"GOP mulls convention challenge to Trump" LATEST: unbinding voted down in cmte

[ag]

What they should do is, concede Trump the nomination, but nothing else. The VP candidate should be chosen despite the clearly stated objection of the nominee, the platform should include planks Trump is on record as being opposed to, the convention itself should be run very tightly and minimizong media exposure of the presidential candidate: it should highlight the governors, the Congress, etc. As little party money as possible should be spent on the presidential race and Republicans should go out of their way to minimize their contribution to Trump exposure. E.g., never mention him by name: only "i support the entire Republican ticket", never schedule joint events with him (but do schedule the VP candidate he hates), etc.

[Torie]

What they should do is, concede Trump the nomination, but nothing else. The VP candidate should be chosen despite the clearly stated objection of the nominee, the platform should include planks Trump is on record as being opposed to, the convention itself should be run very tightly and minimizong media exposure of the presidential candidate: it should highlight the governors, the Congress, etc. As little party money as possible should be spent on the presidential race and Republicans should go out of their way to minimize their contribution to Trump exposure. E.g., never mention him by name: only "i support the entire Republican ticket", never schedule joint events with him (but do schedule the VP candidate he hates), etc.

I quite like this idea. The convention picks for Veep an anti-Trump who campaigns against him urging defeat of his own ticket, and 2) if in some alternative universe, Trump nevertheless manages to get elected, if he then contravenes the law (quite likely), he then can be promptly impeached, convicted and removed, and the sane Pub Veep guy parachuted in, since obviously more than two thirds of both houses of Congress loathe Trump. It's quite a good insurance policy actually.

Kasich for VP!  

[Mr. Morden]

Ryan basically says that he'll neither encourage nor discourage a revolt against Trump.  He's staying out of it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/19/paul-ryan-its-not-my-job-to-tell-delegates-what-to-do/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[ag]

What they should do is, concede Trump the nomination, but nothing else. The VP candidate should be chosen despite the clearly stated objection of the nominee, the platform should include planks Trump is on record as being opposed to, the convention itself should be run very tightly and minimizong media exposure of the presidential candidate: it should highlight the governors, the Congress, etc. As little party money as possible should be spent on the presidential race and Republicans should go out of their way to minimize their contribution to Trump exposure. E.g., never mention him by name: only "i support the entire Republican ticket", never schedule joint events with him (but do schedule the VP candidate he hates), etc.

I quite like this idea. The convention picks for Veep an anti-Trump who campaigns against him urging defeat of his own ticket, and 2) if in some alternative universe, Trump nevertheless manages to get elected, if he then contravenes the law (quite likely), he then can be promptly impeached, convicted and removed, and the sane Pub Veep guy parachuted in, since obviously more than two thirds of both houses of Congress loathe Trump. It's quite a good insurance policy actually.

Kasich for VP!  

Romney would work better, I would think.

[BuckeyeNut]

No point in debating who would be the better VP between Kasich and Romney. Neither would take it.

[DrScholl]

A dueling Vice Presidential selection would only compound what is already a disastrous situation. Republicans are stuck with Trump, because if they try to cheat him by using procedural tricks it will cause a riot. We have already seen how violent Trump supporters can be, so the RNC is probably is aware that it would be real safety risk to pull any stunts that would trigger fights on the floor.

[Torie]

A dueling Vice Presidential selection would only compound what is already a disastrous situation. Republicans are stuck with Trump, because if they try to cheat him by using procedural tricks it will cause a riot. We have already seen how violent Trump supporters can be, so the RNC is probably is aware that it would be real safety risk to pull any stunts that would trigger fights on the floor.

Better the Trumpeters riot, than run the risk of Trump being POTUS, or not seizing the opportunity to grade and cultivate the land to facilitate his prompt removal if he is.

[Ronnie]

Trump accuses Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz of plotting to steal the nomination from him:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/18/trump-accuses-jeb-bush-of-plotting-against-him-and-appears-to-slam-cruz/

Either Trump is a Democratic plant, or a complete blithering idiot.  Instead of dousing the GOP resistance in productive ways (like acting responsibly?), he just confirms the suspicions of delegates who are concerned about his fitness for office by lashing out at random people.

[Boston Bread]

My dream is for a convention challenge to narrowly fail to displace Trump, but narrowly manages to steal the VP slot in favour of someone who hates Trump.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

A dueling Vice Presidential selection would only compound what is already a disastrous situation. Republicans are stuck with Trump, because if they try to cheat him by using procedural tricks it will cause a riot. We have already seen how violent Trump supporters can be, so the RNC is probably is aware that it would be real safety risk to pull any stunts that would trigger fights on the floor.

I disagree. I don't think the fact that TrumpMiller is a violent thug who cares nothing for the GOP or the nation should be used as an excuse to give him whatever he wants.

[Indy Texas]

No one wants to be Trump's running mate so getting an anti-Trump VP isn't going to happen.

Who in their right mind would tar themselves with being associated with this disaster?

The Republicans, if rumors hold, will get to choose from Trump-Christie, Trump-Gingrich, Trump-Sessions or Trump-Fallin.

[ag]

No point in debating who would be the better VP between Kasich and Romney. Neither would take it.

If offered by Trump - of course no. If offered by the convention to spite Trump?  I am not sure.

[DrScholl]

A dueling Vice Presidential selection would only compound what is already a disastrous situation. Republicans are stuck with Trump, because if they try to cheat him by using procedural tricks it will cause a riot. We have already seen how violent Trump supporters can be, so the RNC is probably is aware that it would be real safety risk to pull any stunts that would trigger fights on the floor.

I disagree. I don't think the fact that TrumpMiller is a violent thug who cares nothing for the GOP or the nation should be used as an excuse to give him whatever he wants.

It's not a matter of giving him whatever he wants, he won the nomination and overturning the will of the voters would be a poor choice. In a crowded convention hall, safety is going to be a concern.

[Mr. Morden]

Anti-Trump delegates raising money for staff and a legal defense fund:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/19/anti-trump-delegates-raising-money-for-staff-and-a-legal-defense-fund/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Politico surveys the members of the Rules Committee, and finds a lack of enthusiasm for dethroning Trump:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/politico-delegate-survey-dump-trump-unwelcome-in-cleveland-224796

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Meanwhile, a delegate from Virginia has filed a federal lawsuit in order to get himself (and other delegates) unbound from Trump:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/06/24/world/europe/ap-us-campaign-2016-the-latest.html?_r=0

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The politico article brings up an important question toward the end- what does the RNC do, if the bound trump delegates remain bound, but during the roll call vote, some bound Trump delegates submit votes for Cruz, or Kasich, or someone else, or abstains, and the state chair announces the vote that way. Does the convention chair count the votes as cast, ignoring the bounding? Does the convention chair count the improperly cast votes as abstentions? Or does the convention chair outright say the votes were cast improperly and that they should have been cast as "(insert bound counts here)" and that's what they will be counted as? National GOP rules, which are supposed to take priority over state GOP rules and state law, point toward the third scenario, but it's impossible to know what the convention chair will actually do on stage.

Also, regardless of what is changed and not changed regarding bonding, Cruz can exercise his right to call for a nomination speech for himself before the vote, which he has a result of winning 8 states as long as he doesn't release his delegates. Even if it was quixotic and had no shot of holding Trump below 1237, it would look bad to just see the 2nd nomination speech being made. In 2012, there was only a nomination speech for Romney - nothing for Paul. Same with 2008 and McCain.

[Mr. Morden]

The “Dump Trump” group called “Delegates Unbound” is spending $70,000 to run this ad on Fox News:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFlgP1hnU10
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/25/us/politics/donald-trump-ad-republican-convention.html

[Wisconsin+17]

The argument that the delegates should vote according to their conscience seems to be gathering steam. Wow. That's a showstopper right there against Trump.

[StateBoiler]

I don't think anything Trump says or does throughout the rest of the campaign could harm the GOP more than if the nomination was stolen from him and handed to someone else.

I disagree entirely.

The politico article brings up an important question toward the end- what does the RNC do, if the bound trump delegates remain bound, but during the roll call vote, some bound Trump delegates submit votes for Cruz, or Kasich, or someone else, or abstains, and the state chair announces the vote that way. Does the convention chair count the votes as cast, ignoring the bounding? Does the convention chair count the improperly cast votes as abstentions? Or does the convention chair outright say the votes were cast improperly and that they should have been cast as "(insert bound counts here)" and that's what they will be counted as? National GOP rules, which are supposed to take priority over state GOP rules and state law, point toward the third scenario, but it's impossible to know what the convention chair will actually do on stage.

Also, regardless of what is changed and not changed regarding bonding, Cruz can exercise his right to call for a nomination speech for himself before the vote, which he has a result of winning 8 states as long as he doesn't release his delegates. Even if it was quixotic and had no shot of holding Trump below 1237, it would look bad to just see the 2nd nomination speech being made. In 2012, there was only a nomination speech for Romney - nothing for Paul. Same with 2008 and McCain.

Read the Rules.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Rules Committee can change these or any rules in their pre-Convention meeting by majority vote. If 25% of the Rules Committee (112 members with a man and woman from each state/D.C./territory, so 28 people) sign a proposed rule that was shot down or they disagree with, it can be presented to the Convention as a minority report that the Convention can vote on.

[Mr. Morden]

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/286609-bill-kristol-encourages-floor-revolt-at-gop-convention

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[IceSpear]

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/286609-bill-kristol-encourages-floor-revolt-at-gop-convention

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We're still taking Kristol seriously?

[Mr. Morden]

The WSJ says that the anti-Trump forces are close to having the support of a quarter of the delegates on the Rules Committee.  What good does it do to have the support of just a quarter of the Rules Committee?  It would allow them to force a vote from the full convention on whether to unbind the delegates (or change the threshold for winning):

http://www.wsj.com/articles/anti-donald-trump-forces-see-convention-coup-as-within-reach-1467839099

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One wildcard on the Rules Committee: Its most high profile member is Sen. Mike Lee, who has spoken out against Trump in the past and has not yet endorsed him (and may very well be eyeing a presidential run of his own in 2020).  He hasn’t yet indicated if he’d be open to unbinding the delegates.

[Indy Texas]

Bill Kristol and the rest don't understand that you can't nominate "Not Donald Trump."

You have to have an alternative who is going to be acceptable to the overwhelming majority of the delegates. (Not just a bare majority.) If you don't, you get a floor fight being broadcast, livestreamed, Tweeted and everything else. That sort of skullduggery could be stage-managed in 1948. It just doesn't work anymore.

There is no one you could produce who meets that test.

[Frodo]

Donald Trump camp may lack numbers to stop delegate revolt, for now

By Tal Kopan, CNN
Updated 6:55 AM ET, Thu July 7, 2016

Washington (CNN)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Gass3268]

Lol, this is going to be so much fun. Anything to embarrass The Donald.