jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (7 posts)

Anti-Trump Delegates are raising money for a legal fight.

  1. Johnny James A profile image80
    Johnny James Aposted 4 months ago

    I am not so much concerned with how the Republican convention will unfold, as I am a possible discussion on the legality of a move by certain anti-Trump delegates.  Certain delegates are putting up the argument that they should not be bound by state primary and caucus results for the upcoming convention, and want rules changed prior to the convention.  This is interesting because the Constitution gives state the right to choose Electors and/or how the Electors are chosen.  That being said Most states also put in rules stating that the delegates must vote how the state popular vote turned out, or some states actually go by counties or districts (which is why in certain states you can split delegates).  Based on the wording of the Constitution do you think states have the right to force a delegate to vote a certain why, or were they merely given the power to select delegates or choose how delegates are selected.  This could be an interesting fight if it is pushed.  I doubt it will gain any traction in the courts this late in the game, but what are your thoughts on "if" a challenge was made and how would it turn out.  Also, feel free to give your own opinion if you think the current state using delegates should be changed, kept the same, or is outdated.

    1. Credence2 profile image85
      Credence2posted 4 months ago in reply to this

      As I said in another thread, I like a democratic process. If Mr. Trump wins the rank and file fair and square then he should be the nominee. If he is not then pandemonium can be expected on the GOP convention floor. To try to change the rules at this late date is a bit disingenuous.

      1. Johnny James A profile image80
        Johnny James Aposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        I agree.  To change the rules this late in the game would  tick off a lot of the electorate who will feel even more separated from the election process as it is. Also, even if the delegates have a valid Constitutional challenge as to whether the states can force a delegate to vote a certain way, i think this argument is best kept for after the convention.  However, if they win they would open up a Pandora's box.  Originally, the founding fathers agreed that the Electors were never meant to be beholden to the popular vote of the state. However, whether the state now has the power to force an elector to vote the way of the popular vote was never settled.  If the delegates won this battle I think there would be a call to amend the constitution to once and for all settle all voting issues. Political Professors may like this exercise as it would make a great class lesson, but oh what a mess.

    2. Ken Burgess profile image81
      Ken Burgessposted 4 months ago in reply to this

      What is more interesting, is if they do this, and if Trump is tossed aside... how long until we have a revolution? Or will the people go quietly into the night, and accept the fact that their votes mean nothing, that the elections are a farce, an illusion played upon a largely ignorant populace?

      1. Johnny James A profile image80
        Johnny James Aposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        That is the million-dollar question. I think if Trump is pushed aside, the legal challenges will make the Bush vs Gore legal challenges seem like child's play. Additionally, and to play devil's advocate here we have a situation where one Supreme Ct seat is empty, and Justice Clarence Thomas has recently hinted he might step down soon.  Could you imagine if this case lingered on until after the swearing in of the next president and the winner was either Trump or the person who took his spot? You would effectively have a president, who even if they selected the next Justices would be in a position where those justices would have to recuse themselves on this very case as their appointments would be affected by the vote on the question. My opinion is if a successful challenge to the Supreme court happens and the Supreme Ct says a state cannot make a rule mandating the delegate to follow the popular vote, then there will be a push for an amendment to the constitution for voting rules. People hate the fact that we have delegates as it is, and the popular vote cry has been going on for a while now.

  2. ahorseback profile image54
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Children  - Do Your Homework!

    I just love the open and intentional stupidity of the GOP ,    They made Trump sign a deal because they weren't sure of his loyalty to them !   Now , they are the most disloyal  to the system !  The voting public is already tired of the political antics and delusional  attempt of the  GOP  to control the outcome of popular vote .   

    This entire political joke of a primary season is entirely the fault of the apathy of the  American voter .    We have  collectively created our own political nightmare .   Un-vetted candidates ,  vote for the best image instead of dong our home work ,    callous disregard for integrity , moral and  character searches in candidates ,  where  does the amount of our blame actually end ?

    The DNC , the GOP , and the media ,are all playing the American public like a violin , And the people will continue to do as told ! Why ?  Apathy ?  Stupidity ?       The American voting public needs to come to a realization that  it MUST put in it's required  hours of "home work" time .  Remember as a kid when the homework had to be worked on   out at the kitchen table ?  We are lazy ,I am lazy ,  You are lazy !

  3. PrettyPanther profile image85
    PrettyPantherposted 4 months ago

    The GOP is screwed, whichever way they go. They created this mess by catering to a certain demographic, to put it politely.

    Trump is a horrible candidate, so the party is screwed. However, if they go against the will of their angry base, they're still screwed.