# Is it possible for a US party to refuse to let someone run for office under their party banner? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 9, 2015, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695 "2015-07-09T20:31:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/21 "2015-07-10T08:51:37Z")
What it comes down to is this: The Establishment GOP could try to use lawsuits to run Trump off long enough that he’s missing important deadlines and/or debates such that he no longer has a real shot at the GOP nomination. This would be sleazy and unethical and a blatant delay tactic, but it would work. However, if he had a shot at the GOP nomination to begin with, that would hurt the GOP a lot more than it would hurt Trump, because it would validate Trump as The Man The Establishment Fears, and make the GOP The Frightened Establishment What Hates Your Freedoms. Trump could run as an independent and make a better showing than Perot did in 1992, possibly beating the GOP. After that, the GOP would be finished, because losing an electoral fight to Trump is only a shade better than losing a game of _Operation_ to Michael J. Fox. So a party is never in a real position to try and run someone off: Either the party is big enough that the someone isn’t a threat, in which case why bother, or the someone _is_ a big threat, in which case running them off will only make them a worse threat. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/22 "2015-07-10T13:55:16Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If Trump won the nomination More likely to happen is that Trump loses the nomination to say… Jeb Bush, and then runs anyway as a Republican. What’s the recourse in that situation? Would the GOP have to basically mount a PR campaign to actively disavow him and push Jeb Bush as the “real” candidate, or could they get some sort of court order without a suit to have him cease and desist calling himself a Republican candidate? (I have to figure that the second part is true, otherwise one party or the other would run some kind of horrid child-molester candidate under the other party’s name in hopes of discrediting them) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/23 "2015-07-10T14:07:03Z")
If Trump runs as an independent, the Democrat wins. Period. There’s nothing the GOP can do except try to keep him off the ballot, which IMO, is shady. Just accept that either party can be Nadered at any time and live with it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/24 "2015-07-10T14:57:29Z")
He’s not talking about running as an independent. He’s asking about running as a Republican, though not the party’s candidate. To which the answer is “you can’t do that.” You can hold yourself out as _a Republican who is a candidate_, but the party could obtain an injunction requiring you to desist from calling yourself _the Republican candidate_. See _California Democratic Party v. Jones_ cited by **Billdo** above. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/25 "2015-07-10T15:16:34Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If Trump won the nomination, the best the national RNC could do is go through the 3rd party ballot process and make Jeb Bush the “Republican” candidate endorsed by the national party. > > But that would tear the party apart. There’s already tension between the grassroots and the Beltway establishment. If the RNC didn’t support the Presidential nominee chosen by the party’s voters it would turn into open warfare. “IF” Trump won the nomination, (or whomever won the nomination,) they would be the parties candidate. Why would anyone assume that a political party wouldn’t support it’s own, chosen during it’s political convention, candidate? That would be like the Democrats not supporting a majority-vote-getting Bernie Sanders just because Bernie is better looking, and certainly more trustworthy, than Hillary. If Bernie won the party convention’s vote, Bernie is the party’s candidate. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/26 "2015-07-10T15:20:23Z")
Sure. But Trump would receive fewer votes in a general election than a bag of turnips. It would be like Ben Affleck winning the Democratic nomination. It’s entirely possible that the party would at least consider abandoning him for someone electable. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/27 "2015-07-10T16:39:37Z")
> [@Billdo](#): > > I do not think that this correct. In [California Democratic Party v. Jones](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/530/567), the Supreme Court upheld a political party’s First Amendment associational right to candidate selection, and when a primary process selects the party’s candidate, the party has the right to limit the candidates running for that party’s nomination. > > [Washington State Grange](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-713.ZS.html) examines a slightly different process, in which the primary election is not party based, but in which the two highest vote-getters are selected for the general election, regardless of their party affiliation. The Supreme Court said that in such a system, a candidate could identify him- or herself with any party he or she selected because it wasn’t an endorsement or nomination from the party. > > It’s a subtle difference, but what it means is that where a nonpartisan primary election is for an open spot in the general election, a political party cannot refuse to let a candidate identify him- or herself as aligned with that party, but where the primary is to select the party’s candidate, the party can limit candidates. You are incorrect in your analysis. In _Jones_ the right of association issue was letting people not a member of the party vote for for a party’s candidate. Basically the Republican can prevent a Democrat from voting in the Republican primary. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/28 "2015-07-10T16:41:57Z")
In past elections the party national committees (or by-laws committees, or some such) have modified the election rules for a variety of reasons. In addition to the delegates elected in the primaries and the caucuses, there are At Large delegates and Superdelegates that are selected through a variety of methods and can be used to steer the nomination. In the 2008 Democratic Convention there were approximately 20% Superdelegates voting for the nomination. If Trump were threatening to garner enough delegates to win the nomination you might see some additional Superdelegates created. > **[Superdelegate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate)** > > In American politics, a superdelegate is an unpledged delegate to the Democratic National Convention who is seated automatically and chooses for themselves for whom they vote. These Democratic Party superdelegates (who make up slightly under 15% of all convention delegates) include party leaders and elected officials (PLEOs). > Democratic superdelegates are free to support any candidate for the presidential nomination. This contrasts with pledged delegates who are selected based on the party pri... ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/29 "2015-07-10T16:58:29Z")
There was a little thing called the Civil Rights Movement, which was heavily focused on voting in Democratic primaries and having those votes counted. Laws passed in the wake of that era make it essentially impossible to ignore the wishes of the primary in setting a candidate. There is no “board of Republicans” that can just pick someone in the back room, and if it could be proven that they were trying, they would be in federal court. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2015, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/30 "2015-07-10T21:45:08Z")
> [@Haberdash](#): > > Laws passed in the wake of that era make it essentially impossible to ignore the wishes of the primary in setting a candidate. The Democratic Party did manage to [strip delegates](https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_interviews_Bob_Ely,_Democratic_Party_presidential_challenger_to_Barack_Obama) form multiple minor candidates in 2012 for violations of Party rules. There’s still a gap where the party can exert some control in a way that presumably can stand up in court. The candidates losing delegates were effectively running their campaign from their spare bedroom (or literally their prison cell in one case.) A candidate like Trump who can afford to hire professionals is probably less susceptible to harsh scrutiny turning up rules violations that result in stripped delegates. A candidate with money would probably also increase the risk of politically ugly litigation if there was debate about the application of those rules. The DNC hasn’t managed to keep Willie Carter, who’s basically a fundamentalist Democrat, off ballots going back to 1988. Carter 2016…the eighth time is the charm!!! ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2015, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/31 "2015-07-11T07:22:45Z")
Here’s a related question. I realize that anyone can run as a Democrat, but I wonder why the DNC doesn’t demand that Sanders change his official Senate affiliation to Democrat. Last I checked, news stories still refer to him as Sanders(I-VT). ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2015, 9:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/32 "2015-07-11T09:03:53Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > the Democrat Party > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > \*Really? \* Oh, don’t act so surprised. :dubious: To the OP’s question, it appears that changing ballot-access rules after the fact wouldn’t fly. ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2015, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/33 "2015-07-11T12:04:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Here’s a related question. I realize that anyone can run as a Democrat, but I wonder why the DNC doesn’t demand that Sanders change his official Senate affiliation to Democrat. Last I checked, news stories still refer to him as Sanders(I-VT). How and why would they do that? By running as an independent, a popular candidate is convinced to keep running every six years, and the voters are convinced to support him. The Democrats still get the full benefit of his presence as he votes with them when it matters. You can’t force someone to change their political party. I guess they could try to entice him by offering a key committee chairmanship if he switches (this does happen when the Senate is 51-49 and the minority party is trying to do anything it can to make one person change) but for the prior reasons, why bother? ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2015, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/34 "2015-07-11T12:11:12Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Here’s a related question. I realize that anyone can run as a Democrat, but I wonder why the DNC doesn’t demand that Sanders change his official Senate affiliation to Democrat. Last I checked, news stories still refer to him as Sanders(I-VT). The independent schtick is disingenuous and I think the media would be justified in not playing along, especially since he runs in the Democratic primary in Vermont (but then declines the nomination after he wins), but is there actually an official Senate affiliation other than who he caucuses with? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2015, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/35 "2015-07-12T07:53:40Z")
Actually, it looks like his independent status is a small complication for getting on the ballot in NH: [http://www.startribune.com/sanders-independent-status-could-pose-issue-in-nh-primary/313592291/](http://www.startribune.com/sanders-independent-status-could-pose-issue-in-nh-primary/313592291/) ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/36 "2015-07-13T07:25:15Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > No. We don’t have Euro-style cadre parties with party dues and membership cards and hierarchical organization. There is no mechanism for expulsion from either major party. It’s more of an individual-entrepreneurial model. In that case isn’t a party’s brand identity trademarked and therefore registered to someone who would be in a position not to license candidate X to use it, and to sue them if they tried to? Of course, if whoever such a person or body is did that, and the primary system and conventions went ahead and nominated candidate X, you’d presumably have what Europeans (and indeed Canadians) would understand as a party split, and one or the other would either cave in or form a separate party. ---
**Author:** ![russian\_heel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f05b48/32.png) [@russian\_heel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/russian_heel)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/37 "2015-07-13T07:49:05Z")
Surely there are multiple mechanisms the Republican Party apartniks could use to expel Donald Trump from the Party but right now unless The Donald says something offensive about black people or drops a child molestation joke, it would be ill-advised. One, he is scoring well in the polls and an expulsion could end up with Trump running as an Independent or third party candidate saying he isn’t a politician, and “look at what those Republican insiders did to me”, taking crucial votes away from the Republicans, delivering the White House to Hillary Clinton. Trump would be made to look like a victim. Two, what a punching bag for other Republican candidates. If I was Jeb Bush or any of the other candidates Id be begging the Republican Party to make sure Trump was at every debate, so I could prod and poke him into saying something really stupid that would crash his campaign. Finally, Trump isn’t going to enter any primary, anyway. He will drop out in September citing some bullshit reason, claiming he would have won the nomination and the election, but either business, personal or some other horse’s ass shit reason made him dropout. Remember, the guy is a professional con. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/38 "2015-07-13T14:31:12Z")
> [@russian\_heel](#): > > Surely there are multiple mechanisms the Republican Party apartniks could use to expel Donald Trump from the Party but right now unless The Donald says something offensive about black people or drops a child molestation joke, it would be ill-advised. He’s already this round’s first GOP Rape Guy. > [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Oh, don’t act so surprised. :dubious: Not surprise, disdain. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/39 "2015-07-13T14:58:15Z")
I’m not asking about expelling him from the party. I’m asking about keeping his name separate from the Republican Party banner on a ballot. There was a comment upthread suggesting that there might be TWO Republican candidates for president – assuming Donald loses the nomination but still insists on running, and still called himself a Republican rather than an independent. This is something I doubt would be allowed, though I’m not sure how it would be stopped. ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2015, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695/40 "2015-07-13T15:36:41Z")
There have been past incidents of factions large enough to run another campaign refusing to endorse their party’s nominee and forming temporary splinter groups. In 1872, Republicans who didn’t support Grant’s second term bolted and formed the “Liberal Republican Party.” Their efforts at being the “second Republicans” were somewhat dampered when the Democrats cross-endorsed their ticket, so effectively they just became opposition voters. A more obvious example is 1948. Southern Democrats who perceived the Truman ticket as too sympathetic to civil rights formed the States Rights Democratic Party, popularly known as the Dixiecrats, and ran Strom Thurmond. George Wallace’s 1968 campaign was essentially the same thing, but didn’t use “Democratic” in its name. If Donald Trump wins the nomination and Jeb Bush’s supporters want to form the Moderate Republican Party or whatever, they can. They would still have to start from scratch on ballot access, because Trump would enjoy all of the automatic privileges that Republicans earned by meeting thresholds in past elections. Trump would still be the nominee of the “Republican Party” on the ballots. Trump isn’t going to win anything, by the way – his candidacy is propped up by Democratic editorialists who like making fun of the most mockable Republican on the scene. He doesn’t have any real supporters and none of the above is going to happen. But that’s how it would play out if it did. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-for-a-us-party-to-refuse-to-let-someone-run-for-office-under-their-party-banner/724695.md?page=3)