# Handicapping the GOP primary: a brokered convention? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 17, 2016, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264 "2016-03-17T15:02:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![slash2k](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@slash2k](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slash2k)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/21 "2016-03-18T16:47:53Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > The base will be pissed in June. But they’ll be eating it up by Nov. Or at least dutifully & cynically committed to stopping Hillary. Which is good enough for the insiders. The success of that strategy depends a great deal on what Trumps does after June/July, and I don’t think even the party insiders have any faith that they can know, much less control, what The Hair is planning. It’s probably too late at that point for a successful 3rd-party run, but if he’s out there holding rallies in the fall with the them Don’t Vote for the Nasty Republicans Who Stabbed Us in the Back, enough of the base might well be pissed come November to cost the party the WH and the Senate, which probably also means the Supreme Court. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/22 "2016-03-18T17:03:40Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > If I thought he had it in him, I’d say that Trump’s first goal after it looks like he’ll win a plurality of delegates would be to moderate his image, stop appealing to the worst aspects of the Republican fringe, and start behaving like a statesman. If he does that, he’ll start winning over people on the fence about him, and that will make it hard for the establishment to punt him. > > Unfortunately, I don’t think he’s capable of that. So I suspect he’ll continue to say and do so many outrageous things that the GOP simply cannot let him be their representative for President. At some point, they’re going to have to stop him, even it it means changing their own rules and causing a disaster at the convention. But there would be a disaster at the convention anyway - it’s unprecedented to have a nominee for President who is bitterly opposed by the party leadership and 50% of its members. I used to think that maybe Trump was trolling them. But if he was going to change he’d just insult unpopular groups and opponents. His moving to inciting violence shows me that he’s never going to moderate his message - at least not until he gets the nomination. Lots of GOP plotting is getting into the papers. I wonder what plotting is not getting in. And also what percentage of Trump delegates are yahoos enough to start punching other delegates on command. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/23 "2016-03-18T17:12:30Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > Until they start marching in the streets, anger is an impotent political force; full of sound and fury yet signifying nothing. Ultimately anger lacks the persistence to push changes through the thick porridge of the actual political process, not the make believe sound-bite process where changes happen instantly if you just want it bad enough. > > Anger can be very effective during a campaign season to push a candidate to the top. But it isn’t effective as a legislative force, whether the legislature in question is the real national one, a party rules committee, or your local darts club. > My bottom line: The R insiders can and will follow their sneaky rules and meta-rules and deliberate loopholes to deny Trump the nomination. The anger will be real. But it’ll die off soon into mere impotent cynicism. Impotent cynicism isn’t exactly impotent, if it results in lost votes for the party you’re cynical about. > [@](#): > > It’s not like they want the Trump fans to take a lasting interest in party operations or governance; losing those people for that purpose is no-cost to the insiders. Whichever insider they do nominate will receive lots of anodyne advertising about his credentials as a culture warrior, a steadfast Stopper-of-Obama, and some fresh promises of economic protectionism. > > Meantime they’ll launch a shitstorm of ads portraying Hillary as Obama II. But with a vagina!!1! And massive 100% pinky-swear proven sleaze!! > > The base will be pissed in June. But they’ll be eating it up by Nov. Or at least dutifully & cynically committed to stopping Hillary. Which is good enough for the insiders. I’d say that what you’re saying will hold true for _most_ of the base. But an essential part of Trump’s appeal is the sense among many Republican voters that the Republican Party keeps on making all these promises that they fail to come through on, keeps on getting them worked up and then letting them down. For some of them, having the nomination ‘stolen’ from Trump - by their own sense of the term’s meaning, not by any legalistic definition - will be the final straw. Certainly for this cycle, and maybe considerably longer. If the GOP loses 5% of its base this way, it’ll hurt. If 10%, it’ll be crippling. And sure, if Trump gets the nomination, some normally GOP voters will stay home. But Trump is probably a one-off, and the party can pretend it’s back to normal in 2018 and beyond. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/24 "2016-03-18T17:33:36Z")
Agree that R’s losing 10% will be crippling _in the Presidential contest_ both in 2016 & beyond. IMO the regional distribution of hard-Red vs. hard-Blue counties ensures the R’s a solid representation in every other race right on down to Podunkville dogcatcher for my remaining lifetime of 30-40 years. The Rs today are in the ascendant in every measure of political representation except the US presidency. It would be foolish to think them a spent force no matter what the world looks like on Nov 10th. The deep question here is: regardless of whether Trump is the nominee or not and whether he’s the winner in Nov or not, what becomes of the festering social sore that Trump has so skilfully exposed and poured salt into? (Hard on the heels of Fox, Limbaugh, _et al_, rubbing it raw for 20 years.) The Ds and the Rs will be dealing with this in 2018, 2020, 2022, etc. It may just become my “sullen cynicism” flaring into an angry protest candidate at each presidential primary cycle. It may get & stay worse, with folks in the streets. The US may well dodge the Trump Presidency bullet this time. But I would not want to keep replaying this scenario every four years until the totalitarians finally get it right. I’m sure the Kochs or the Scientologists can find a manageable actor to play tyrant for them. Or they may decide to do the job themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/25 "2016-03-18T18:10:27Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > It would be convenient if you’re right about #3. But I think you’re not. > > IMO you’re correct about #1 & #2. But surrendering at point #3 is so unthinkable they’ll grasp at all sorts of straws. > > As others have said, the second (or third) ballot support for Trump will be much smaller since Trump seems to have forgotten the importance of having delegates that actually support him, not just are pledged to him. So all TPTB need to do is engineer a second ballot. Lots of room for plausibly deniable shenanigans, much less overt shenanigans to make that happen. As has happened in many recent conventions. > > If there is one feature common to political thinking, it’s that cans of worms are always better postponed than dealt with now. Kicking the can down the road is a tried and true political nostrum for almost every intractable problem. Avoiding reckoning with Trump (or a Trump-like nominee in 2020) is perceived as safer than grasping the nettle now. > > So far we’ve seen nothing but short-term reactionary thinking from TPTB (to the degree that term even applies any more). To think they’ll suddenly develop foresight, cojones, \*and \*unity all at once is expecting a miracle under fire. Which only happens in Hollywood. Republicans these days have three priorites 1. Their paycheck/power 2. The party 3. The country Trump getting the nomination will hurt all three - even they think so - while Cruz would not hurt any in their estimation. But “stealing” the nomination from Trump in his eyes might lead to riots on the floor - he has already blown the dog whistle. So since this will hurt #2, they might hope to subvert Trump by making a deal with him to let him be nominated. Their other problem is that with most politicians not playing ball would require them to find a real job. Trump already has one (TV star) so they have less clout. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/26 "2016-03-18T18:36:48Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > Agree that R’s losing 10% will be crippling _in the Presidential contest_ both in 2016 & beyond. > > IMO the regional distribution of hard-Red vs. hard-Blue counties ensures the R’s a solid representation in every other race right on down to Podunkville dogcatcher for my remaining lifetime of 30-40 years. [There are 26 Congressional districts with R+1 and R+2 Cook PVIs.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cook_Partisan_Voting_Index#By_congressional_district) That’s a hell of a lot of CDs that a small shift could flip. And another 20 with R+3 and R+4. In 2008, Dems won a fair number of races in districts with R+5 through R+7 PVIs. So if a chunk of former GOP voters basically said ‘fuck it’ and turned their backs on politics altogether, it would make a difference down ticket as well. [QUOTE] > [@](#): > > The Rs today are in the ascendant in every measure of political representation except the US presidency. It would be foolish to think them a spent force no matter what the world looks like on Nov 10th. Tru dat, but just seven years ago, the same was true of the Dems, from the Presidency down to state legislatures. The GOP is not going to become a spent force, but that doesn’t mean things won’t start going against them. > [@](#): > > The deep question here is: regardless of whether Trump is the nominee or not and whether he’s the winner in Nov or not, what becomes of the festering social sore that Trump has so skilfully exposed and poured salt into? (Hard on the heels of Fox, Limbaugh, _et al_, rubbing it raw for 20 years.) > > The Ds and the Rs will be dealing with this in 2018, 2020, 2022, etc. It may just become my “sullen cynicism” flaring into an angry protest candidate at each presidential primary cycle. It may get & stay worse, with folks in the streets. > > The US may well dodge the Trump Presidency bullet this time. But I would not want to keep replaying this scenario every four years until the totalitarians finally get it right. I’m sure the Kochs or the Scientologists can find a manageable actor to play tyrant for them. Or they may decide to do the job themselves. I pretty much agree with Kevin Drum that voters aren’t any angrier this year than they’ve been; it’s just that Trump is a more capable rabble-rouser than we’ve seen since maybe George Wallace. I don’t think you can just grow them in a vat. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/27 "2016-03-18T19:21:20Z")
Flipping the House this cycle is no question a very tall order and usually those sorts of wave elections occur at midterms against the party of the incumbent president … but these are unusual times. The speculations/fantasies go back [to November](http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/how-democrats-could-win-the-house-213318) and are valid today. > [@](#): > > Trump, through his anti-immigrant stances and lack of traditional political polish, could really hurt Republicans in the affluent suburbs, which just so happens to be where future Democratic House majorities are almost certain to be made. … > > … The seats Democrats are likely to target in the future are in places like suburban Philadelphia, Greater New York and New Jersey, suburban Denver, Greater Chicago, Northern Virginia, Las Vegas, Minnesota’s Twin Cities and other suburban areas. These are districts where the number of college graduates is generally higher than the national average and where there are below-average numbers of white evangelicals. It is not outlandish to suggest Carson or Trump would perform poorly in these places. … Many of those R up to +4s are in suburban areas. Large numbers of suburban GOP voters just sitting it out, let alone flipping sides, could go a long way. Or not. This cycle all bets may be off. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/28 "2016-03-19T00:40:27Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > As a Democrat leaning independent who would like to see the GOP destroyed and then build back up again (and not see a GOP president until this happens), should I be rooting for a straight up Trump victory or a brokered convention? I’m thinking the latter would do more to foment the revolution, and probably result in a Democratic victory? If you want the party destroyed and built back up again, then you don’t want it to go in the direction it’s currently going. What many Democrats seemed to be predicting was that due to demographic change, the party would have to become more liberal. Instead, it’s becoming more populist, which means being more liberal on some issues, like entitlements(Trump pledges no cuts), but pretty virulent about things like immigration and trade. Basically, the GOP is finding its future as a European-style right-wing populist party, and those parties are gaining ground. I don’t think it’s any healthier here than it is there, and the elites need to stop screwing around in all Western countries. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/29 "2016-03-19T00:43:18Z")
How much longer do you plan to keep supporting them, given all that? Your party has already evolved to the point where Jean-Marie Le Pen is happy endorsing your pending nominee. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/30 "2016-03-19T00:59:58Z")
If the GOP becomes a right wing populist party then I have no interest in them. The Democrats would share more of my views at that point and I’d hope that the presence of 30 million new conservative Democrats plus the realities of demographics(young people vote Democrat, old vote Republican), would change Democrats on federal spending issues, especially elderly entitlements. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/31 "2016-03-19T01:03:36Z")
Insiders seem to think Kasich could win majority support if all the delegates are unbound > **[Insiders: Kasich could win a contested convention](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/john-kasich-contested-convention-insiders-220946)** > > POLITICO Caucus members say the Ohio governor would be more acceptable to GOP delegates than Ted Cruz or Donald Trump. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/32 "2016-03-19T02:14:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > And this article says Ryan is the chairman. Unless he’s definitely not going to accept a nomination, he should probably not be chairman. It would look like he managed the convention to get himself the nomination. > > [Ryan says open GOP convention 'more likely' | Fox News](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/17/ryan-says-open-gop-convention-more-likely.html?intcmp=hpbt1) The Speaker of the House is always the chairman of the party’s convention. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/33 "2016-03-19T11:45:08Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If the GOP becomes a right wing populist party then I have no interest in them. The Democrats would share more of my views at that point and I’d hope that the presence of 30 million new conservative Democrats plus the realities of demographics(young people vote Democrat, old vote Republican), would change Democrats on federal spending issues, especially elderly entitlements. For the past few decades, the GOP has been a party that’s used right wing populism as a bait-and-switch to further the interests of the plutocratic class. I guess that’s preferable to the populists actually taking control, huh? 😉 > [@adaher](#): > > Insiders seem to think Kasich could win majority support if all the delegates are unbound > > [http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/john-kasich-contested-convention-insiders-220946](http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/john-kasich-contested-convention-insiders-220946) I think I’ll pass the mic to a couple of sources [via Kilgore](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/gop-convention-is-looking-a-lot-more-predictable.html): [Paul Ryan:](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/ryan-rules-out-nomination-may-not-have-a-choice.html) > [@](#): > > “I’ve been really clear about this,” he said. “If you want to be president, you should run for president. We should select our nominee from among the people who are running for president. Clear and simple. So no, I am not going to be the president. I am not going to be the nominee.” He added, “I am not going to become the president through Cleveland.” And then, there’s [the folks on the Rules Committee](http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/rnc-rules-insiders-speak-out-contested-convention-n541146), the people who would have to implement the rules changes to allow a Romney (or a Kasich, if he fails to win 8 states) to be eligible for the nomination: > [@](#): > > While politicos have speculated about a new candidate swooping in to win a contested convention, such as House Speaker Paul Ryan, insiders on the RNC Rules Committee say that idea would be dead on arrival in Cleveland this July. > > “Ridiculous — not happening,” said one Rules Committee member, asked about the prospect of candidates getting on the ballot who did not run this year. > > “There’s no way in hell that any of these candidates — who have worked this hard and spent this much money — are going to say, ‘OK, now, for the good of the party, I’ll sit down and let’s bring back Mitt Romney,’” said the insider. “That’s a fantasy world — there’s zero chance of that happening.” > > Another committee member said creating a path for a new candidate would lead to a party meltdown. > > “Change the rules drastically you will have a problem,” said the insider, who requested anonymity to discuss controversial convention scenarios. “You want to have World War III and destroy the party?” > > Indeed, most of the 19 Rules Committee members reached by MSNBC opposed any rule enabling new candidates to run at the convention. Only three backed a rule allowing new candidates to run. Now, there are 56 people on the Rules Committee, so it’s possible that MSNBC somehow got a really skewed sample, and there’s really a potential majority for opening the floodgates to new candidates. But unless the sample is pretty damn skewed, 19 of 56 should be more than enough to tell you what’s up. So in all likelihood, it’s down to Trump and Cruz (and Kasich, if he can win another 7 states). ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/34 "2016-03-19T12:21:50Z")
But again what happens if the delegates just refuse to give Trump or Cruz a majority and Kasich doesn’t qualify? I guess one out is that the convention just disbands without ever nominating a candidate and the party runs an independent who isn’t really an independent. If the bulk of the delegates are just GOP establishment types, then Trump or Cruz can’t win a majority once they are unbound. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/35 "2016-03-19T12:53:14Z")
Interesting scenario. And plausible at least at first. Within the terms of your scenario … Once Kasich doesn’t qualify, then there are only two candidates. Once the delegates are unbound then each delegate may vote Trump (T), Cruz © , or abstain (A). I don’t know how the rules treat abstentions, but if they aren’t counted as votes, then one or the other of T or C will have a majority on the next ballot. The odds of a tie are very slim, even if 2000 of the roughly 2500 abstain. The odds of getting 250/250 vice 249/251 or even more lopsided are negligible. OTOH, if the rules count abstentions, so the winner needs to break 50% of total delegates then it gets a bit more interesting. Let’s say the first vote goes T/C/A = 40%/40%/20%. No winner. So they re-vote after some harranguing. It goes 41 / 41 / 18. They continue late into the wee hours with everybody getting testier and testier. The lead position may swap between T and C a couple times. Abstentions may even grow and wane. But eventually one or the other begins to pull ahead bit by bit. There’s nobody to make (or more importantly, enforce) \*en masse \*deals, so we’re seeing game theory being applied by 2500 individual confused and tired amateurs. A sizeable fraction of whom don’t like either remaining candidate very much. Eventually, just like in a rope and mud puddle tug-of-war the holdouts run out of stamina against the slowly gathering momentum of the other as the sun comes up on voting day 4. Then suddenly one team drags the other over the line. Which man will it be? Flip a coin. The outcome of the flip will have just as much electoral or political meaning as does the exhausted surrender of 2500 sleep-deprived delegates. A much simpler possibility is what happened in 2008 (or was it 12?) where an indistinguishably close voice vote was called by the Chair as an absolute win for one side. If every vote was roll call by named individual delegate that trick couldn’t be played. But AIUI that’s not the case here. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/36 "2016-03-19T12:56:48Z")
If the delegates decide to just nominate one of the two, it will be Cruz, no question. But Cruz hasn’t won majorities of delegates in 8 states, and there’s no guarantee that he will. Of course, the GOP leadership could just decide that nominating nobody is the plan, in which case they’d do a dozen or so rounds and then just dismiss the convention. There is another very, very unlikely scenario, but not entirely implausible: Disband the convention and the party elite throw their support to Gary Johnson. He’s a Republican in good standing and has the resume to be a President, being a two term governor. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/37 "2016-03-19T13:03:48Z")
BTW, doesn’t this sometimes happen at the state level, where a major party won’t field a nominee but might tacitly back an agreeable third party candidate? It would be very unusual to do that at the federal level, but at least Johnson will have the virtue of already being on the ballot, and without an official GOP candidate can draw all the usual suspects’ money. You know the Kochs won’t have a problem with him. If Trump or Cruz are pissed off, good luck getting on the ballot that late. ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/38 "2016-03-19T13:09:00Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > I don’t know how the rules treat abstentions, but if they aren’t counted as votes, then one or the other of T or C will have a majority on the next ballot. The odds of a tie are very slim, even if 2000 of the roughly 2500 abstain. The odds of getting 250/250 vice 249/251 or even more lopsided are negligible. Rule 40(d): > [@](#): > > (d) When at the close of a roll call any candidate for nomination for President of the United States or Vice President of > the United States has received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the convention, the chairman of the convention shall > announce the votes for each candidate whose name was presented in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (b) of this rule. So, the winner must get a majority of the “votes entitled to be cast in the convention.” But, in constructing your scenarios, also keep in mind Rule 32: > [@](#): > > RULE NO. 32 > Suspension of Rules > A motion to suspend the rules shall always be in order, but only when made by authority of a majority of the delegates > from any state and seconded by a majority of the delegates from each of seven (7) or more other states, severally. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/39 "2016-03-19T13:11:21Z")
So does that mean in the case of an impasse they can just change the rules? ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2016, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264/40 "2016-03-19T13:31:12Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > So does that mean in the case of an impasse they can just change the rules? They can suspend any given rule as far as I can tell. Rule 30 says that the convention shall be run according to the Rules of the House of Representatives, unless otherwise specified in the RNC rules. Rule XV of the House rules says that 2/3 of the members voting shall be required to suspend any rule. I don’t know if it requires a roll call or if a voice vote suffices. That’s all I know. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/handicapping-the-gop-primary-a-brokered-convention/749264.md?page=3)