It would have to be a write in campaign. The filing deadline to get on the ballot will have already passed before the convention in 11 states, including two of the largest ones, Texas and Florida. Several more will pass within a week of the convention, and they require a significant number of signatures on a petition to qualify. The biggest state, California, doesn’t close its filing until August 12, but it requires 178,000 signatures to get on the ballot. A pretty heavy lift in less than three weeks.
It’s traditional to put a United Way update or something between a pair of conflicting statements.
There sure are a lot of folks going along with using “conservative” as a label for reactionaries these days.
Yes, but there are two sets of principals here. One, as you have pointed out, is not to put forth a fascist buffoon to represent your party, but the other is is accept the democratic will of the people. To me, changing the rules to overturn the results of an election you don’t like is a much bigger deal that putting forth a repulsive candidate.
I hate Trump with every fiber of my being, but if he somehow managed to win the most electoral votes in the general election, only to have the electors decide to get together and make Martin O’Malley president. I would join in the protests against this move.
A primary is a complicated mix of private organizational rules and laws at the federal, state and even county levels. However, I’d still argue that at its heart, a party’s Presidential nominee is NOT the democratic will of the people. It is an internal selection process within the party that just happens to have democratic-like elements.
As an example of this, a party is not required to let someone run at all. You can’t just declare yourself to be on the ballot. So, no matter how closely you want to follow the will of the people, the people only have a say on candidates the party already approved.
As another example, there are party rules about how votes are conducted, and the rules change as different rounds of voting are conducted. These rules are not law because they’re set by the Republican party itself, and the Republican party has the authority to change them. The rules themselves define how to change the rules.
Any changes at this point are likely to create bad will and other problems, but I don’t think violating the will of the people is one of the problems.
It will with Trump’s base if he’s denied the nomination somehow (a highly unlikely but possible prospect). All the logic in the world won’t convince them that they didn’t get jobbed.
And they would have a point, anyway, regardless of rules.
If the GOP replaces Trump with someone else they are essentially ignoring the will of their own voters. They will be sayin “It’s our party not yours” to their support base.
They will lose by such a huge margin that they will have destroyed the party from within. The time for them to have done something about Trump was during the primary season. It was assumed for way too long that Trump would flame out, but he didn’t, and he is the GOPs clown now and they own him, he is their candidate.
To pull any shenanigans at the convention will have a negative effect on republicans right down to the local school board elections.
dracoi is absolutely correct about the fact that political parties can choose their candidates according to such rules as they decide to institute; and Johnny Ace, Dallas Jones (and others who’ve posted similarly) are ALSO absolutely correct that many would feel–rightly or wrongly–that the nomination is illegitimate if the democratic elements parties have established get thrown out the window at the GOP convention.
So the GOP is probably stuck with Trump. But if they had the courage to do it, they’d be smart to defenestrate the clown and nominate Comey. That guy is impressive.
(If they ran him I’d still vote for Clinton, as (among other reasons) I have more confidence that she’d appoint progressive-leaning Justices and federal judges, than would be the case with Comey. But at least if Comey became President I wouldn’t fear for the continued existence of democracy and the rule of law.)