The Republicans have had enough with this Obama guy. They are very angry. My brother taught me: never go into a fight angry.
The main problem I can see with this is, if there is nobody for the Republicans to stand behind, then a lot of them will stay home, and, as a result, a number of seats in Congress that the Republicans could have won will go to the Democrats.
Maybe all of them would … Maybe there would be a dozen “Republican” standard bearers. I mean, at least half of the problem is that every Republican who could tie a Windsor knot all insisted on running at once. I bet if the Pubs don’t name a candidate, most of them (including Mitt Romney) would jump back in.
I find it doubtful with the twin realities of campaign finance and being relevant enough to actually get a substantial percentage of the vote. Every additional candidate would be an albatross around Trump’s neck, not that he needs any, and ensure the Republican-hated Democratic Presidency.
I still see only two workable possibilities for the R’s; either Trump or somebody else jobbing him and getting the nomination, but even the latter is likely to have the effect mentioned above.
Being a minarchist, I’d love Gary Johnson to have a shot.
It ain’t going to happen though.
Gary Johnson is probably the only “Republican” with a realistic chance of attracting left of “center” voters away from the Democrat.
If we had a controversy like 2000, the Rs in the Senate might regret leaving a split SCotUS to rule on a voting rights type error, or perhaps a faithless elector monkeywrenching the count. In which case, Congress would have to choose a President. But we cannot be sure how well that would work: in a congressional selection, Texas and Vermont each get the same number of votes: one per state. We could, at least in theory, have a government in disarray; it is not clear how long the country could remain functional without a chief executive or how the government would decide to proceed in getting a replacement. But one thing is clear: the small/anti-government advocates would have what they want.
Christ.
Yeah, that is the other thing they want.
But he’s disqualified due to that “natural-born citizen” rule…
I thought the Republican Establishment wants an open convention so they can get Paul Ryan nominated.
With the way Lindsay Graham has “endorsed” Ted Cruz and Mitt Romney has “endorsed” John Kasich, I’m beginning to think the establishment has just said “Fucking fuck it already, see you in fucking 2018.”
He said, “Christ!”
It was funny how he had named the only man
Who could save him now
Harry Chapin - “30,000 Pounds Of Bananas”
This gives me a scary thought of something worse than Trump wrecking the GOP: Trump wrecking the LP (and the GOP). If Trump is rebuffed at the convention, would he seek the LP nomination? Would the LP “make a deal with the devil” for an increase in name recognition? Would Trump bother with this? One idea in its favor might be that Trump could say he promised not to run as an independent, but did not promise not to accept the LP nomination.
P.s. I previously floated an idea how the GOP could get something in exchange for dumping Trump.
The day the Republicans can even act together enough to nominate a presidential candidate is the same day they’re finished as a national party.
Why so?
It’s a total dissolution of coherence. Who ever is left will go looking elsewhere or talking to their buds about restructuring as a new party.
If they want Christ, I say make a compromise, offer them Krist.
Or Crist: Charlie Crist - Wikipedia
He’s pretty darn politically incoherent too.
Both parties have already had Crist.
Bolding mine.
IMO that’s not much of a risk.
The rules on this are crystal clear. Yes, a lot of rank and file Americans don’t yet know what the rules are. The media will educate the heck out of them if/when the time comes. But the rules themselves are clear. Contrast that with the situation in the R nominating process that the rules are subject to change on the fly, and don’t necessarily always result in a decision, and you can see there’s a lot more room for folks starting a brawl to overturn the chessboard rather than lose the game.
And yes, a lot of Americans will not be happy with the result of a one-state-one-vote selection of the President. Which may well be the trigger for some kind of constitutional amendment movement. If so, that’ll play out over the course of years or decades even.
Here’s a different scenario to *really *send the Trump fans into orbit …
Trump wins the popular vote narrowly. With lots of Trump-favorable violence and voter intimidation at most polling places in swing states. The kind of stuff we expect in Third World nations with UN election monitors, not Europe or the US.
Trump also wins the EC narrowly on the back of those swing states. Each of whose vote counts is vigorously contested in court.
It gets past late Dec and into January and Trump and his supporters are getting ever more bellicose and brown-shirty as the courts try to avoid making a call.
Obama declares that he’s going to “remain in charge here in Washington” as Al Haig almost said once upon a time. At least until the dust settles on the election. Congress, both old and new, looks into the totalitarian abyss and decides this is probably a good idea and overwhelmingly votes a resolution of support.
And thus do the far-rightists enshrine a cool, relatively calm leftist leadership that lasts until they get the fires put out and the cities rebuilt.
Do I think this likely? Nope. But it has that *hoist by petard *thing written all over it. Which seems to be a theme this year.
IIUC Obama can not remain in charge because of the 22nd amendment, not sure if then it will be Biden then because, would the congress invent a rule like the Biden rule for SCOTUS? (That was just an observation of Biden, there was no move to make that a rule)
This is because I see that the Republican congress would likely make moves so that the second in line would be the one. Say hello to the Paul Ryan’s single term presidency.