• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

If Trump does drop out, who is the nominee, do they have a change?

And people thought their vote didn't matter in the Convention? Looks like only a few people get to vote for each state based on the back up nomination rules. Personally, I'd sue the Republican Party for making me endure all of this bullshit, just so that they could eventually nominate someone else when the unhinged narcissistic sociopath that actually was nominated quit because he was going to lose and badly.
lpetrich said:
Looking at this year's Republican Presidential primaries, I find this list of possibilities:
Ted Cruz
John Kasich and Marco Rubio, approximately tied
Ben Carson
Jeb Bush
all the rest

So if the Republican leadership doesn't like Cruz, it can choose either Kasich or Rubio.
Click to expand...
Kasich has the best chance at winning. He has the least to lose out of this.
 
Here is the process for a trump back-out. http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...ould-fill-vacancy-presidential-ticket-n622256
Rule 9 of the Republican Party rules covers 'filling vacancies in nominations."

It says that the Republican National Committee is "authorized and empowered to fill and all vacancies, which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise" of the candidate.

Under the rules, the Republican National Committee has two options. It could reconvene the entire convention - all 2437 delegates. Or, a much more likely options, would be to convene the Republican National Committee's 168 members, consisting of 3 members from each state and territory, to represent the delegates.

Each member would represent one-third of the number of delegates awarded in each state and cast a vote for a presidential candidate.

For instance, three RNC members from California would represent the state's 99 delegates. If two candidates cast a vote for made-up candidate Jan Smith and one member casts a vote for the other made-up candidate Max Brown, then Smith would receive two-thirds of the delegates - or 66 delegates - and Brown would receive one-third - or 33 delegates.

The candidate that wins 1,237 delegates would be named the new nominee.
Click to expand...
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
...
Kasich has the best chance at winning. He has the least to lose out of this.
Click to expand...

If Trump dropped out now Kasich would win in a landslide. Even Democrats have become inured of the idea that Hillary can't be trusted, but that compared to Trump she's as saint. Not so against Friar Kasich.
 
Treedbear said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
...
Kasich has the best chance at winning. He has the least to lose out of this.
Click to expand...

If Trump dropped out now Kasich would win in a landslide. Even Democrats have become inured of the idea that Hillary can't be trusted, but that compared to Trump she's as saint. Not so against Friar Kasich.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure about that.
 
credoconsolans said:
Treedbear said:
If Trump dropped out now Kasich would win in a landslide. Even Democrats have become inured of the idea that Hillary can't be trusted, but that compared to Trump she's as saint. Not so against Friar Kasich.
Click to expand...

Not all of them.



http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...k-you-Hillary-Clinton-is-fundamentally-honest
Click to expand...

Up to a point: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/jill-abramson-hillary-clinton-2016-221017

When I ask her what she thinks, after all these years, about the core criticism of Clinton — that she is untrustworthy and lies more than other politicians — the typically blunt Abramson demurs:

“I guess I’m still thinking that through.”
Click to expand...

As they say, that's the bottom line.
 
Treedbear said:
credoconsolans said:
Not all of them.



http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...k-you-Hillary-Clinton-is-fundamentally-honest
Click to expand...

Up to a point: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/jill-abramson-hillary-clinton-2016-221017

When I ask her what she thinks, after all these years, about the core criticism of Clinton — that she is untrustworthy and lies more than other politicians — the typically blunt Abramson demurs:

“I guess I’m still thinking that through.”
Click to expand...

As they say, that's the bottom line.
Click to expand...

Just goes to show how good brainwashing works.
 
joedad said:
credoconsolans said:
Good point. Does he HAVE to participate in the debates?

He's already gone on record saying he can't wait to debate Hillary. But like most idiots, when the time to put his money where his mouth is, he's starting to waffle.

His rabid supporters will accept ANY excuse from him ("I didn't need to debate her. I already know her ideas are trash and have said so..." or "The debates are rigged by 1) liberal media 2) Democrats 3) Jimmy Hoffa and I refuse to cooperate in something so corrupt...") but that might shake reasonable people awake to the fact he's an empty suit of nothing but bluster.

He can't face Hillary, he can't face any foreign power.
Click to expand...
Trump isn't very intelligent but he's clever enough to smoke Clinton in a debate where half the audience merely wants to be entertained and not informed. Hillary had better prepare not for cogent discussion but a lot of "I know you are but what am I" moments. She can't afford to come off as snarky. She just has to kick him in the balls when he deserves it. That's how you win a debate with people like this, by being just as clever.
Click to expand...

With the exception of Ben Carson, any of the GOP or Dem candidates could smoke Trump in a one on one debate. Trump will hang himself and all Hillary has to do is say, "Do you want to stick with that?", and then expose the factual errors. The Trump persona only works for a receptive audience. Up to this point in his life, that audience has been mostly his employees.

In a debate, the audience is not in the seats, it's standing at the other podium.
 
Wouldn't they dust off Mitt Romney? He seemed pretty popular even being a Mormon.
 
There wouldn't be a huge exodus from Democrats to republicans if Kasich was put in place of Trump. Probably those republicans who had decided to go with Clinton instead would go back, but the anti-establishment Trump people would probably stomp off and vote for whoever.

The turmoil would add to the evidence that Democrats like me see that the Republican Party is a party in name only, and is too chaotic to govern effectively. During the primaries, I had some warm things to say about Kasich, but not in the context of "I'd vote for this guy.' Only in terms of 'I would not regard it as a disgrace and catastrophe if this guy were elected.' The last republican I would have actually considered voting for was Huntsman, and I never got the chance.
 
Sarpedon said:
There wouldn't be a huge exodus from Democrats to republicans if Kasich was put in place of Trump. Probably those republicans who had decided to go with Clinton instead would go back, but the anti-establishment Trump people would probably stomp off and vote for whoever. ...
Click to expand...

At this point I think there would be a tidal wave of relief in the Republican camp. Of course it would need to have Trump's cooperation. (And it can't look like he's quitting 'cuz Melania says Donald will never, ever quit!)
 
Treedbear said:
At this point I think there would be a tidal wave of relief in the Republican camp
Click to expand...

No, there wouldn't be. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but the Republican party is divided. Certain republicans would be relieved, but certain others would be angry. The fact is that there is no one who is acceptable to both factions. That is why we have Trump. Perhaps there will come one in the future who can unify the factions again, but I do not see who, now.
 
Sarpedon said:
Treedbear said:
At this point I think there would be a tidal wave of relief in the Republican camp
Click to expand...

No, there wouldn't be. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but the Republican party is divided. Certain republicans would be relieved, but certain others would be angry. The fact is that there is no one who is acceptable to both factions. That is why we have Trump. Perhaps there will come one in the future who can unify the factions again, but I do not see who, now.
Click to expand...

From what I've heard the real diehard Trumpies are the Repubs and Indies who never vote anyway. They will likely walk off in a huff. The only other viable factions are Kasich (because he polls well against Hillary), Cruz (the guy that everyone loves to hate), and gutless Rubio. If those certain relieved Repubs were sufficiently scared by Trump to find common ground they might make the rational decision to get behind Kasich. Just say'n not know'n, but the GOP is rapidly melting down and a lot of them feel quite humiliated already.
 
Kasich polled well against Clinton months ago during the primary. Before all this shit happened. He's been damaged himself since then, as has the GOP in general. You are correct in pointing out that Trumps fans are part of the less likely voter set. What you don't see is that for the Republican Party to have a chance of beating the democrats, they need to improve turnout of that very group. (without alienating everyone else) Trump succeeded by improving turnout in the primaries of that very group. Could Kasich successfully woo everyone back? I don't see why you should think that. Will Hispanics suddenly forget that the republicans just nominated Trump? Will African Americans suddenly reverse their flow to the Democrats? Will the low likelyhood voters turn out for Kasich, establishment hero, after he 'stole' the nomination from Trump? (and you can bet Trump will be saying that). All he will do is cease the hemorraging of moderates to Clinton and might pick up a few moderate Democrats (but not really, as Clinton herself is a moderate Democrat) Probably, he'll get a few sexist Democrats.

Its a pipe dream. There's no way to get rid of Trump without him quitting. And any alternative candidate would be a sacrificial lamb. There's just too much inertia at this point. Why would Cruz or Kasich subject themselves to that, when they could wait four years and start fresh? Kasich is too smart for this. Pence is likely the best you'll get, as he's already committed.
 
Treedbear said:
Sarpedon said:
No, there wouldn't be. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but the Republican party is divided. Certain republicans would be relieved, but certain others would be angry. The fact is that there is no one who is acceptable to both factions. That is why we have Trump. Perhaps there will come one in the future who can unify the factions again, but I do not see who, now.
Click to expand...

From what I've heard the real diehard Trumpies are the Repubs and Indies who never vote anyway.
Click to expand...
That is a part of it, but not as much as people think. The far far right-winger conspiracy theorists.
They will likely walk off in a huff. The only other viable factions are Kasich (because he polls well against Hillary), Cruz (the guy that everyone loves to hate),and gutless Rubio. If those certain relieved Repubs were sufficiently scared by Trump to find common ground they might make the rational decision to get behind Kasich. Just say'n not know'n, but the GOP is rapidly melting down and a lot of them feel quite humiliated already.
Click to expand...
It really is impossible to know how a Trump resignation would affect the Republican Party. It could be viewed initially as relief within the party, but among Independents, it could look extremely disshelved and chaotic. Why vote for a party that can't even keep their own candidate from the Convention?

Kasich could definitely help reign in some conservatives, but that may be offset by turnout from the uber right. Add to that, it'll be impossible to undo damage to the Hispanic wing. Kasich may be able to get women to support him if given enough time. It is an uphill battle to win the Presidency for a Republican. And starting from worse than Mondale territory won't help and Democrats won't let people forget about Trump.
 
Kasich may be able to get women to support him if given enough time.
Click to expand...

Except that his achilles heel is his condescending sexism.
 
Sarpedon said:
Kasich polled well against Clinton months ago during the primary. Before all this shit happened. He's been damaged himself since then, as has the GOP in general. You are correct in pointing out that Trumps fans are part of the less likely voter set. What you don't see is that for the Republican Party to have a chance of beating the democrats, they need to improve turnout of that very group. (without alienating everyone else) Trump succeeded by improving turnout in the primaries of that very group. Could Kasich successfully woo everyone back? I don't see why you should think that. Will Hispanics suddenly forget that the republicans just nominated Trump? Will African Americans suddenly reverse their flow to the Democrats? Will the low likelyhood voters turn out for Kasich, establishment hero, after he 'stole' the nomination from Trump? (and you can bet Trump will be saying that). All he will do is cease the hemorraging of moderates to Clinton and might pick up a few moderate Democrats (but not really, as Clinton herself is a moderate Democrat) Probably, he'll get a few sexist Democrats.

Its a pipe dream. There's no way to get rid of Trump without him quitting. And any alternative candidate would be a sacrificial lamb. There's just too much inertia at this point. Why would Cruz or Kasich subject themselves to that, when they could wait four years and start fresh? Kasich is too smart for this. Pence is likely the best you'll get, as he's already committed.
Click to expand...

Consider how much time and effort would be spent repudiating (and refudinating, as well) Trump's campaign. There's no way to renounce the Wall and deporting millions of people, without alienating Trump's former base. The new candidate will have to explain why he/she remained silent after Trump clinched the nomination. As a gotcha question, it's second to "Were you lying then, or now?"
 
Sarpedon said:
Kasich polled well against Clinton months ago during the primary. Before all this shit happened. He's been damaged himself since then, as has the GOP in general. You are correct in pointing out that Trumps fans are part of the less likely voter set. What you don't see is that for the Republican Party to have a chance of beating the democrats, they need to improve turnout of that very group. (without alienating everyone else) Trump succeeded by improving turnout in the primaries of that very group. Could Kasich successfully woo everyone back? I don't see why you should think that. Will Hispanics suddenly forget that the republicans just nominated Trump? Will African Americans suddenly reverse their flow to the Democrats? Will the low likelyhood voters turn out for Kasich, establishment hero, after he 'stole' the nomination from Trump? (and you can bet Trump will be saying that). All he will do is cease the hemorraging of moderates to Clinton and might pick up a few moderate Democrats (but not really, as Clinton herself is a moderate Democrat) Probably, he'll get a few sexist Democrats.

Its a pipe dream. There's no way to get rid of Trump without him quitting. And any alternative candidate would be a sacrificial lamb. There's just too much inertia at this point. Why would Cruz or Kasich subject themselves to that, when they could wait four years and start fresh? Kasich is too smart for this. Pence is likely the best you'll get, as he's already committed.
Click to expand...

Ok, I figured Kasich wouldn't happen anyway, so my theory wouldn't get tested. So yes, it's sort of a pipe dream. You're probably right that he'd rather wait four years. And I haven't been keeping up with Kasich since the primaries. That said I still think the panic and disarray will subside if Trump should exit, whether it's done gracefully or not. The wagons will be circled once again. But you may be discounting the fact that much of Hillary's campaign and growing bipartisan support has been based on defeating Trump. From what I saw in the primary debates Clinton is a lot less moderate than Kasich. IIRC she's way to the right of him militarily and way to the left of him domestically (thanks to Bernie :love:). She'd have to totally shift gears (again :rolleyes:).
 
Kasich wants to expand the military and use ground troops on Isis. He's no dove. He's just good at playing a moderate on camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom