Trump gets obliterated by Cruz forces in Georgia's District Conventions

[Lyin' Steve]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The will of the voters was quite clear. Cruz + Rubio > Trump.

The will of the voters in 1860 was quite clear as well.  Douglas + Breckenridge + Bell > Lincoln.
It's silly to argue that because a candidate didn't receive a majority in a multi-way election, the voters rejected that candidate.

[Volrath50]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The will of the voters was quite clear. Cruz + Rubio > Trump.

Even if you choose to interpret the results that way, that's not the way most people see elections. Most elections in the US are done on a First-Past-the-Post basis, it's what people are familiar with.

If Trump finishes with far more votes and delegates than Cruz, he will have a far stronger narrative going into the convention, and almost certainly have greater public sympathy for his case. I think Cruz will look like he is trying to overturn the will of the voters based on sneaky backroom deals.

Also be aware, I'm not arguing over what is actually happening, or the ethics/morality/legitimacy of it, only how I believe it will be interpreted by voters; two very different things.

[Erc]

The system is rigged. This will cause a popular outrage among the Trump supporters and only help Trump win the required 1237 delegates the regular way and win on the first ballot.

If the system is rigged it's in Trump's favor. He's getting a higher percentage of free media than he does with the vote, and he gets a higher percentage of delegates than votes. The latter has helped him more than it has other candidates.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/despite-complaints-delegate-system-has-given-trump-22-percent-bonus-n553801

Regardless, what makes a more compelling, easier to understand narrative?

"Trump is getting a disproportionately high number of delegates! He should be winning, but not by this much!"

-or-

"Ted Cruz is trying to steal the nomination! He's sweeping delegates in states where they cancelled the election, and getting his own delegates elected as Trump delegates in order to override the will of voters!"

Regardless of anything, I think the second narrative will dominate. For most people, getting the most votes means you win, regardless of the actual "rules." Just think how many Democrats are still angry about 2000, even after several post-election recounts have shown Gore's recount strategy still would have had Bush win.

It's the responsibility of people who know better to get the facts right. Presumably, everyone on a politics message board knows better.

This is so frustrating to watch.  I'm not a Trump supporter by any means but what's happening is deeply unfair.  To those who say "it's part of the game", do you remember Romney or McCain or W having to go back to elections they had already won and re-fight them, not to win votes, but to outmanouver local party activists abusing the rulebook to put up delegates who support the guy who lost instead of the guy who won?  It's insane that this can happen.

It's happening because Trump is weaker than Romney or McCain. If Trump was on track to win all the delegates, it wouldn't be an issue.

Well, the strategic consideration for Republicans at this point should be whether it's better to nominate Trump and have about a 5% chance of winning the election and about a 50/50 chance of the next 1964, or to nominate Cruz, who has perhaps a 20% chance of winning the election (and that might be generous) but is very unlikely to get <45% of the vote in any scenario.  But a contested convention in which Cruz "steals" the nomination from Trump, although it is technically within the rules, will probably be a Remember the Alamo moment for Trump supporters.  The odds that Trump recruits an ambitious 45 year old to run on his platform and raise hell into the 2020's go way up.  It goes without saying that the damage would be even worse if they give the nomination to someone who didn't even run, like Romney or Ryan.  

I've changed my tune on this a bit.  It's now much less likely that Trump could actually win the general than it was in December.  Might it be better in the long run for Republicans to let him run and lose badly so that they can purge the party of his influence for good than to invite a long run struggle by taking the nomination from him?  Of course, Cruz would be back in 2020, but as long as the establishment unites next time, they should be able to hold him off and nominate someone stronger.

Pretty sure Trump is not interested in starting a "movement" to follow him.  Someone may try to pick up his mantle, but it's not like there's going to be an explicitly Trumpista movement led by Trump going forward.

The best way to stop Trump and his ideas going forward is to make sure he loses the nomination, not by surrendering it to him.

It's a real shame that that means that Ted Cruz is the nominee.  But we're losing this election anyway, and, uh...well I can't bring myself to say anything nice about Ted Cruz either.

[jimrtex]

This is so frustrating to watch.  I'm not a Trump supporter by any means but what's happening is deeply unfair.  To those who say "it's part of the game", do you remember Romney or McCain or W having to go back to elections they had already won and re-fight them, not to win votes, but to outmanouver local party activists abusing the rulebook to put up delegates who support the guy who lost instead of the guy who won?  It's insane that this can happen.

Romney, McCain, and Bush had competent campaign staffs who did this.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

As much as I dislike Trump, this is truly disguisting.

I have to agree. The voters are choosing Trump; they should let him have the nomination.

If Don Trump wanted to be nominated by a plurality of primary votes, then he should have started the Populist Primary Party, or run for some third party nomination. He chose to run as a Republican, and hypocritically whining about their rules at this late date because of his own incompetence and unpopularity is both pathetic and disgusting.

Does Don Trump regularly let people he does business with rewrite contracts in their favour, months in? Somehow, I doubt it. 

[Sbane]

Are you being serious? When has Cruz said that all Mexicans are rapists? When has he said all Muslims should be given special ID's so they can be tracked? Has he called for all Muslims to be excluded from America? Has he even called for all 12 million illegals to be forcibly removed from the U.S.? Are his rallies full of white supremacists and neo Nazis? Are people who are Muslim or may look Muslim (people of south Asian descent) called terrorists and heckled at his rallies? Has he called for the U.S. Military to commit war crimes?

Most of that stuff about Trump isn't anywhere near true either.  You'll really enjoy life more if you stop inventing terrible things to believe and simply live in reality.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/12/media/cbs-sopan-deb-arrest-trump-rally

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You describe it as though it's a routine thing, like they have their two minutes of hate where Trump leads the crowd in cheering against dark-skinned members of the audience.  When all you have is one idiot saying something mean to an Indian guy.

It happens all the time! You hear from people on twitter all the time about the amount of racial abuse at Trump rallies. I have thought about going to one to see if that is actually true, but I don't really like being racially abused myself.....

In any case, it's quite clear Trump has attracted the trashiest of Americans to follow and support him. You can watch any video montage of his supporters to figure that out.

[Lyin' Steve]

Are you being serious? When has Cruz said that all Mexicans are rapists? When has he said all Muslims should be given special ID's so they can be tracked? Has he called for all Muslims to be excluded from America? Has he even called for all 12 million illegals to be forcibly removed from the U.S.? Are his rallies full of white supremacists and neo Nazis? Are people who are Muslim or may look Muslim (people of south Asian descent) called terrorists and heckled at his rallies? Has he called for the U.S. Military to commit war crimes?

Most of that stuff about Trump isn't anywhere near true either.  You'll really enjoy life more if you stop inventing terrible things to believe and simply live in reality.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/12/media/cbs-sopan-deb-arrest-trump-rally

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You describe it as though it's a routine thing, like they have their two minutes of hate where Trump leads the crowd in cheering against dark-skinned members of the audience.  When all you have is one idiot saying something mean to an Indian guy.

It happens all the time! You hear from people on twitter all the time about the amount of racial abuse at Trump rallies. I have thought about going to one to see if that is actually true, but I don't really like being racially abused myself.....

In any case, it's quite clear Trump has attracted the trashiest of Americans to follow and support him. You can watch any video montage of his supporters to figure that out.

So you don't even know for sure that it's actually true, but you make strong assertions based on its truth.  OK.

And every candidate attracts trashy people.  If you think Cruz doesn't have racists and other terrible people on his side you're dead wrong.  Same with Kasich, I'm sure there are some terrible people supporting him.  Bernie and Hillary obviously have mountains of just awful lefties supporting them.  Trump's assholes get attention because they're part of a story.

[Sbane]

As much as I dislike Trump, this is truly disguisting.

Bullsh**t. Trump needs to be stopped and any means to do so is acceptable. Of course they are merely using the existing rules here so I don't see what the problem is.

If you had any principled reason to oppose Trump, you'd never say something like this. I can't imagine anyone who wants to stop a "fascist" would be cheering the active subversion of democracy, and voting for a man who is honestly quite similar to - and possibly much worse than - Donald Trump in views and rhetoric.

Are you being serious? When has Cruz said that all Mexicans are rapists? When has he said all Muslims should be given special ID's so they can be tracked? Has he called for all Muslims to be excluded from America? Has he even called for all 12 million illegals to be forcibly removed from the U.S.? Are his rallies full of white supremacists and neo Nazis? Are people who are Muslim or may look Muslim (people of south Asian descent) called terrorists and heckled at his rallies? Has he called for the U.S. Military to commit war crimes?

Cruz is an extremist but he is an acceptable part of the political discourse in America. What is truly scary is people like you accepting Trump as a valid part of the political discourse in America. You are validating the open use of race baiting and racial violence as an acceptable part of the political discourse in America. That is VERY, VERY scary. Scarier than Trump or his supporters.

?

I just said that Cruz is as bad or worse than Trump - meaning that both must be awful. But, I'll reiterate.

Cruz has said some pretty disgusting things, too. In the wake of the Brussels terror attacks he was talking about how great it would be if we had the police patrolling Muslin neighborhoods. This, of course, would not do anything to stop terror, but would just incite fear in the Muslim population of America. It's just more hot-headed racist rhetoric. The type of rhetoric that is supposedly your problem with Trump.

Also, Cruz HAS called on the U.S. Military to commit war crimes. He said that we should carpet-bomb the middle east to stop ISIS and "find out if sand can glow in the dark." Carpet bombing civilian areas is considered a war crime under Protocol I of the Geneva Convention.

There will be some bluster in a campaign but what Cruz said about carpet bombing is the maximum I would expect from a campaign. It is debatable what is or is not considered carpet bombing and it's not something that could ever be used against him as a broken campaign promise. Saying you want to kill the families of ISIS members is pretty specific....And the worst part is he could not even understand why what he said was wrong.

And while Cruz has been saying some horrible things, he also understands the constitution. For Trump the constitution is an impediment to what he wants. I am terrified of what he would actually do if he is president. At least with Cruz I know he will stay within the bounds of the constitution. Don't get me wrong, Cruz will be horrible. Trump could be Hitler.

[Sbane]

Are you being serious? When has Cruz said that all Mexicans are rapists? When has he said all Muslims should be given special ID's so they can be tracked? Has he called for all Muslims to be excluded from America? Has he even called for all 12 million illegals to be forcibly removed from the U.S.? Are his rallies full of white supremacists and neo Nazis? Are people who are Muslim or may look Muslim (people of south Asian descent) called terrorists and heckled at his rallies? Has he called for the U.S. Military to commit war crimes?

Most of that stuff about Trump isn't anywhere near true either.  You'll really enjoy life more if you stop inventing terrible things to believe and simply live in reality.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/12/media/cbs-sopan-deb-arrest-trump-rally

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You describe it as though it's a routine thing, like they have their two minutes of hate where Trump leads the crowd in cheering against dark-skinned members of the audience.  When all you have is one idiot saying something mean to an Indian guy.

It happens all the time! You hear from people on twitter all the time about the amount of racial abuse at Trump rallies. I have thought about going to one to see if that is actually true, but I don't really like being racially abused myself.....

In any case, it's quite clear Trump has attracted the trashiest of Americans to follow and support him. You can watch any video montage of his supporters to figure that out.

So you don't even know for sure that it's actually true, but you make strong assertions based on its truth.  OK.

And every candidate attracts trashy people.  If you think Cruz doesn't have racists and other terrible people on his side you're dead wrong.  Same with Kasich, I'm sure there are some terrible people supporting him.  Bernie and Hillary obviously have mountains of just awful lefties supporting them.  Trump's assholes get attention because they're part of a story.

Oh of course Kasich and Cruz (and the Democrats too) have terrible people supporting them. The difference is that Trump empowers the trash humans and legitimizes their horrible view of the world. Dog whistle politics is bad, but actually saying racist sh**t out loud/advocating for racist, unconstitutional policies is over the line. That's the difference between Romney/Bush/Cruz and Trump. I don't know if he will actually act in the unconstitutional manner he says he will, I just don't want to find out. Just like I don't know whether or not I will be racially abused at a Trump rally, I just don't want to find out.

Also, I doubt I would be racially abused at a Cruz or Kasich rally. Doesn't mean that some at those rallies wouldn't look at me and have similar thoughts to Trump supporters, they just wouldn't feel empowered/safe to say such things in public. There is a lot of nastiness in this world, and it didn't start with Trump, but he is making it ok to act like that in public.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Case in point, how many republican primaries have had the challenger rack up 550+ delegates? One.

The voters have not indicated a clear preference for Trump, who is earning 36 percent of the total votes.

He will finish below 50, the first time that has happened in the modern era of the GOP, lower than Ford in '76.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most people do not understand the convention process. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump will finish with fewer than 50 percent of the electorate. Right now he is at 37 percent. That is a plurality, not a majority position.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perception matters little. Trump needs to get 1237.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'll point out that if the Republicans used the same mostly proportional system as the Democrats Trump would have zero chance of getting 1237. He doesn't deserve all the delegates he's getting ANYWAY. In Georgia he was assigned 56.6% of delegates on 38.81% of the vote.

[Torie]

As much as I dislike Trump, this is truly disguisting.

Bullsh**t. Trump needs to be stopped and any means to do so is acceptable. Of course they are merely using the existing rules here so I don't see what the problem is.

I can't quite decide which one of us hates Trump more. What do you think? 

Oh, hi friend by the way. How's it going?

Haha it has to be me. I can't imagine anyone hating him more.

I'm doing well and hope you are doing the same. Btw, I'm voting for Cruz. Who would have thought that would happen.

This election season constrains one to do really weird things. I'm voting for Hillary tomorrow. So I empathize. You're voting for an execrable man, and I voting for an execrable woman.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's a little alarming to see people in this thread implying that a better understanding of the rules of the convention process would or should be all it would take obviate people's concerns about the perceived fundamental justice or injustice of one candidate getting the most votes but another winning. FPTP is a horrible, horrible system, but it's still a damn sight more democratic than ~ninja delegates~.

[Erc]

It's a little alarming to see people in this thread implying that a better understanding of the rules of the convention process would or should be all it would take obviate people's concerns about the perceived fundamental justice or injustice of one candidate getting the most votes but another winning. FPTP is a horrible, horrible system, but it's still a damn sight more democratic than ~ninja delegates~.

I agree that we haven't really had a similar situation in American democracy since 1824.  1912 and 1968 (and perhaps some other conventions) come close, but none of them really had the same expectation of a democratic process.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Curious. If you're against FPTP, why would you be against Cruz taking delegates in areas where Trump won by FTPT. It would make more sense in seeing this as a correction.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Curious. If you're against FPTP, why would you be against Cruz taking delegates in areas where Trump won by FTPT. It would make more sense in seeing this as a correction.

If Cruz took only enough delegates to correct for the discrepancy in Trump's favor, and if this could be done and communicated in a manner that the general public understood, I'd be all for it.

[Adam Griffin]

It happens all the time! You hear from people on twitter all the time about the amount of racial abuse at Trump rallies. I have thought about going to one to see if that is actually true, but I don't really like being racially abused myself.....

In any case, it's quite clear Trump has attracted the trashiest of Americans to follow and support him. You can watch any video montage of his supporters to figure that out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4hApKQj72c


Also, so proud of my state. First, not giving Trump 40% or more, and then this? FF!

[Antonio the Sixth]

Stopping Drumpf is more important than internal democracy within a party that would still be utterly horrible no matter what.

[emailking]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Curious. If you're against FPTP, why would you be against Cruz taking delegates in areas where Trump won by FTPT. It would make more sense in seeing this as a correction.

If Cruz took only enough delegates to correct for the discrepancy in Trump's favor, and if this could be done and communicated in a manner that the general public understood, I'd be all for it.

But you don't know how people would have voted if it was just Trump and Cruz. And you can't rely on polls for something like that.

[Mr. Morden]

As much as I dislike Trump, this is truly disguisting.

I have to agree. The voters are choosing Trump; they should let him have the nomination.

"The voters are choosing Trump."  Except that not a single state that's voted so far has seen a majority of voters support him.

It would be great if we had some sort of IRV system or runoff or something like that. Unfortunately we don't, so the only candidate who can really be argued to have a democratic mandate is Donald Trump.

I’d say none of them have a democratic mandate.  But if we’re talking about potential arguments for a democratic mandate, you could say that the 3rd, 4th, 5th etc. place candidates represent the people who they voted for, so if enough of them endorse the candidate who came in 2nd that would be good enough.  That is, since Cruz + Kasich + Rubio collectively got a majority of the votes, would Kasich and Rubio endorsing Cruz grant him more legitimacy, especially if one of them joins him on the ticket?

Or what if there were no ninja delegates, but just regular Kasich and Rubio delegates shifting to Cruz?  Seems like in that case, there’s nothing nefarious going on.  No one has a majority of delegates, so the losing candidates’ delegates are swayed over to back one of the top contenders.  It’s the ninja delegate thing that makes it look sketchy, IMHO.  If the candidates picked their own delegates, they’d have an easier time selling the process to skeptics.