz got that either.  In fact Trump has had more 45% type wins in open primaries .  Did Cruz even crack 50% in Texas?

[Oak Hills]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

I agree.  If they're going to play dirty, shouldn't they keep everything quiet for now and then just have the rules committee repeal Rule 16 (binding to primary/caucus results) on the 1st day of the convention?  As it stands now, they will have to keep doing sketchy stuff 30-40 times at the state level, have it blasted all over the news, and give Trump advance warning so he can find some way to retaliate (3rd party signature gathering?).  I don't get it.

There's no Republican Illuminati, and no one singular "they" to rig things. What there is, is a lot of party insiders, in lots of different places who really don't like Trump and don't want to see him as the nominee. If all Trump's various opponents in the party hierarchy did nothing until the rules committee meets, it would be utterly dominated by Trump and Cruz delegates, and that would be that.

These "shady" delegate shenanigans are as much a part and parcel of how the party process in the US works as Trump's uses of bankruptcy law are of legal business practices in the US. And if they mean that one populist demagogue  cannot seize the nomination with a weak plurality of votes, that's literally the way its supposed to work.

I keep hearing this from anti-trump folks.   So explain to me what other candidate has more votes?  You talk as if there somebody out their with way more votes yet last time i check you run your campagain to beat the other candidates on the ballot for votes.  The person with the most votes win.. isn't that the process?    It doesn't matter if its with 39% or 35% .   Did Cruz somehow get more votes and still lost?  

 " well he hasn't got over 50%"    I don't recall a single full primary in which Kasich or Cruz got that either.  In fact Trump has had more 45% type wins in open primaries .  Did Cruz even crack 50% in Texas?

The point is that to lock up the nomination, you need a majority of delegates. The idea is that if the voters of the other candidates combined would prefer someone else, then someone else should be nominated, and if enough of those other candidates' supporters would support Trump over say, Cruz, that when combined with the Trump-supporters they form a majority, then Trump should be nominated. Since we do not have a runoff or preferential voting in this country (though I think we should), the best way of resolving such an inconclusive result is for the stronger candidates to try to win over the delegates of the candidates who finished too weak to be viable at the convention.

If Trump cannot get a delegate majority, then he does not have a mandate to be the party nominee. If he didn't perform strong enough to lock up the nomination, then he should absolutely have to fight with Cruz for the votes of the Rubio and Kasich delegates. I don't know how to explain it any more clearly.

[MK]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

I agree.  If they're going to play dirty, shouldn't they keep everything quiet for now and then just have the rules committee repeal Rule 16 (binding to primary/caucus results) on the 1st day of the convention?  As it stands now, they will have to keep doing sketchy stuff 30-40 times at the state level, have it blasted all over the news, and give Trump advance warning so he can find some way to retaliate (3rd party signature gathering?).  I don't get it.

There's no Republican Illuminati, and no one singular "they" to rig things. What there is, is a lot of party insiders, in lots of different places who really don't like Trump and don't want to see him as the nominee. If all Trump's various opponents in the party hierarchy did nothing until the rules committee meets, it would be utterly dominated by Trump and Cruz delegates, and that would be that.

These "shady" delegate shenanigans are as much a part and parcel of how the party process in the US works as Trump's uses of bankruptcy law are of legal business practices in the US. And if they mean that one populist demagogue  cannot seize the nomination with a weak plurality of votes, that's literally the way its supposed to work.

I keep hearing this from anti-trump folks.   So explain to me what other candidate has more votes?  You talk as if there somebody out their with way more votes yet last time i check you run your campagain to beat the other candidates on the ballot for votes.  The person with the most votes win.. isn't that the process?    It doesn't matter if its with 39% or 35% .   Did Cruz somehow get more votes and still lost?  

 " well he hasn't got over 50%"    I don't recall a single full primary in which Kasich or Cruz got that either.  In fact Trump has had more 45% type wins in open primaries .  Did Cruz even crack 50% in Texas?

The point is that to lock up the nomination, you need a majority of delegates. The idea is that if the voters of the other candidates combined would prefer someone else, then someone else should be nominated, and if enough of those other candidates' supporters would support Trump over say, Cruz, that when combined with the Trump-supporters they form a majority, then Trump should be nominated. Since we do not have a runoff or preferential voting in this country (though I think we should), the best way of resolving such an inconclusive result is for the stronger candidates to try to win over the delegates of the candidates who finished too weak to be viable at the convention.

If Trump cannot get a delegate majority, then he does not have a mandate to be the party nominee. If he didn't perform strong enough to lock up the nomination, then he should absolutely have to fight with Cruz for the votes of the Rubio and Kasich delegates. I don't know how to explain it any more clearly.

Problem here is If they wanted say Ted Cruz then he should have been a strong enough candidate to win outright. The voters apparently didn't think so.  Same goes for Kasich. Its too late for that
Its funny how we have the "sore loser" rules and laws to prevent the very thing you are supporting.  " My candidates couldn't win so now that I feel butt hurt about Trump winning lets make some new rules so I can win again"    Moving the goal posts.   

[Mr. Morden]

Its funny how we have the "sore loser" rules and laws to prevent the very thing you are supporting.  " My candidates couldn't win so now that I feel butt hurt about Trump winning lets make some new rules so I can win again"    Moving the goal posts.   

If Trump doesn't have the support of a majority of delegates, then he hasn't won.  How is that moving the goalposts?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If he runs - and I've seen the polls that have him losing independents by 27 points, and winning republicans by 27 points, meaning he'd lose an election without a single democrat.

We'd get a Goldwater result *IF* he ran.

[Oak Hills]

Its funny how we have the "sore loser" rules and laws to prevent the very thing you are supporting.  " My candidates couldn't win so now that I feel butt hurt about Trump winning lets make some new rules so I can win again"    Moving the goal posts.   

If Trump doesn't have the support of a majority of delegates, then he hasn't won.  How is that moving the goalposts?

This exactly. If you do not see the point I am trying to make, you do not understand how presidential nominations work. The requisite threshold to be nominated is 50% of delegates, full stop. The rules have always said that. If Trump cannot convince enough extra delegates to vote for him to get to 1,237, and Cruz can, then Cruz will and should be the nominee. The opposite is true if Trump can and Cruz can't. Your camp is willfully failing to understand the rules.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

I agree.  If they're going to play dirty, shouldn't they keep everything quiet for now and then just have the rules committee repeal Rule 16 (binding to primary/caucus results) on the 1st day of the convention?  As it stands now, they will have to keep doing sketchy stuff 30-40 times at the state level, have it blasted all over the news, and give Trump advance warning so he can find some way to retaliate (3rd party signature gathering?).  I don't get it.

There's no Republican Illuminati, and no one singular "they" to rig things. What there is, is a lot of party insiders, in lots of different places who really don't like Trump and don't want to see him as the nominee. If all Trump's various opponents in the party hierarchy did nothing until the rules committee meets, it would be utterly dominated by Trump and Cruz delegates, and that would be that.

These "shady" delegate shenanigans are as much a part and parcel of how the party process in the US works as Trump's uses of bankruptcy law are of legal business practices in the US. And if they mean that one populist demagogue  cannot seize the nomination with a weak plurality of votes, that's literally the way its supposed to work.

I keep hearing this from anti-trump folks.   So explain to me what other candidate has more votes?  You talk as if there somebody out their with way more votes yet last time i check you run your campagain to beat the other candidates on the ballot for votes.  The person with the most votes win.. isn't that the process?    It doesn't matter if its with 39% or 35% .   Did Cruz somehow get more votes and still lost?  

 " well he hasn't got over 50%"    I don't recall a single full primary in which Kasich or Cruz got that either.  In fact Trump has had more 45% type wins in open primaries .  Did Cruz even crack 50% in Texas?

I understand that this is hard for Trump supporters to grasp (I won't venture a guess as to why), but the thing they keep missing is that the Republican primary process isn't some sort of middle-school popularity contest. It's a complicated set of voting mechanisms based on already established rules. In that respect its like any other complex human endeavor, from running a company to building a piece of technology.

When Trump decided to run for the Republican nomination, he agreed to abide by the Republican party's rules and systems. (If he didn't want to do that, then he should have run as an independent.) And the Republicans rules, which, again, Trump has explicitly agreed to, involve a long and convoluted process, from various levels throughout the states up to the national convention. (There are even processes for questioning, challenging, and changing the rules as part of the rules themselves.) The established and agreed upon process involves getting a majority of delegates at the convention, with alternative options if that doesn't happen on the first ballot.

Now, normally there is someone who clearly gets a majority of delegates, and all the other aspects of the system become just background mechanisms. But Trump is well on his way to FAILING at getting a majority. And when that happens, the next step it NOT "some guy with a lot of votes and threats of violence sets a new bar, declares that he's passed it, and proclaims himself Number One". That's how dictatorships work, not democracies.

It's a lot like the national presidential election in the fall, really. The electoral college normally selects the President. But if it can't or doesn't for some reason, there's a long set of formally established procedures for filling the office. And they do not include "Trump makes some stuff up" and then whines and threatens to throw a temper tantrum if he doesn't get his way.

[MK]

I know it's technically in line with the rules, but, man, this is shady.

I agree.  If they're going to play dirty, shouldn't they keep everything quiet for now and then just have the rules committee repeal Rule 16 (binding to primary/caucus results) on the 1st day of the convention?  As it stands now, they will have to keep doing sketchy stuff 30-40 times at the state level, have it blasted all over the news, and give Trump advance warning so he can find some way to retaliate (3rd party signature gathering?).  I don't get it.

There's no Republican Illuminati, and no one singular "they" to rig things. What there is, is a lot of party insiders, in lots of different places who really don't like Trump and don't want to see him as the nominee. If all Trump's various opponents in the party hierarchy did nothing until the rules committee meets, it would be utterly dominated by Trump and Cruz delegates, and that would be that.

These "shady" delegate shenanigans are as much a part and parcel of how the party process in the US works as Trump's uses of bankruptcy law are of legal business practices in the US. And if they mean that one populist demagogue  cannot seize the nomination with a weak plurality of votes, that's literally the way its supposed to work.

I keep hearing this from anti-trump folks.   So explain to me what other candidate has more votes?  You talk as if there somebody out their with way more votes yet last time i check you run your campagain to beat the other candidates on the ballot for votes.  The person with the most votes win.. isn't that the process?    It doesn't matter if its with 39% or 35% .   Did Cruz somehow get more votes and still lost?  

 " well he hasn't got over 50%"    I don't recall a single full primary in which Kasich or Cruz got that either.  In fact Trump has had more 45% type wins in open primaries .  Did Cruz even crack 50% in Texas?

I understand that this is hard for Trump supporters to grasp (I won't venture a guess as to why), but the thing they keep missing is that the Republican primary process isn't some sort of middle-school popularity contest. It's a complicated set of voting mechanisms based on already established rules. In that respect its like any other complex human endeavor, from running a company to building a piece of technology.

When Trump decided to run for the Republican nomination, he agreed to abide by the Republican party's rules and systems. (If he didn't want to do that, then he should have run as an independent.) And the Republicans rules, which, again, Trump has explicitly agreed to, involve a long and convoluted process, from various levels throughout the states up to the national convention. (There are even processes for questioning, challenging, and changing the rules as part of the rules themselves.) The established and agreed upon process involves getting a majority of delegates at the convention, with alternative options if that doesn't happen on the first ballot.

Now, normally there is someone who clearly gets a majority of delegates, and all the other aspects of the system become just background mechanisms. But Trump is well on his way to FAILING at getting a majority. And when that happens, the next step it NOT "some guy with a lot of votes and threats of violence sets a new bar, declares that he's passed it, and proclaims himself Number One". That's how dictatorships work, not democracies.

It's a lot like the national presidential election in the fall, really. The electoral college normally selects the President. But if it can't or doesn't for some reason, there's a long set of formally established procedures for filling the office. And they do not include "Trump makes some stuff up" and then whines and threatens to throw a temper tantrum if he doesn't get his way.

Of course we have now exposed the oligarchy that is the republican party.   We get to the convention and Trump as around 1100 or so delegates and Cruz is far behind at 600ish are you really wanting to take it away from Trump in that scenario?    Yes, the unbounded delegates are free to do whatever they please.... should they?

Really as i said before all of this talk about delegates is worthless to the VOTER. It will not matter as the people could careless about some oligarchy process.  It will appear as if the nomination was stolen from the candidate that had more votes and more delegates heading into the convention. I don't know about riots as Conservatives and republicans seem to be more sane then the socialist/blm Democrat party of today.  I do know that the awarded candidate will go down in spectator flames in Nov as a result and prob the republicans lose the house as well.  If Iam Trump I basically run a write-in campgain against  if its Cruz or kasich.


In all honestly something tells me that the party will come to its senses after Trump wins in NY and PA/NJ and he will be the nominee.

[SillyAmerican]

Of course we have now exposed the oligarchy that is the republican party.   We get to the convention and Trump as around 1100 or so delegates and Cruz is far behind at 600ish are you really wanting to take it away from Trump in that scenario?    Yes, the unbounded delegates are free to do whatever they please.... should they?

In this scenario, Kasich and/or Rubio play the role of king maker, no?

Really as i said before all of this talk about delegates is worthless to the VOTER. It will not matter as the people could careless about some oligarchy process.  It will appear as if the nomination was stolen from the candidate that had more votes and more delegates heading into the convention. I don't know about riots as Conservatives and republicans seem to be more sane then the socialist/blm Democrat party of today.  I do know that the awarded candidate will go down in spectator flames in Nov as a result and prob the republicans lose the house as well.  If I am Trump I basically run a write-in campaign against  if its Cruz or kasich.

Agreed. The party folks have to be very careful about appearances; if Trump voters begin to think that their votes don't matter (which is the very reason Trump has enjoyed such tremendous support/popularity), it will not be pretty.

In all honestly something tells me that the party will come to its senses after Trump wins in NY and PA/NJ and he will be the nominee.

I'm inclined to agree here as well. Actually, I'm beginning to feel like the GOP would be better off having Trump go to the convention with the requisite 1237, rather than risking what would undoubtedly be portrayed as "shady" delegate shenanigans...

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Cleveland is going to be a disaster.

They are used to it there.

I won't link the fake Cleveland tourism video I assume everyone has seen.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Add TN to the other states Trump won, but will flip their entire delegation to Cruz on the second ballot: AR, KY, LA, NC.  There may be more, but these seem the most likely to me due to the weakness of Trump's numbers.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Add TN to the other states Trump won, but will flip their entire delegation to Cruz on the second ballot: AR, KY, LA, NC.  There may be more, but these seem the most likely to me due to the weakness of Trump's numbers.

Arizona most likely as well.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Add TN to the other states Trump won, but will flip their entire delegation to Cruz on the second ballot: AR, KY, LA, NC.  There may be more, but these seem the most likely to me due to the weakness of Trump's numbers.

Arizona most likely as well.

I read the AZ story.  Seems far-fetched, but anything can happen after the first ballot.

[Likely Voter]

For Trump, watching the second ballot vote it will be like watching Invasion of the Body Snatchers.  He will see his delegates suddenly wearing Cruz pins and waving TrusTed signs.   

Twitter may need to buy some new servers to deal with the tirade that will follow

[Erc]

Tennessee delegates are bound on the first two ballots, so it would have to go to a third for this to make a difference.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

For Trump, watching the second ballot vote it will be like watching Invasion of the Body Snatchers.  He will see his delegates suddenly wearing Cruz pins and waving TrusTed signs.   

Twitter may need to buy some new servers to deal with the tirade that will follow

Singlehandedly DDoS'ing Twitter!

[President Johnson]

It's so disgusting what the GOP establishment is doing. It's just disrepectful to TRUMP, but to his voters!

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

It's [not] just disre[s]pectful to TRUMP, but to his voters!

that's fine, neither are deserving of respect

[Mr. Morden]

For Trump, watching the second ballot vote it will be like watching Invasion of the Body Snatchers.  He will see his delegates suddenly wearing Cruz pins and waving TrusTed signs.   

I still give him a >50% chance of winning on the first ballot, which would mean that it won't actually come to that.  However, the "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" moment could still happen when Trump is giving his acceptance speech, and keeps getting booed by his own delegates.

At that point, I look forward to Trump insulting his delegates, by calling them out as out-of-touch GOP donors.