# RNC vs. Trump **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [May 2, 2016, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706 "2016-05-02T19:29:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**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:** [May 2, 2016, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/1 "2016-05-02T19:29:27Z")
Should a national committee actively oppose a candidate or do they owe it to the rank-and-file to be unbiased. I think they need to run a fair and unbiased campaign and respect the voting party member. Otherwise, we might as well go back to the old style of back room deals with no voice for the actual voters. You may hate Trump but that doesn’t give the RNC the right to try to get him to lose. Then again the Pubs are the party of exclusion. I’ve been told for a while that I’m not a “real republican” since I am pro-choice and supported SSM. ---
**Author:** ![Locrian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/locrian/32/14146_2.png) [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/2 "2016-05-02T19:43:55Z")
The RNC is a committee which can change their own rules whenever they want. They could even say no delegate can vote unless they’re dressed in drag a day before they vote. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/3 "2016-05-02T19:51:43Z")
No because that would be a subversion of democracy. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/4 "2016-05-02T19:58:01Z")
Bottom line for me is that the Republican Party is essentially a private organization. It’s not part of the government and isn’t required to operate by rules that we might expect a government to operate by. The party is allowed to define a platform and to require candidates to follow it. There is a mixture of party rules and state laws, and these define how delegates vote and how candidates are moved forward. A lot of Trump’s complaints about the Republican party’s system are equally valid against the Electoral College system written into the Constitution. America is NOT a democracy that relies on popular vote to elect our candidates and never has been. Period, the end. Why would anyone vote for a candidate who hasn’t done enough homework to understand that? Speaking of backroom deals, why is Trump complaining? Backroom deals are his forte, are they not? Isn’t he the master of the deal, who get smart advice, puts the right people in place and gets them to do what he wants? A disputed convention should be his moment of triumph. If he can’t understand the nominating process and make deals with his own freaking party, how will he handle the Democrats, let alone the Mexicans or the Chinese? ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/5 "2016-05-02T20:08:11Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > No because that would be a subversion of democracy. When I was a kid, my sisters and I wanted to have ice cream for dinner. My dad said no. We said that that was a subversion of democracy, but for the same reason as here, that argument didn’t work. I voted ‘absolutely’, but I’m not sure I’d phrase it as ensuring the ‘right’ Republican is nominated. But their duties to the country and to the party (as Americans and Republicans, respectively) trump (no pun intended) their non-existent duty to not weigh in on their own party’s nomination contest. ---
**Author:** ![Kyrie\_Eleison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kyrie_eleison/32/7682_2.png) [@Kyrie\_Eleison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyrie_Eleison)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2016, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/6 "2016-05-02T20:40:42Z")
I voted for “absolutely,” but “they need to ensure the ‘right’ Republican is nominated” sure poisons my selection a bit. I don’t see how it would be unethical for the leadership of a private political party to openly advocate for a particular candidate, even inside the party itself. They might choose to do that, and there would be nothing wrong with it. On the other hand, if they choose to establish a set of rules and promise their members that they will act only as fair arbiters, then they ought to do that. As a private organization, I think they could do either ethically, but it becomes problematic if they promise members that they’ll do one thing, and then actually do something else. But it would also be just fine for one part of the organization to be responsible for establishing and enforcing rules while another separate part promotes particular candidates based on the party’s interests. ---
**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:** [May 2, 2016, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/7 "2016-05-02T21:08:06Z")
I think “right Republican” is appropriate since you can interpret it however you want and talk about it here. “Right Republican” could mean one that completely agrees with the party platform or one that is the party’s favored son or the most general-electable, etc. ---
**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:** [May 2, 2016, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/8 "2016-05-02T21:26:06Z")
The RNC is responsible for more than just the presidential race, so I’m fine with them doing anything legal to try and stop a candidate who is going to lose and also drag a ton of other candidates down with him. Now in this case Cruz would probably drag others down with him also, so I selected the final option in the poll. My objection to the RNC in this campaign is not that they are trying to stop Trump, but that they are as incompetent as the Jedi Council in the prequels. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/9 "2016-05-03T15:17:46Z")
Parties don’t have to be unbiased, but they do need fair rules. The DNC stacking the rules against Sanders by scheduling debates so that there were few viewers was pretty awful. So would changing the rules to deny Trump the nomination if he wins enough delegates. So they don’t need to be unbiased, they can even have a clear favorite, but they must be fair. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/10 "2016-05-03T15:29:13Z")
I’m not sure “ethical” comes into it. They can go with Trump (assuming he gets the majority of delegates) and the “will of the people”, or they can reject that result and pick someone else who will serve their bidding. The problem is that, either way, there will be consequences they don’t like. They’re probably better off to let Trump have it, assuming he’ll lose, and start planning for 2018 and 2020. If they openly discard what the voters have decided they run the risk of either suppressed Republican turnout out of protest, or a third-party run by Trump which will not only guarantee the loss of the chosen GOP candidate but could potentially schism the party. Plus there’s always a chance Trump could win it in November and they can surround him with advisers who will steer him the way they want. But “ethical”? This is politics. Ethics got nothing to do with it. ---
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/11 "2016-05-03T15:35:02Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Parties don’t have to be unbiased, but they do need fair rules. The DNC stacking the rules against Sanders by scheduling debates so that there were few viewers was pretty awful. So would changing the rules to deny Trump the nomination if he wins enough delegates. > > So they don’t need to be unbiased, they can even have a clear favorite, but they must be fair. I agree. That stated, I don’t know for sure that the DNC scheduled the Democratic debates to minimize viewership, but the result certainly seemed to have the taint of a Wasserman bias, which should not have been allowed, especially with all the Democratic talk of fairness. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/12 "2016-05-03T15:42:11Z")
There needs to be an “Other” category in this poll. As others have said, they are a private organization and are not ethically “required” to do anything. However, it would be extremely foolish for them to alter the rules to prevent Trump. Trump will only be around for one election after which the GOP can go into damage control mode in time for the next election. On the other hand having party insiders overturn an election. Will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump was right about the Republican party not listening to its base. That will be a blow that is not so easy to recover from. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/13 "2016-05-03T15:49:55Z")
It’s their party and they’ll pry if they want to. I think they should make some rule for the future such that the presidency isn’t the first electoral office you would hold. Earn your chops in the House or Senate or Governorship first ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/14 "2016-05-03T15:50:13Z")
It’s ethical – their group, their rules and primary voting isn’t the same as general election voting. That said, it’s a very bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/15 "2016-05-03T16:16:39Z")
I can actually see a good argument for changing the rules and making someone else the nominee. Ultimately, the party does decide. There’s no written guarantee that the voters get to choose the nominee and if either party wanted to they could just say it all gets decided at the convention, no delegates are bound regardless of the voting. I think the calculation they will be making is what happens if Trump and his followers get screwed. Even if the Republicans lose this election because of all that, the biggest fear isn’t that Trump runs as a third party or something. It’s that he comes back in four years and does this again. At least if he loses the general, he’s not a future threat. He may try to run again, but he’d lose badly because he’d already proved himself unable to win a general election. Deny him the nomination and he runs again in 2020 with his fanbase even more pissed off and determined. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/16 "2016-05-03T16:17:39Z")
Andrew Sullivan, late of the much-mourned (by me at least) [Dish](http://dish.andrewsullivan.com), has a [new essay](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html) touching on this very topic. > [@Andrew Sullivan](#): > > More to the point, those Republicans desperately trying to use the long-standing rules of their own nominating process to thwart this monster deserve our passionate support, not our disdain. This is not the moment to remind them that they partly brought this on themselves. This is a moment to offer solidarity, especially as the odds are increasingly stacked against them. Ted Cruz and John Kasich face their decisive battle in Indiana on May 3. But they need to fight on, with any tactic at hand, all the way to the bitter end. The Republican delegates who are trying to protect their party from the whims of an outsider demagogue are, at this moment, doing what they ought to be doing to prevent civil and racial unrest, an international conflict, and a constitutional crisis. These GOP elites have every right to deploy whatever rules or procedural roadblocks they can muster, and they should refuse to be intimidated. > > And if they fail in Indiana or Cleveland, as they likely will, they need, quite simply, to disown their party’s candidate. They should resist any temptation to loyally back the nominee or to sit this election out. They must take the fight to Trump at every opportunity, unite with Democrats and Independents against him, and be prepared to sacrifice one election in order to save their party and their country. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/17 "2016-05-03T16:27:09Z")
As is usually the case, Andrew Sullivan is right. I dont know about stealing the nomination from him, but if he wins it, he should be opposed, by the RNC itself if they feel the urge. Back Gary Johnson and make him the de facto GOP nominee and Trump the de facto independent. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2016, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/18 "2016-05-03T16:46:22Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > As is usually the case, Andrew Sullivan is right. I dont know about stealing the nomination from him, but if he wins it, he should be opposed, by the RNC itself if they feel the urge. Back Gary Johnson and make him the de facto GOP nominee and Trump the de facto independent. [Thus guy](http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/_confessions_of_a_republican_why_is_this_campaign_ad_for_lbj_going_viral_52_years_after_it_aired) was right too. It’s an amazing video from 1964. I actually think it applies to Trump more than Goldwater. 4 minute tv ad. ---
**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:** [May 3, 2016, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/19 "2016-05-03T17:16:35Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Ultimately, the party does decide. There’s no written guarantee that the voters get to choose the nominee So the members of the Republican Party are not “the Party”. That bothers me. Bit of a hijack but if Trump has the nomination stolen from him, he should not run as an independent. He should pick an established third party (like Libertarian) and tell his supporters that since the Party doesn’t value their both, they should vote Libertarian _for every elected office top to bottom_ from President to town council. ---
**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:** [May 3, 2016, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706/20 "2016-05-03T17:26:51Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > [Thus guy](http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/_confessions_of_a_republican_why_is_this_campaign_ad_for_lbj_going_viral_52_years_after_it_aired) was right too. It’s an amazing video from 1964. I actually think it applies to Trump more than Goldwater. 4 minute tv ad. Best quote ever [in general with TeaBaggers and Fundamentalists] > [@](#): > > when all these weird groups come out in favor of the candidate of my party — either they’re not Republicans or I’m not. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rnc-vs-trump/753706.md?page=2)