The Republican Primary Race Is Filling Up

[T.Lex]

The prior version of Rule 40(b) was 5 states. It was changed in 2014 to 8 states.

They didn't ask for my opinion.

If you had said that no one earned it (by meeting the requirements), and therefore no one "deserved" it, then I would agree with you. But the only way to "earn" it is to get a majority of delegates, and meet any other rules, such as 40(b). So, Trump and Cruz are the only ones with even a remote chance of "earning" it.

I guess I see "earning" it more abstractly, if no one gets the majority. Clearly, >1,237 delegates means earned/deserved/closed the deal.

By falling short, "earning" it to me takes on a broader meaning. Earning it in the sense of having done that which proves one would be a good president.

(I think a commentator last night, still expressing shock at how well Trump is doing, lamented that it seems like people don't understand that they are NOMINATING A PRESIDENT! It seems like Trump voters seem to be looking to nominate a celebrity or a personality. I kinda agree. The man is not presidential.)

 

[CountryBoy1981]

Trump will skip Fox debate, essentially declares election over

BREAKING: Donald Trump To Skip Fox Debate | RedState

Only about half the delegates have been given out. How is it over? It is for Rubio but if Rubio support goes behind Cruz, Trump can easily still lose this election.

 

[pudly]

Only about half the delegates have been given out. How is it over? It is for Rubio but if Rubio support goes behind Cruz, Trump can easily still lose this election.

From that article, Trump didn't declare the election over. GPAIR7 did. That's how the vast majority of anti-Trump propaganda is generated, by spin-meisters putting words in his mouth.

 

[chipbennett]

Only about half the delegates have been given out. How is it over? It is for Rubio but if Rubio support goes behind Cruz, Trump can easily still lose this election.

For what it's worth, it appears that, last night at least, lost Rubio support went to Kasich, not Cruz.

 

[T.Lex]

Only about half the delegates have been given out. How is it over? It is for Rubio but if Rubio support goes behind Cruz, Trump can easily still lose this election.

I think the only way Trump falls in the polls is if he goes on national tv and says he's into child porn. Even then, if he disavowed that statement an hour later, it could actually improve his numbers.

Unless by "lose" you mean, "not get a majority of delegates." In that case, it is still mathematically feasible.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Only about half the delegates have been given out. How is it over? It is for Rubio but if Rubio support goes behind Cruz, Trump can easily still lose this election.

That was my editorialization, a commentary on his smugness of thinking he doesn't need to debate anymore.

 

[chipbennett]

That was my editorialization, a commentary on his smugness of thinking he doesn't need to debate anymore.

You're speculating on the matter of smugness. As for the need to debate anymore: there have been 12 debates. How many more are needed?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

GOP Debate in Salt Lake City is canceled. Confirmed by Salt palace Convention Center.

You're speculating on the matter of smugness.

Yes. I am. That's what I said. Declaring you don't need to attend a debate is a smug move, signifying that you don't think it matters anymore.

I speculate. Any other painfully obvious commentary?

 

[JettaKnight]

Why? Because if Trump goes, then his big-tent coalition goes with him. Where they go is anyone's guess, but it won't be to the GOP nominee.

Those of us who routinely hold our noses to vote GOP will continue to do so, regardless. (And yes, I'm in that group.)

Last time I held my nose and voted was for Murdock. That didn't go so well.

Traditionally, "big tent" referred to a candidate that many voters could back. Trump isn't big tent, he just moved the tent and left the rest of us standing in the rain.



Trump just creates a whole new bloc - a combination of "they took our jobs!" and mye-ryeeights.

 

[printcraft]

Also, don't discount that Trump does knows optics and the art of the deal.
He is trying to appeal to a broader range of voters.
Fox gets panned as extremely right wing. By dissing Fox he shows a "bigger tent" appeal with independents.

 

[chipbennett]

Yes. I am. That's what I said. Declaring you don't need to attend a debate is a smug move, signifying that you don't think it matters anymore.

Did Trump say that he didn't need to attend the debate? Or could it be for entirely different reasons?

Maybe he thinks that there have been enough debates (a view shared by many):

“How many times can the same people ask you the same question?” Trump asked. “So I was very surprised when I heard that Fox called for a debate. Nobody told me about it and I won’t be there, no.”

And maybe that decision to skip a previously unannounced debate that the GOP announced only on Monday of this week was based on a previously scheduled engagement?

"I'm making a very major speech in front of a very important group of people," he said on "Fox & Friends," later confirming that the remarks will be delivered before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Trump said his speech at the powerful lobbying group's conference in Washington "was scheduled a while ago."

No, it couldn't be that. It must simply be because he smugly believes that he doesn't need to debate, because he's already won the election.

 

[T.Lex]

So, I ran my own modeling through the RCP GOP delegate counter. I figured Trump would get both coasts, Arizona and Wisconsin, but not Indiana. That puts him at about 1087. Obviously, if anyone else wins any of those states (or gets a significant proportion), his path becomes more difficult.

If the states play out that way, Trump will basically need to win 3 or 4 of the following states outright to win the nomination: ND, SD, MT, NE, UT, CO, NM, or IN. Now, NM is the only proportional of those states, and CO has some messed up system I don't understand. The rest are winner-take-all or winner-take-most. Cruz (or someone else) will have to straight up win them.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

GOP Debate in Salt Lake City is canceled. Confirmed by Salt palace Convention Center.

Fox News source confirms March 21 GOP Debate cancelled, following Trump decision to back out.

I'm speculating that they'll cover an hour-long Trump speech instead.

 

[chipbennett]

Last time I held my nose and voted was for Murdock. That didn't go so well.

Traditionally, "big tent" referred to a candidate that many voters could back. Trump isn't big tent, he just moved the tent and left the rest of us standing in the rain.



Trump just creates a whole new bloc - a combination of "they took our jobs!" and mye-ryeeights.

Even in a heavily contested, 3+ way race, Trump is going to shatter the vote totals for the past several contested Republican primaries:

2000 primary: Bush 12.0MM votes
2008 primary: McCain 9.9MM votes
2012 primary: Romney 10.0MM votes
2016 primary: Trump 7.5MM votes (at roughly just past the half-way point).

Meanwhile, in a two-way race against a socialist, Clinton barely has more votes than Trump:

2000 primary: Gore 10.9MM votes
2004 primary: Kerry 9.9MM votes
2008 primary: Obama 17.6MM votes
2016 primary: Clinton 8.6MM votes

And Trump is bringing more participation into the GOP primary process:

Total GOP: ~ 19MM votes
Total Dem: ~ 15MM votes

(All numbers from RCP and Wikipedia)

 

[ArcadiaGP]

How Trump Can Be Stopped | The Weekly Standard

How to keep Trump under 1,100? Beat him in Utah, Wisconsin, Indiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Montana, California

Hey, Indiana has a purpose in the Primary now? Imagine that!

 

[T.Lex]

How Trump Can Be Stopped | The Weekly Standard

Hey, Indiana has a purpose in the Primary now? Imagine that!

Hello? *tap tap tap*

Is this thing on?

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...n-primary-race-filling-up-85.html#post6437975



I think Wisconsin will be an interesting scenario - somewhat like Minnesota. I doubt they'll like Cruz or Trump. I don't trust California, so I think they'll go Trump.

 

[jamil]

Nothing more than confirmation bias. You're inferring what you want that statement to mean. As-spoken, there's not a bit of a threat, or of an intent to incite to riot.

Trump is right. If the party tries to pull any shenanigans, tens of millions of people who supported Trump are going to be livid. That's not a threat; that's a fact.

Honestly, I don't think anyone can say they don't have confirmation bias when discussing politics. It's about as hard for you to infer "bully" as it is easy for G.

 

[BugI02]

They didn't ask for my opinion.



I guess I see "earning" it more abstractly, if no one gets the majority. Clearly, >1,237 delegates means earned/deserved/closed the deal.

By falling short, "earning" it to me takes on a broader meaning. Earning it in the sense of having done that which proves one would be a good president.

(I think a commentator last night, still expressing shock at how well Trump is doing, lamented that it seems like people don't understand that they are NOMINATING A PRESIDENT! It seems like Trump voters seem to be looking to nominate a celebrity or a personality. I kinda agree. The man is not presidential.)

Suppose we arrive at the convention with no one having 1237 delegates or more, but only one candidate satisfies 40(b). Could not a case be made that the candidate able to satisfy the other strictures in place should be the nominee?

 

[BugI02]

That was my editorialization, a commentary on his smugness of thinking he doesn't need to debate anymore.

It isn't bragging if you can back it up

 

[miguel]

Let's get back to punching people in the face. Looks like it is time to get to work on the speed bag: Democracy Spring