I'm curious as to why there isn't more discussion about BLM threatening to shut down conventions and all that shit. In the past whenever people did stuff at a rally people excused it by saying they weren't officially members.
Well one of the founders of BLM was the one saying this. There is no "it wasn't really BLM". Do we just ignore this?
A top black lives matter activist already said "‘WE WILL INCITE RIOTS EVERYWHERE IF TRUMP WINS’"
"Trump wins aint no more rules fammo. We've been too nice as is."
"Went to the trump rally untouched and unscathed **** yall wolf ticket selling cowards keep tweeting me. thank you"
^Real classy from thugs
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Then they will end up in Trump's camps, because Kasich will most likely be Trump running mate.You do realize there is no path for Kasich to get to 1237 delegates right? From Rubio's numbers, his support is lackluster and dwindled fast, and now he is gone, he could not even win his home state.
As I've said before, I'll take president Trump over President Cruz any day of the week.
Kasich's plan isn't to get 1237, it's to stop Trump from getting to 1237 so no one wins the nomination and the GOP gets to pick their runner. They can also at some point start picking off each other's delegates.
Kasich is an idiot in that regard. He doesn't want to win the honorable way, he wants to win through the convention. Its not only shady but deplorable. He wants to take the vote away from the people and give it to the bureaucrats in Washington.
People talk about hating on the trump wall, how about the political partisan wall Washington is building around DC that shuts the american people out.
How's it shady when it's a standard practice? If no one secures the 1237, the party picks.
Granted, I feel the party should pick or strongly consider the person who came closets to 1237, as that reflects the views of public. But there's no rule that they have to and the party has to think in the long run, not just the next 4-8 years. Would Trump be a smart choice for the party.
Not likely, but it's possible. He's not very controversial, isn't bipartisan-hated like Cruz and it's a wildcard like Trump, who is also hated by a considerable amount of people in the GOP. As I said, the GOP is looking beyond just the next 4-8 years.
So yah, Kasich has a chance even if tiny, should it go to an open election.
Trump's rise to power will be a lesson to the Republican Party in the future about too many candidates diluting the vote and allowing an outsider to take over. Imagine if in September it had been between Kasich, Cruz, and Trump, who knows how the primaries would have shaken out.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
If you really think the party is going to pick Kasich who got his home state by only 8 points, then 😂
And they would lose the general election as everyone that voted for Trump or Cruz would never show up to vote for party pick. Are you un aware that this would go in complete opposite of the voting base? If they did this, the republican party would be over and they will never recover. Unless this is their grand scheme which makes sense as they are spineless cowards who are afraid of their own base and want to get rid of their voting base.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
And they would lose the general election as everyone that voted for Trump or Cruz would never show up to vote for party pick. Are you un aware that this would go in complete opposite of the voting base? If they did this, the republican party would be over and they will never recover. Unless this is their scheme.
This has been an interesting election in that both the parties are having to reckon with the desires of their respective bases in a way they didn't have to in previous elections.
You have to love that the GOP have pretty much said Phuck You to their own constituents.
Trump is the frontrunner and thus the undeniable choice of the GOP constituency, and rather than accepting and embracing him on behalf of their constituents, they have now resorted to a plan to take the decision out of the hands of the voters, pretty much saying their constituency is too stupid to properly decide, and put it directly in the hands of the establishment to choose who they please.
In other words, the elite minority is outright ignoring the will of the majority they were chosen to represent, aka they're trying to run their party (and the nation) as an plutocratic oligarchy where the elite minority rule without input of the majority, rather than through a democratically republican process of the public electing representatives. This is without a doubt the purest epitome of political corruption.
. And they wonder why their constituents have undergone a Trump rebellion against them.
That's been the sentiment for US government from the start, that the government represent the people, not the few.
Lincoln's Gettysburg address touched on that 90ish years later, "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth."
But as noted, the party picking whomever they want in an open/contested election isn't illegal.
What on earth does that have to do with picking nominees?
EVERY western nation follows that creed. It's not some sort of special US thing.
Democratic elections are about choosing amongst those nominated, not choosing who gets nominated in the first place. That's a private matter for parties.
Overly-strong public consultation in the choosing of nominees tends to cock that up. Damn right I wouldn't trust the public members of my party to choose sensibly if I was a Republican. The rank and file are clearly gravitating to an unelectable extreme. Half the point of a party mechanism is to prevent that kind of idiocy happening- it does not benefit the nation or the people.
Touching back on Lestov's point. If Trump wins the nom because he achieved the magic number of 1237, it's the sentiment that he gets it because the people wanted it.
Now if he only gets 1112, somehow the people's opinion doesn't matter?
As I said, it's not illegal for the party to pick who they want in the case of a contested process regardless of the public views, it's just a bit odd, considering.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
I agree with you. I think the Republicans are ****ed this election. Even if their candidate (read: likely Trump), wins the general election, the party won't be feeling good, and they'll likely lose lots of ground in congress. The worst case scenario for the GOP is that Trump wins and the conservative wing of the party splits off to form a third party.This has been an interesting election in that both the parties are having to reckon with the desires of their respective bases in a way they didn't have to in previous elections.
I see a civil war/race war coming soon honestly.
That's all just technicality because the Republicans are stuck with the rules they've pledged by- they are just stupid rules, is all.
It;s not as if they will 'get away with it' per se- if they prevent Trump getting the nomination, it will tank the Republicans in the election because they have abided by a pubic consultation system and then trashed it. But that may still actually be better for the party than letting Trump run. It would have been a whole lot better if they'd had a system that didn't produce such a dumb result in the first place. 'We let the people choose' is no excuse. Again, it is not an election to public representation, where you can invoke the democracy card; it is a decision about who to nominate.
The Labpur party in this country has recently had a similar idiocy when they opened up their leadership process and nominated, virtually for a laugh, a left-wing extremist- only for their open process to then have him elected leader despite the fact he is despised by virtually his entire parliamentary party, is completely unelectable and is tearing his party to pieces.
The Tories here are in hysterics because their party leader election system guarantees that that can't happen- they eliminate the extremes first and present two alternatives to the party base. Damn good job too, otherwise we'd be in great peril now of having a relative extremist take over the leadership and have a shot at being PM, as the Tory party base is shifting rightwards. As it is, they are never given such a person to vote for.