I think the plan right now, assuming there is one, is to wait until the primaries on March 15th and later. By that time the race shifts to blue and purple states like Ohio, Illinois, and Florida. These later states are winner take all. “The establishment” is probably hoping that just one of the establishment lane candidates of Rubio, Bush, and Kasich are still going by then. At that point, Trump and Cruz can split the wingnut vote with the establishment candidate winning these states with a plurality. That seems to be the most likely scenario for Trump loosing.
I suppose that means that two establishment candidates, some combination of Rubio, Bush, or Kasich, have to give up after the Super Tuesday primaries. Bush seems to be the likeliest to drop out. I'm not sure who it would be after that between Rubio and Kasich.
Because he doesn’t need them. He is a big donor, the other big donors know it, and he doesn’t need to court the PACs. Trump is a respected businessman, and now feared because he has not only the money to influence the process but the charisma as well.
That doesn’t sound like a plan. First, it does seem probable to me that unless they are getting seriously trounced Rubio and Bush will hold on til Florida. Second, if the polling holds then even if a single “establishment” candidate is left, one of the wingnuts could still get the plurality in Texas (Cruz polling average 40%) and Florida (Trump polling average also 40%). Third, remember that Rubio isn’t really “establishment”. He is Tea Party except “soft” on immigration. You can’t assume all his support will go to Bush or Kasich should he drop out.
Anyone know what the current convention rules are? Does winning the official nomination require a majority of delegate votes or a plurality? If nobody wins on the first ballot, are delegates free to vote for anyone? That would certainly open up a lot of other options,
I agree that if Trump is leading in delegates at the convention but still doesn’t get the nomination, the party will be seriously damaged, maybe even splitting into now parties.
If there is a scheme to oust Trump, there’s some chance that a quiet word will go out to the preferred candidate(s) to stay in the race, no matter what the primary outcomes, to keep them notionally viable.
There’s no reason to send out a quiet word. The candidates know how things work without having to be told, and they know that even if any one candidate continues claiming 20% or 30% of delegates, he will not have a clear majority.
Hard to say how that will unfold, of course, and that’s precisely the reason they’ll hang on throughout the process. Anyone with even a small chance will keep running.
Majority…under the current rules. It was plurality before last cycles changes.
Yes… if they are on the convention ballot. The current rule is a candidate must win in at least 8 states to be on the convention ballot rule. Before last cycle it was 5 state wins.
The last two answers both were different before rules changes last cycle. There are a lot of options.
Playing overt rules changes if it’s not at least close is fraught with peril. If it’s close they might be able to at least mitigate some of the shit storm by tweaking things so the second place going in can “win” the first ballot with excluded candidate delegates. That at least allows some spin space. Rules changes are a risky course of action but to some extent so is a Trump nomination. They don’t need to choose which grenade to throw themselves on till July, though. Party leadership will have a lot better information to assess risk at the point they need to make changes.
This. I can’t see how the Adelsons, the Kochs and the SuperPACs would allow the clown to get the nomination. I’ll also point out that endorsements from house & senate reps is ZERO. Trump has no established political backing whatsoever at this point.
That happens to be the highlight of his campaign, and the major reason for his support. Right now he has to disavow any endorsements from the establishment.
Why? Don’t you want a few Pubs to start supporting your candidacy if you’re running for the Republican nomination? If five or ten past supporters of Fiorina or Christie switch their support, it could start a snowball in your favor, influencing the establishment voters.
Fiorina and Christie might fly because they’re outside Washington. But yeah, he could turn the endorsements his way, but he’ll want more than one or two in his pocket before he goes that route. He’s going to make the endorsements look like a victory over the establishment when they come in. For now he’s doing better than the candidates who have endorsements so he’s in no hurry to change that aspect of his campaign.
Hurting Trump only make Trump STRONGER! Trump SMASH!
Really, the only thing they can do is endorse him and hope he loses the general election, then wait 4 years and try it again. I think that’s what Bush and others are thinking at this point.
Y’know, while it’s not likely to happen even in the chaos of this cycle, with a crowded enough field it would be at least theoretically possible for no candidate to win the required 8 states. It seems to me to be rather a clumsy ruleset that would make that even possible.
Meanwhile, that rule is almost certainly not going to exclude Trump or Cruz, but it just might end up excluding all of the establishment lane candidates. It looks like, until one of the three remaining establishment candidates drops and throws his support behind another, none of them has a chance of actually winning a state, beyond possibly one from home-field advantage.
The only meaningful thing the party can do by tweaking that rule would be to choose the threshold in just such a way that exactly one of the establishment candidates makes the cut, and hope for the best in the resulting three-way convention vote.
The Koch brothers are adamantly opposed to Trump. All they’d have to do is pick one of the other candidates top annoint and then say to the others, withdraw and we’ll give you “consultant” and “company director” positions worth 100s of millions over the next 20 years. The other GOP candidates are not billionaires and the Kochs can throw around more money than they can ever hope to earn in their lifetimes.
The fact they haven’t done this yet, is also probably because they can’t decide which one they want to support.