GOP donors start research of ballot access laws for independent bid

[Landslide Lyndon]

So much fun.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/doors-gop-consulting-independent-219859

Conservative donors have engaged a major GOP consulting firm in Florida to research the feasibility of mounting a late, independent run for president amid growing fears that Donald Trump could win the Republican nomination.

A memo prepared for the group zeroes in on ballot access as a looming obstacle for any independent candidate, along with actually identifying a viable, widely known contender and coalescing financial support for that person. The two states with the earliest deadlines for independent candidates, Texas and North Carolina, also have some of the highest hurdles for independents to get on the ballot, according to the research.
Story Continued Below

“All this research has to happen before March 16, when inevitably Trump is the nominee, so that we have a plan in place," a source familiar with the discussions said. March 16 is the day after the GOP primary in Florida, a winner-take-all contest that Marco Rubio supporters have identified as a must-win to stop Trump's early momentum.

[Mehmentum]

[Ebsy]

Great way to lose.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I don't know if this will actually happen, although there are a lot of rumblings out there. I expect a lot of them will end up backing Hillary or Bloomberg should either make it to the general.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Great way to lose.

The idea is to lose to save the party.

[Blair]

I feel this is a great way to make money; what with Webb, Bloomberg and even Trump (early on) apparently hiring people to look at ballot access

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I don't know if this will actually happen, although there are a lot of rumblings out there. I expect a lot of them will end up backing Hillary or Bloomberg should either make it to the general.

No self-respecting Republican would support Hillary under any circumstance.

[YaBoyNY]

Great way to lose.

The idea is to lose to save the party.

This is like the worst way to "save" the party.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

My idea for the GOP establishment is to effectively seize the Libertarian Party (which has ballot access) via sheer mass of numbers, somehow; and install some sort of puppet candidate. (libertarians can't really complain, it's a free market - and besides they might get bumped up to major party status)

[tpfkaw]

My idea for the GOP establishment is to effectively seize the Libertarian Party (which has ballot access) via sheer mass of numbers, somehow; and install some sort of puppet candidate. (libertarians can't really complain, it's a free market - and besides they might get bumped up to major party status)

x-post from AAD:

Yeah, that's what I've been saying for a while that Trump could do. They're such doormats that they might be willing to give up their ballot line anyway (Bob Barr, lesa murkoki), but even if they aren't all you need to seize control is have a couple dozen people show up at a few meetings – that's what Pat Buchanan did with the Reform Party in 2000.

Trump of course can get more people to go to weirdo fringe third party meetings than the hardcore neocons/GOPe types can, so his campaign should act fast to seize control of as many third-party ballot lines as possible, as a preemptive strike.

[Asian Nazi]

My idea for the GOP establishment is to effectively seize the Libertarian Party (which has ballot access) via sheer mass of numbers, somehow; and install some sort of puppet candidate. (libertarians can't really complain, it's a free market - and besides they might get bumped up to major party status)

That's be goddamn hilarious.  I can just imagine all of the lolbertarian tears now.

[Mr. Morden]

There's a decent argument for the create a 1912 situation in 2016 so you can win with, say, Ryan in 2020 approach, but it would have been a lot more palatable to elite Republicans a month ago when Justice Scalia was still with us than it is now.  In a 3 way race where Hillary wins 30-40 states, it's basically assured that Democrats would also pick up the senate.

No, the people planning this presumably think that they'll lose the Senate if it's a 1-on-1 Clinton vs. Trump, but that by also having a conservative 3rd party candidate on the ballot as an option, you'll boost right-wing turnout and save the Senate.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I don't know if this will actually happen, although there are a lot of rumblings out there. I expect a lot of them will end up backing Hillary or Bloomberg should either make it to the general.

No self-respecting Republican would support Hillary under any circumstance.

Actually, those of us who don't want anything to do with this "new Republican coalition" certainly should go elsewhere. Voting for it only makes us part of the problem.

[Torie]

I don't know if this will actually happen, although there are a lot of rumblings out there. I expect a lot of them will end up backing Hillary or Bloomberg should either make it to the general.

No self-respecting Republican would support Hillary under any circumstance.

Actually, those of us who don't want anything to do with this "new Republican coalition" certainly should go elsewhere. Voting for it only makes us part of the problem.

Yes, the situation is getting increasingly intolerable. But this sort of thing happens, when standards of living for the bulk of the population, stagnate or decline, with no immediate remedy in sight, because it's systemic, and there really is no remedy, other than hoping we can better educate the next generation. So strange stuff, unrealistic promises, demagoguery, intolerance, demonizing the other and the blame game, conspiracy theories, authoritarianism, self defeating protectionism (particularly for the longer term as to that) and other assorted and sundry unpleasantness, proliferates. It will probably get worse, before it gets better. Having said all of that, it would be nice to find a politician who tells it like it is, what the hard choices really are, and that it is going to be a long slog, from which there is no escape. The era of American exceptionalism is over. The rise of standards of living in the US as a force of nature, is over. From now on, it's blood, sweat and toil.

[ElectionsGuy]

Hillary Clinton approves.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

I don't know if this will actually happen, although there are a lot of rumblings out there. I expect a lot of them will end up backing Hillary or Bloomberg should either make it to the general.

No self-respecting Republican would support Hillary under any circumstance.

Actually, those of us who don't want anything to do with this "new Republican coalition" certainly should go elsewhere. Voting for it only makes us part of the problem.

Yes, the situation is getting increasingly intolerable. But this sort of thing happens, when standards of living for the bulk of the population, stagnate or decline, with no immediate remedy in sight, because it's systemic, and there really is no remedy, other than hoping we can better educate the next generate. So strange stuff, unrealistic promises, demagoguery, intolerance, demonizing the other and the blame game conspiracy theories, authoritarianism, self defeating protectionism (particularly for the longer term as to that) and other assorted and sundry unpleasantness, proliferates. It will probably get worse, before it gets better. Having said all of that, it would be nice to find a politician who tells it like it is, what the hard choices really are, and that it is going to be a long slog, from which there is no escape. The era of American exceptionalism is over. The rise of standards of living in the US as a force of nature, is over. From now on, it's blood, sweat and toil.

The constant need of politicians to go around shouting about how we are the greatest country in the history of ever always reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

[Cassius]

I don't know if this will actually happen, although there are a lot of rumblings out there. I expect a lot of them will end up backing Hillary or Bloomberg should either make it to the general.

No self-respecting Republican would support Hillary under any circumstance.

Actually, those of us who don't want anything to do with this "new Republican coalition" certainly should go elsewhere. Voting for it only makes us part of the problem.

Yes, the situation is getting increasingly intolerable. But this sort of thing happens, when standards of living for the bulk of the population, stagnate or decline, with no immediate remedy in sight, because it's systemic, and there really is no remedy, other than hoping we can better educate the next generate. So strange stuff, unrealistic promises, demagoguery, intolerance, demonizing the other and the blame game conspiracy theories, authoritarianism, self defeating protectionism (particularly for the longer term as to that) and other assorted and sundry unpleasantness, proliferates. It will probably get worse, before it gets better. Having said all of that, it would be nice to find a politician who tells it like it is, what the hard choices really are, and that it is going to be a long slog, from which there is no escape. The era of American exceptionalism is over. The rise of standards of living in the US as a force of nature, is over. From now on, it's blood, sweat and toil.

The constant need of politicians to go around shouting about how we are the greatest country in the history of ever always reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zqOYBabXmA

Well, you know, it's difficult to define an objective metric for what constitutes 'greatness', but by far the easiest one to fall back on is 'power'. Now, of course, that's a pretty nebulous concept in and of itself, but if one loosely interprets it in military, monetary, and to a lesser extent cultural (if you think how influential US culture is), then the United States pretty objectively is the greatest country in the history of the world. Now, maybe that status is under threat somewhat today (and that feeling is one of the root causes of Trump's popularity), but even now it's hard to see who is 'greater' than the United States.

[RR1997]

I really hope this happens. I'd have the ability to vote for someone who isn't a nut job (unlike Trump), but still a conservative (unlike Clinton), and this would guarentee that Clinton would beat Trump in a landslide (Clinton is far better than Trump imo).

[Reginald]

I just can't believe this gets any traction with a Supreme Court seat (their seat) up for grabs. But I want to believe.

[ag]

Great way to lose.

From their standpoint, if Trump is nominated, they have already lost anyway. The rest is just trying to figure out how to, perhaps, determine, whome they have lost to.

[Mr. Morden]

I just can't believe this gets any traction with a Supreme Court seat (their seat) up for grabs. But I want to believe.

Again, many of them don't think Trump is going to beat Clinton one-on-one anyway.  Best way to have a veto over the Supreme Court pick is to retain control of the Senate, which they are more likely to keep if there's an alternative conservative presidential candidate on the ballot in addition to Trump.

[Mehmentum]

I just can't believe this gets any traction with a Supreme Court seat (their seat) up for grabs. But I want to believe.

Again, many of them don't think Trump is going to beat Clinton one-on-one anyway.  Best way to have a veto over the Supreme Court pick is to retain control of the Senate, which they are more likely to keep if there's an alternative conservative presidential candidate on the ballot in addition to Trump.

There's also a lot of skepticism about how conservative Trump really is on social issues.  Not to mention, Trump seems like the type who'd want to expand executive power, which isn't something a conservative justice would be on board with.

[Horsemask]

Guaranteed win for HRC

[pho]

I wouldn't be so quick to say this is would automatically mean a Clinton landslide. GOP donors couldn't buy Jeb the nomination. Why should we believe they can buy more than 3% of the general electorate?

[RR1997]

Guaranteed win for HRC

You're saying this like it's a bad thing .

Great way to lose.

The idea is to lose to save the party.

^
This

A lot people are saying that this would guarantee a Hillary presidency, but I think that that's the point. A lot of these mega-donors don't want to see the GOP become a populist party that is staunchly anti-free trade and overall economically moderate, and that's what will happen if Trump wins the presidency. If these mega-donors (and the GOP establishment) put up an establishment candidate, not only does it guarantee that Trump will never become president (thus saving the GOP from becoming populist), it also gives them someone they'd actually like to vote for (since many of them hate both Trump and Hillary).