Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Cruz is custom-built to lose the 2016 general election, so if I were RNC I'd be trying to pump Paul Ryan up like nobody's business. But he's just a kid, so he'll lose too. But who else do they have?

Some dude from Ohio who just happens to be sitting in third place AND isn't quite as crazy as the guy in silver and gold.....

 jasper76 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, it looks like Ted Cruz's victory has just hammered the final nail into the Republican party's bid to have their candidate in the White House.

If Trump can't win a majority, expect to see a deal done behind closed doors with anybody but Trump gaining the nomination.

The Republican party grassroots will never forgive the top brass for this 'betrayal,' the party will be divided...

and a divided party will be steam rolled by HRC.

They lose with Trump, and they lose without him. This campaign is getting pretty boring because all roads lead to
Clinton in the White House (which has been the most likely outcome since Obama won his second term).

I suppose the GOP could try and recruit some serious star power. It would have to be someone better than Paul Ryan. Colin Powell would do the trick, but I know he's not interested and maybe not even Republican anymore. But it would take someone of that caliber to compete.

In any case, there's certainly entertainment left to be had in how much damage a wrecking ball can do.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Clinton because she has been touted as an anti-American demon (despite being basically a conservative in blue colors) the GOP will be forced to fighter her tooth and nail to feed their base what they want.

Basically what I'm saying is a Clinton presidency couldn't be any worse for the GOP or arguably the health of American politics. After 4 to 8 years under Clinton, like I did with Jeb, we will be wishing Trump was running (if he already isn't) because an open extremist is polling high in the race.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
The GOPs actions during Obama's presidency has a lot to do with what is going on right now with this election. You can't support the rhetoric that they have these last 8 years without it affecting their base. I am confident that under Clinton not only will the GOP return to the same tactics they have relied on with Obama but at an increased capacity. Clinton because she has been touted as an anti-American demon (despite being basically a conservative in blue colors) the GOP will be forced to fighter her tooth and nail to feed their base what they want.

Basically what I'm saying is a Clinton presidency couldn't be any worse for the GOP or arguably the health of American politics. After 4 to 8 years under Clinton, like I did with Jeb, we will be wishing Trump was running (if he already isn't) because an open extremist is polling high in the race.

At least that is what I feel I am seeing. It is my prediction I will be glad to learn I am completely wrong on. However, I'm fairly confident a Clinton presidency will pull the GOP even farther right.

 sebster wrote:

It's not a forgone conclusion that Bernie gets curb stomped in NY anymore...

538 is projecting Clinton winning 61 to 36. Have you got different figures?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Trump can still win all of NY and NJ's delegates... and he would STILL need 61% of the remaining delegates to get to 1267.

Not happening...

Does New York have a 50% trigger?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, it looks like Ted Cruz's victory has just hammered the final nail into the Republican party's bid to have their candidate in the White House.

If Trump can't win a majority, expect to see a deal done behind closed doors with anybody but Trump gaining the nomination.

The Republican party grassroots will never forgive the top brass for this 'betrayal,' the party will be divided...

and a divided party will be steam rolled by HRC.

They lose with Trump, and they lose without him. This campaign is getting pretty boring because all roads lead to
Clinton in the White House (which has been the most likely outcome since Obama won his second term).

I suppose the GOP could try and recruit some serious star power. It would have to be someone better than Paul Ryan. Colin Powell would do the trick, but I know he's not interested and maybe not even Republican anymore. But it would take someone of that caliber to compete.

In any case, there's certainly entertainment left to be had in how much damage a wrecking ball can do.

If I were a Republican voter, I'd feel cheated and bitter if some other candidate was dumped on me. As bad as Trump and Cruz are, at least they toured the nation to get the votes.

Republicans on this site might not want to hear this, but in the long term interests of the party, they need to be crushed by HRC in November. Then, and only then, can they start to rebuild. They need a massive shock to the system.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, it looks like Ted Cruz's victory has just hammered the final nail into the Republican party's bid to have their candidate in the White House.

If Trump can't win a majority, expect to see a deal done behind closed doors with anybody but Trump gaining the nomination.

The Republican party grassroots will never forgive the top brass for this 'betrayal,' the party will be divided...

and a divided party will be steam rolled by HRC.

They lose with Trump, and they lose without him. This campaign is getting pretty boring because all roads lead to
Clinton in the White House (which has been the most likely outcome since Obama won his second term).

I suppose the GOP could try and recruit some serious star power. It would have to be someone better than Paul Ryan. Colin Powell would do the trick, but I know he's not interested and maybe not even Republican anymore. But it would take someone of that caliber to compete.

In any case, there's certainly entertainment left to be had in how much damage a wrecking ball can do.

If I were a Republican voter, I'd feel cheated and bitter if some other candidate was dumped on me. As bad as Trump and Cruz are, at least they toured the nation to get the votes.

Republicans on this site might not want to hear this, but in the long term interests of the party, they need to be crushed by HRC in November. Then, and only then, can they start to rebuild. They need a massive shock to the system.

A contested convention can only cause bad things for the Republican Party. It's unlikely that Trump gets the magic number of 1237 delegates so he won't win the first floor vote but it's pretty much impossible for anyone else to get to 1237 either. Once the first floor vote is over and all the delegates are unbound it will be tough for Trump to win a subsequent vote. However, it would be difficult to rationalize the delegates choosing Cruz or Kasich, who both performed worse than Trump in the primaries, and tout them as better candidates as that would be openly contradicted by the primary results. There is no white knight candidate to ride into the convention pick up the nomination unite the party and win the general. Nominating a candidate that didn't even run in the primaries alienates every vote who supported a candidate that did run. The Republican Party made their bed and now they have to lie in it.

 whembly wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Well, it looks like Ted Cruz's victory has just hammered the final nail into the Republican party's bid to have their candidate in the White House.

If Trump can't win a majority, expect to see a deal done behind closed doors with anybody but Trump gaining the nomination.

The Republican party grassroots will never forgive the top brass for this 'betrayal,' the party will be divided...

and a divided party will be steam rolled by HRC.

They lose with Trump, and they lose without him. This campaign is getting pretty boring because all roads lead to
Clinton in the White House (which has been the most likely outcome since Obama won his second term).

I suppose the GOP could try and recruit some serious star power. It would have to be someone better than Paul Ryan. Colin Powell would do the trick, but I know he's not interested and maybe not even Republican anymore. But it would take someone of that caliber to compete.

In any case, there's certainly entertainment left to be had in how much damage a wrecking ball can do.

If I were a Republican voter, I'd feel cheated and bitter if some other candidate was dumped on me. As bad as Trump and Cruz are, at least they toured the nation to get the votes.

Republicans on this site might not want to hear this, but in the long term interests of the party, they need to be crushed by HRC in November. Then, and only then, can they start to rebuild. They need a massive shock to the system.

A contested convention can only cause bad things for the Republican Party. It's unlikely that Trump gets the magic number of 1237 delegates so he won't win the first floor vote but it's pretty much impossible for anyone else to get to 1237 either. Once the first floor vote is over and all the delegates are unbound it will be tough for Trump to win a subsequent vote. However, it would be difficult to rationalize the delegates choosing Cruz or Kasich, who both performed worse than Trump in the primaries, and tout them as better candidates as that would be openly contradicted by the primary results. There is no white knight candidate to ride into the convention pick up the nomination unite the party and win the general. Nominating a candidate that didn't even run in the primaries alienates every vote who supported a candidate that did run. The Republican Party made their bed and now they have to lie in it.

I don't agree with this premise.

That's how these conventions work.

It's up to the party leadership to teach the public how this works. I'm not optimistic that they can do this, so yes, there will be chaos.

We just haven't seen a contested convention for quite some time.

Ted Cruz, Not Paul Ryan, Would Probably Win A Contested Convention
The ‘establishment’ might not like Cruz, but the delegates likely will.

It’s like something out of an Aaron Sorkin script. After their bitterly divisive primary, the Republican delegates come together to nominate John Kasich on the fourth ballot at a contested convention in Cleveland, despite his having won only his home state of Ohio. Or they choose House Speaker Paul Ryan, despite his not having run in the primaries at all. Balloons descend from the ceiling, celestial choirs sing and everything is right again with the Republican Party, which goes on to beat Hillary Clinton in a landslide in November.

As I said, it’s like something out of a TV show. In other words: probably fiction. It’s not that hard to imagine a contested convention. In fact, with Donald Trump’s path to 1,237 delegates looking tenuous, especially after his loss in Wisconsin on Tuesday night, it’s a real possibility. And it’s not hard to see how Republicans might think of Kasich or Ryan as good nominees. If Republicans were starting from scratch, both might be pretty good picks, especially from the perspective of the party “establishment” in Washington.

But Republicans won’t be starting from scratch, and the “establishment” won’t pick the party’s nominee. The 2,472 delegates in Cleveland will. And most of them will be chosen at state or local party conventions a long way from Washington. Few will be household names, having quietly attended party gatherings in Fargo, North Dakota, or Cheyenne, Wyoming, for years with little remuneration or recognition. Although the proverbial Acela-riding insiders might dream of Ryan or Kasich, there are indications that the rank-and-file delegates are into Ted Cruz — and they’re the ones who will have votes in Cleveland.

To recap a bit, the Republican presidential voting process is separate from the delegate selection process in most states. In South Carolina, for instance, most delegates are selected through a series of county, congressional district and state conventions. Although those delegates are bound to Trump (who won the state’s primary on Feb. 20) on the first ballot, they could peel off and vote for another candidate after that.1

There are some states where delegates are selected directly on the ballot (as in Maryland, for instance) and others where slates are submitted by the candidates (as in New Hampshire) — these are a fairly small minority. Below, you’ll find a table showing the Republicans’ delegate selection method in all states and territories, according to the Republican Party’s rulebook.

Without getting too lost in the details,2 there are five major delegate selection methods:

Candidates choose their delegates (10 percent of delegates). In some states, candidates name a slate of delegates. These states include California, making it even more important to the Republicans’ delegate math; delegates won in California are likely to remain loyal to their candidates longer than in most places.

Directly elected (16 percent of delegates). Other delegates, as I mentioned, are chosen directly on the primary ballot. Usually, the ballot indicates which candidate the delegate prefers, and the delegates are bound to that candidate. An important exception is Pennsylvania, where 54 delegates will be elected on the ballot as uncommitted.

In these first two cases, there’s a strong link between the presidential preference vote and delegate selection. The link isn’t perfect — weird things can happen when voters are asked to choose from among a number of delegates they’ve never heard of — but it’s pretty close. However, these two groups combined will represent only 26 percent of all delegates in Cleveland (or 24 percent if Pennsylvania’s uncommitted delegates aren’t included in the tally).

The other delegate selection methods are as follows:

Selected at state or local conventions (55 percent of delegates). The majority of delegates, as I mentioned, are chosen through a series of state and local conventions or caucuses. This is grass-roots democracy at work, with somewhere between dozens and thousands of Republican activists attending these events.

Selected by state or local party committees (12 percent of delegates). In a few other cases, however, party insiders are responsible for appointing some delegates. The state executive committee names 14 at-large delegates in Tennessee, for instance, a point of contention because these delegates are thought not to be favorable to Trump even though he won the state.

Republican National Committee members (7 percent of delegates). Finally, the 168 members of the RNC — three in each state — are automatically chosen as delegates. This used to be an important group because these delegates were uncommitted even on the first ballot in many states, making them equivalent to the Democrats’ “superdelegates.” But this year, Republican rules usually bind them to the statewide winner on the first ballot. Like other delegates, they may be free to choose whom they want later on.

We know that Cruz is likely to do well among delegates chosen through state and local conventions because we’ve seen that demonstrated quite a few times already. This is most obvious in the three states — Colorado, Wyoming and North Dakota — where there was no presidential preference vote. Cruz won nine of the 12 delegates chosen at county conventions in Wyoming (Trump won one), and Cruz has gotten six of six picked so far at congressional district conventions in Colorado (more Colorado congressional districts will choose their delegates this week). In North Dakota, delegates are technically unbound, but Cruz got a highly favorable slate of delegates approved at the state convention on Sunday; only one or two delegates of the 25 chosen appear favorably disposed to Trump.

Cruz has also gotten good results at state and local conventions in states that do hold a presidential preference vote. In fact, considering that relatively few states have completed their convention process, it’s remarkable how many examples you can find of Cruz cleaning Trump’s clock: for example, in Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina and South Dakota. It’s possible that Trump will improve his delegate-selection efforts in subsequent states, and with his chance of winning the GOP nomination down to 49 percent at prediction markets, he’s become a tempting buy-low opportunity. But in terms of delegate selection, Trump has nowhere to go but up, making it more essential for him to win 1,237 delegates by California or come very close to it.

We have fewer examples of how Cruz will fare among delegates chosen by party committees, but Tennessee represents an initial success for him. Another good proxy for how state party insiders are leaning is endorsements from state legislators. Cruz has about six times more of those than Trump and more than twice as many as Kasich, according to data collected by Boris Shor and Will Cubbison. Furthermore, Cruz has been fairly popular among state legislators for some time, according to Shor and Cubbison; they’re not merely coming to him out of desperation.

Then there are the 168 RNC delegates. Perhaps they’d be favorably disposed to Ryan or Kasich, but they represent a relatively small share of the delegate pool. And with strong ties to their state parties, they don’t all fit the stereotype of Washington insiders either.

It also helps Cruz that he, like Trump, will have won a fair number of delegates from the first two categories — directly elected delegates and delegates chosen by the candidates. True, these may be only about a quarter of delegates combined, but those are delegates that a candidate like Ryan would have a hard time winning over, meaning that he’d need a supermajority of delegates from the other categories. Also, in some states, delegates are bound based on the primary or caucus results for more than one ballot. So while Cruz could be a viable choice from the second ballot onward, it might not be until the fourth ballot or so that Ryan would really have a shot.

It’s true that a contested convention is uncharted territory in the modern political era, so we can’t be completely sure what the delegates would do. The 2,472 delegates have nearly unlimited authority to rewrite the convention rules, and if most of the them really wanted to see Ryan or Kasich nominated, they could probably find a way to do it. Or, if the voting was a stalemate between Trump and Cruz for many ballots, a true dark horse — maybe someone far more obscure than Ryan or Kasich — could emerge as a compromise. We can’t rule out these outcomes.

But we’re also learning more and more about who those delegates are now that they’re being chosen. They’re not members of the Washington “establishment.” Instead, they’re mostly grass-roots activists, and many of them want Cruz to be their next president.

 plastictrees wrote:
Trying to work out if Trump would run as a third party if he doesn't get the nomination.
On one hand it's spiteful, which is how he keeps his luminous orange hue.
On the other hand being 'screwed by the establishment' gives him a great out without actually losing...which he would have to assume is completely inevitable as a third party candidate.

Trump/Sanders though...the underdog odd couple that will confuse America great again!

 jasper76 wrote:
If you're best hope is Ted Cruz, just give up all hope now. Ted Cruz is not a palatable nominee.

The best chance for the GOP was either Rubio or maybe Bush,, and both were squished underfoot by Trump.

 jmurph wrote:
It doesn't matter if "that's how these conventions work"- politically, with the current climate, I don't see how anyone but the frontrunner getting the nomination turns out well for the party. (And with the whole "Anyone But Trump" faction, even that will be problematic). Expecting the GOP leadership to somehow lecture their angry populist wing (already largely hostile to the so called "GOP establishment") to swallow a bitter pill seems like throwing gasoline on a fire.

 jasper76 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 plastictrees wrote:
Trying to work out if Trump would run as a third party if he doesn't get the nomination.
On one hand it's spiteful, which is how he keeps his luminous orange hue.
On the other hand being 'screwed by the establishment' gives him a great out without actually losing...which he would have to assume is completely inevitable as a third party candidate.

Trump/Sanders though...the underdog odd couple that will confuse America great again!

I'm betting 50/50 that Trump runs Independent if he feels he is cheated by the party.

Sanders would never run with Trump, that should go without saying.

 Polonius wrote:

 jmurph wrote:
It doesn't matter if "that's how these conventions work"- politically, with the current climate, I don't see how anyone but the frontrunner getting the nomination turns out well for the party. (And with the whole "Anyone But Trump" faction, even that will be problematic). Expecting the GOP leadership to somehow lecture their angry populist wing (already largely hostile to the so called "GOP establishment") to swallow a bitter pill seems like throwing gasoline on a fire.

Let's be fair though, Trump won a ton of his delegates due to quirks in the rules and a crowded field. He hasn't taken 50% of any given state yet. He's got the most votes, but nothing approaching a mandate. And that's the rule: get to half, or take your chances in a convention.

If I was in the RNC, I'd worry less about the angry populists, who aren't a reliable bloc, and more on the religious right, which is. Running Cruz shows the hard right that the GOP is about true conservative values. More Trump voters would support Cruz than vice versa. It's the smarter play, and Cruz can be expected to not embarrass the party too badly, especially if the actual general election seems lost. All those down ticket races matter.

The GOP has spent six years trying to kowtow to angry voters since the Tea Party sprang up, and it's gotten nothing but grief. I don't think they make the same mistake twice. It's the same cold calculation the democrats make with the Green party and the other far left agitators: make them realize that it's a two party system, and they'll buckle to support the lesser of two evils. Worst case, they're just staying home.

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 plastictrees wrote:
Trying to work out if Trump would run as a third party if he doesn't get the nomination.
On one hand it's spiteful, which is how he keeps his luminous orange hue.
On the other hand being 'screwed by the establishment' gives him a great out without actually losing...which he would have to assume is completely inevitable as a third party candidate.

Trump/Sanders though...the underdog odd couple that will confuse America great again!

I'm betting 50/50 that Trump runs Independent if he feels he is cheated by the party.

Sanders would never run with Trump, that should go without saying.

Trump won't (or unwilling) be able to fund it if he loses the GOP nomination.

Third party threats is very weak-sauce.
.

 whembly wrote:

Cruz is actually leading Clinton in the head-to-head polls.

I think Cruz would definitely have an uphill battle vs. Clinton, but he'd have a chance. It could be the 2014 scenario as the D's are electing someone who doesn't resonate with the masses.

<small> Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com</small>

 jasper76 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 plastictrees wrote:
Trying to work out if Trump would run as a third party if he doesn't get the nomination.
On one hand it's spiteful, which is how he keeps his luminous orange hue.
On the other hand being 'screwed by the establishment' gives him a great out without actually losing...which he would have to assume is completely inevitable as a third party candidate.

Trump/Sanders though...the underdog odd couple that will confuse America great again!

I'm betting 50/50 that Trump runs Independent if he feels he is cheated by the party.

Sanders would never run with Trump, that should go without saying.

Trump won't (or unwilling) be able to fund it if he loses the GOP nomination.

Third party threats is very weak-sauce.
.

What has Trump done to make you think that he responds rationally to real or perceived slights? The dude doesn't seem capable of letting anything slide, and I don't put it past him for a minute to run for sole purpose of fething over the Republican Party for screwing him out of the nomination .

 Polonius wrote:

Spoiler:

 whembly wrote:

Cruz is actually leading Clinton in the head-to-head polls.

I think Cruz would definitely have an uphill battle vs. Clinton, but he'd have a chance. It could be the 2014 scenario as the D's are electing someone who doesn't resonate with the masses.

General election polls prior to the nomination aren't very reliable, but they've shown Clinton perking back up. The problem is, I don't care very much about Cruz vs. Clinton nationally. Look at the states that matter:

Clinton is up in most polls for Ohio and Florida

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/oh/ohio_cruz_vs_clinton-4245.html#polls
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_cruz_vs_clinton-4214.html

A Cruz nomination puts vaguely purple states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin completely out of play, but it might work in states like Iowa and North Carolina. I think Virginia is way too establishment to go for Cruz. Assuming Cruz rallies in Iowa, NC, and Virginia, he'd almost certainly lose Colorado and Nevada, along with NH. That means he has to win Ohio and Florida. It's a tight needle to thread

<small> Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com</small>

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 plastictrees wrote:
Trying to work out if Trump would run as a third party if he doesn't get the nomination.
On one hand it's spiteful, which is how he keeps his luminous orange hue.
On the other hand being 'screwed by the establishment' gives him a great out without actually losing...which he would have to assume is completely inevitable as a third party candidate.

Trump/Sanders though...the underdog odd couple that will confuse America great again!

I'm betting 50/50 that Trump runs Independent if he feels he is cheated by the party.

Sanders would never run with Trump, that should go without saying.

Trump won't (or unwilling) be able to fund it if he loses the GOP nomination.

Third party threats is very weak-sauce.
.

What has Trump done to make you think that he responds rationally to real or perceived slights? The dude doesn't seem capable of letting anything slide, and I don't put it past him for a minute to run for sole purpose of fething over the Republican Party for screwing him out of the nomination .

He has a brand, and part of that is that he's a "winner".

Besides, he's *not* going to get the fundings he'd need for a 3rd party run.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 plastictrees wrote:
Trying to work out if Trump would run as a third party if he doesn't get the nomination.
On one hand it's spiteful, which is how he keeps his luminous orange hue.
On the other hand being 'screwed by the establishment' gives him a great out without actually losing...which he would have to assume is completely inevitable as a third party candidate.

Trump/Sanders though...the underdog odd couple that will confuse America great again!

I'm betting 50/50 that Trump runs Independent if he feels he is cheated by the party.

Sanders would never run with Trump, that should go without saying.

Trump won't (or unwilling) be able to fund it if he loses the GOP nomination.

Third party threats is very weak-sauce.
.

What has Trump done to make you think that he responds rationally to real or perceived slights? The dude doesn't seem capable of letting anything slide, and I don't put it past him for a minute to run for sole purpose of fething over the Republican Party for screwing him out of the nomination .

He has a brand, and part of that is that he's a "winner".

Besides, he's *not* going to get the fundings he'd need for a 3rd party run.

Kinda like how people predicted he would never make it this far?