|
Eschers Basement posted:To ratfuck Trump at the convention, they need to convince a majority of the delegates on the rules committee, and then some large number of delegates during the voting, that the ratfucking is good and should be done. They then get to face the wrath of all of the Trump supporters who had the nomination stolen AND the disdain of moderates who wouldn't want to do something so un-democratic. Can't the guys on the rules committee just vote to not seat any of the delegates that Trump has as loyalists, and unbind the ones who are actually Cruz supporters? Or just unbind all the delegates on the first ballot, and then have all the guys Cruz installed keep Trump from getting a majority? Both of these are burn the party to the ground level things, but I'd have to think the public would think the same thing about a third party Cruz/Kasich missile being shot at Trump in the general. They'd be getting backing from all the standard powerbrokers, so people would put two and two together rather quickly.
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
So apparently the rural Edwards county in Texas is being run by a corrupt "Constitutional sheriff".
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:My only kind of meta complaint as some people have alluded to is that Ted Cruz's ideology hasn't really gotten much media coverage, like others have said it's horribleness is hard to understate and the fact that it's apparently going to go unexamined and rejected by the general public is a disappointment. This is the Election of Trump. We need to save some horrible aspect of the American Psyche to display during 2020, and it looks like that's going to be Ted Cruz's Dominionism.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Essentially the rules committee can do whatever the gently caress they want as political parties weren't a part of the constitution. They unless I'm misunderstanding something could say gently caress the primary system and just have the head of the party nominate whoever the gently caress they want. This isn't something that is controlled by anything other than the specific party running the primaries. They won't do this obviously(probably?) and would probably go only as far as unbinding the delegates, allowing them to vote for whoever. But there is nothing other than the fear of voters feeling disenfranchised that prevents them from nominating whoever they want regardless of the votes.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Essentially the rules committee can do whatever the gently caress they want as political parties weren't a part of the constitution. They'd have to change the rules though. Which is totally in their power, but you completely telegraph their plans to the rest of the world. The angry mob of Trump supporters would be glorious in that event. I kind of want them to try.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:They'd have to change the rules though. Which is totally in their power, but you completely telegraph their plans to the rest of the world. The angry mob of Trump supporters would be glorious in that event. I kind of want them to try. If they don't do it and Trump has the magic number (1237?) Trump's the nominee fullstop. If that's something they want to avoid(assuming Trump reaches that number) they have no choice but to telegraph their plan.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:So apparently the rural Edwards county in Texas is being run by a corrupt "Constitutional sheriff". Pop: 1884 Which is still 10x more than the state's least populous county!
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:So apparently the rural Edwards county in Texas is being run by a corrupt "Constitutional sheriff". I think we are going to see a lot more of this as the Bundy standoff types realize that the real way to be huge pains in the asses is from within the system that really isn't prepared to deal with them there.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Goons need to dispell the notion of anything but a Trump nomination at the convention. Trump will get the remaining delegates he needs because Cruz in in the death spiral that Rubio went through shortly before his Florida loss, and there is no way in hell RNC officials will let the convention go off the rails by having enough delegates switch sides to Cruz.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
RevKrule posted:In the year of our lord 2016, Donald John Trump is trying to link Rafael Edward Cruz to the John Fitzgerald Kennedy administration in a way no one has ever thought of. What?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Can't the guys on the rules committee just vote to not seat any of the delegates that Trump has as loyalists, and unbind the ones who are actually Cruz supporters? Or just unbind all the delegates on the first ballot, and then have all the guys Cruz installed keep Trump from getting a majority? Both of these are burn the party to the ground level things, but I'd have to think the public would think the same thing about a third party Cruz/Kasich missile being shot at Trump in the general. They'd be getting backing from all the standard powerbrokers, so people would put two and two together rather quickly. It's more about precedent, I think. The Rules Committee is made up of 2 delegates from each state, elected by the delegates of their state. Trump has won 27 states so far and will probably win another 5, so for him not to have a majority of the Rules Committee delegates in his pocket looking out for the ratfuck would mead Cruz et al would have to do an exceptional job of outmanuevering Trump by replacing pro-Trump people with secret pro-Cruz people and then arranging for those people to get onto the Committee. This isn't just "power brokers come out against Trump": this would be "power brokers go directly against the democratic process of electing delegates by replacing elected Trump delegates with secret #neverTrumps, and do it so much and so often that over a third of Trump delegates actually turn out to be #neverTrumps, and then the Rules Committee makes an obvious play to strip Trump of the ability to be nominated. It would be unprecedented since the primary reforms in the early '70's, and would rival the "smoke filled rooms" of the 19th century for sheer power-grabbing. Conversely, Cruz or Kasich or Sasse deciding "Hey, the parties don't represent me, I'm going to run third party" would be seen as sour grapes, but in line with what John Anderson did in 1980, and to a lesser extent, the Nader/Perot/Wallace/Thurmond tradition of politicians making a big third party run to prove they still had support.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:So apparently the rural Edwards county in Texas is being run by a corrupt "Constitutional sheriff". This is probably every 'constitutional' sheriff, ever.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
So here's an article that Cory Robison wrote about Neoliberalism https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/05/jonathan-chait-charles-peters-mont-pelerin
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:They'd have to change the rules though. Which is totally in their power, but you completely telegraph their plans to the rest of the world. The angry mob of Trump supporters would be glorious in that event. I kind of want them to try. They've been telegraphing their plans to screw Trump over for quite a while now. Rampant speculation about contested conventions no matter Trump's delegate advantage and Cruz openly poaching delegates and making a worthless "alliance" with Kasich shows intent like an army massing on the border of a neighboring country. Officially changing the rules to let Cruz's delegate fuckery work is the moment that army officially crosses the border and there's no going back.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:The Rules Committee is made up of 2 delegates from each state, elected by the delegates of their state. Trump has won 27 states so far and will probably win another 5, so for him not to have a majority of the Rules Committee delegates in his pocket looking out for the ratfuck would mead Cruz et al would have to do an exceptional job of outmanuevering Trump by replacing pro-Trump people with secret pro-Cruz people and then arranging for those people to get onto the Committee. Just because the delegates are bound to vote for Trump on the first ballot doesn't mean they're bound to vote for rules that keep it that way. And with the way Cruz has been stacking the delegate pool with his own people (Virginia, Colorado, South Carolina, etc.) it makes it MORE likely for Trump to get ratfucked by the rules committee, not less.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
If the GOP tried to take the nomination away from Trump after he has 1237+, well, I don't know what would happen but it would be biblical.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
zoux posted:If the GOP tried to take the nomination away from Trump after he has 1237+, well, I don't know what would happen but it would be biblical. Nationwide riots, imo.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
zoux posted:If the GOP tried to take the nomination away from Trump after he has 1237+, well, I don't know what would happen but it would be biblical.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Nationwide riots, imo. White people would be the one's protesting, so it wouldn't be a riot.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
zoux posted:If the GOP tried to take the nomination away from Trump after he has 1237+, well, I don't know what would happen but it would be
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:White people would be the one's protesting, so it wouldn't be a riot. lol when a bunch of white people destroy a black community they always call it a "race riot" http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2016/05/02/476450908/in-memphis-a-divide-over-how-to-remember-a-massacre-150-years-later quote:"The rumor among the whites was that this was a full-scale black uprising in South Memphis," Ash says, "and so white mobs began forming, marched into South Memphis and began indiscriminately shooting black men, women and children." This went on for 36 hours.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
I doubt that the GOP has the guts to ratfuck Trump openly this year, but I bet that they'll rework the rules something fierce for 2020.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Yeah, see also the Tulsa Race Riot - notable for military fetishists as one of the first aerial assaults on US soil, when white people bombed the middle class black district from the air.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
All I'm saying is that the media won't call it a riot. Sports victory celebration yes, riot no.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:The Rules Committee is made up of 2 delegates from each state, elected by the delegates of their state. Trump has won 27 states so far and will probably win another 5, so for him not to have a majority of the Rules Committee delegates in his pocket looking out for the ratfuck would mead Cruz et al would have to do an exceptional job of outmanuevering Trump by replacing pro-Trump people with secret pro-Cruz people and then arranging for those people to get onto the Committee. Uh, that's what Cruz has been doing for the last few weeks. He'd put lots of "Trump" delegates forward who are Cruz loyalists, and Trump is too incompetent at actual politics to stop him. It's been in the real people news (like on NPR) on and off for the last two weeks or so. It's an old school Stalinesque move (seriously, that's how he gained power after Lenin's death) but something being a little sketchy never would stop old Teddy boy before.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Uh, that's what Cruz has been doing for the last few weeks. He'd put lots of "Trump" delegates forward who are Cruz loyalists, and Trump is too incompetent at actual politics to stop him. It's been in the real people news (like on NPR) on and off for the last two weeks or so. It's an old school Stalinesque move (seriously, that's how he gained power after Lenin's death) but something being a little sketchy never would stop old Teddy boy before. Yes, he's done some of it, but that doesn't mean he has done (or even can do) enough of it. He's done it in SC, and he's gotten a few in other states, but not nearly enough to flip nine full delegations so that they elect his people to the rules committee, and then convince Kasich and Rubio to both support him screwing Trump out of it (when Rubio has gone on record as not seeing a need to stop Trump).
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:Yeah, see also the Tulsa Race Riot - notable for military fetishists as one of the first aerial assaults on US soil, when white people bombed the middle class black district from the air. white people can do one better than that, in 1898 wilmington north carolina had a straight up race coup
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
For the record, I find this thread subtitle a lot more palatable than the previous month's subtitle. Imagining Reagan's face etched on a sacrifice is disturbing enough.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Seriously, Bibi's attempt to set himself up as the Voice of Jews Everywhere is crass, offensive, and self-serving. Hell, I'd argue it's antisemitic too. It ignores the individual agency of Jewish people to have different or even opposing viewpoints so he can forward the objects of right-wing Israeli politicians. Welcome to Israel, we hope you enjoy your stay.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:Welcome to Israel, we hope you enjoy your stay. *Does not apply to Ethiopian jews.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
So all this talk of how the term race riot is used to not blame whites for attacking minority or ethnic populations got me to see if I could find a definition for the word. So after just typing race riot into google it gave me a bunch of stuff about a Race Riot in Chicago in 1919 but so eventually it took me to a wikipedia page where it was laid out like thisquote:Mass racial violence in the United States, also called race riots, can include such disparate events as:
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Just because the delegates are bound to vote for Trump on the first ballot doesn't mean they're bound to vote for rules that keep it that way. And with the way Cruz has been stacking the delegate pool with his own people (Virginia, Colorado, South Carolina, etc.) it makes it MORE likely for Trump to get ratfucked by the rules committee, not less. Most of the delegates bound to vote for a specific candidate on the first ballot are bound to do so by their state's law. Which is why some delegations can vote differently on the second ballot while others are bound for several rounds of balloting. Trump could conceivably have a small enough lead that a few delegates being turned loose ruins it, but that seems unlikely. On the other hand I believe that it is both legal and within the rules for a delegation to all happen to be using the bathroom when they're supposed to be voting, causing no vote to be cast while still not illegally voting for another person on the first ballot. I could be wrong though.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Most of the delegates bound to vote for a specific candidate on the first ballot are bound to do so by their state's law. Which is why some delegations can vote differently on the second ballot while others are bound for several rounds of balloting. Trump could conceivably have a small enough lead that a few delegates being turned loose ruins it, but that seems unlikely. We must make sure they are all using the correct bathroom. This is important.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Sounds like Fox is calling Indiana for Trump, looks like he got over 50% too. Is that the last nail in the coffin? Edit: quoth John Roberts reporting for Fox, "Ted Cruz couldn't have done worse in this state if he had planned it" sit on my Facebook fucked around with this message at 00:09 on May 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Sounds like Fox is calling Indiana for Trump, looks like he got over 50% too. Is that the last nail in the coffin? what is dead can never die Cruz is a believer, in the most basic sense. He's not going to drop out because he believes that God will strike Trump dead at the convention.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Sounds like Fox is calling Indiana for Trump, looks like he got over 50% too. Is that the last nail in the coffin? You can't drive the last nail until after Cruz and the Establishment try their last Hail Marry of Ron Paul channeling rules fuckery. It's almost certainly not going to work against The Donald, but it's going to be hilarious.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Oh man, I really don't want to let the primary chat slip into this thread but the conservative reactions that are being posted in that thread are delicious. Case in point: https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/727637574177542145 Didn't the GOP try to do some soul searching after Romney, so far as to have a moratorium where they realized they should probably not come across the party of old white stubborn assholes?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Oh man, I really don't want to let the primary chat slip into this thread but the conservative reactions that are being posted in that thread are delicious.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:You've heard of Emmett Till right? The useless sacks of flesh that killed him even admitted to the crime, but shockingly got off because the jury just decided the evidence didn't loving matter. there aren't numbers on the practice since there is no objective standard to measure it with. But I think there's a pretty good argument that's what's happening in the Freddy Gray trial, and what happened in the Trayvon Martin case. White losers are more than willing to look the other way for crimes against minorities, especially if those people are "scary" (i.e. not properly submissive to whites) The Freddie Gray trial is about the best anyone can expect in America when its cops being charged for abusing a black person. Antti posted:Jury nullification is "this thing happened but we don't think it is/should be a crime." Turning in a bullshit "not guilty" verdict when the defendants openly admit to the crime is one way how jury nullification works.  Do people in this thread think the foreman comes out and announced "your honor we find them Not Guilty by reason of Jury Nullification" or something? Because that's not how it works unless maybe you have some weird sovcit foreman. Pope Guilty posted:So apparently the rural Edwards county in Texas is being run by a corrupt "Constitutional sheriff". Intimidation of political opponents and corrupt as gently caress? Sounds like she wants to be the female counterpart to Sheriff Joe. rkajdi posted:Can't the guys on the rules committee just vote to not seat any of the delegates that Trump has as loyalists, and unbind the ones who are actually Cruz supporters? Or just unbind all the delegates on the first ballot, and then have all the guys Cruz installed keep Trump from getting a majority? Both of these are burn the party to the ground level things, but I'd have to think the public would think the same thing about a third party Cruz/Kasich missile being shot at Trump in the general. They'd be getting backing from all the standard powerbrokers, so people would put two and two together rather quickly. The short answer is yes, they can do this to ratfuck* Trump and/or Cruz so that the leadership can force its own ticket. It won't happen. The GOP will, at worst, admit to itself that the White House is almost certainly a lost cause and put a lot of focus in to not losing the Senate since both parties know if the Dems retake the Senate they're going to blitz through a shitload of confirmations for judges and other positions the GOP has been blocking. * and completely destroy their party in the process, likely handing the Senate to the Democrats and maybe putting the House at risk due to the chaos of the party infighting and 3rd party (right wing) challengers that would crop up anywhere the deadline hasn't passed.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Donald Trump is clearly gaining ground against Clinton. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html No trolling. How do people actually believe this is a surefire thing when he is gaining on her?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 00:47
|
|