It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

National Review: The Republican Nomination Will Be Decided at the Convention

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 02:56 AM
link   

The race for the Republican nomination is going to the convention. It must sound strange to hear that — given that this perennial contingency never gets past political-nerd fan fiction. It certainly feels strange to write it. But that’s where we’re headed. While the networks will quickly declare Trump the winner tonight in most (if not all) Super Tuesday states, the math is plain to see. At the current trajectory, no one — not Trump, not Rubio, not Cruz — will secure the necessary delegates to win the nomination outright. Nor, given the calculus, does anyone have any incentive to drop out. The very Mexican standoff that has enabled Trump thus far is likely to trigger a convention-floor failsafe. Somewhere John Nash is smiling.
On to Cleveland: The Republican Nomination Will Be Decided at the Convention


There is only a 37% chance of that according to PredictIt (up 6% today):

Will Republicans have a brokered convention in 2016?
www.predictit.org...

The following is looking a little bit more relevant:

Republican National Committee member on nomination process: “This is the greatest hoax ever.”

I know there are a lot of math lovers on this site. I'm not checking the math before posting this so I'll be interested in their input. Please be as specific as possible if you're going to post mathematical projections in this thread.
edit on 2-3-2016 by Profusion because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 03:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

It's pretty clear at this point. If Trump isn't the nominee the GOP will be completely scuttled, losing not only party members, but more importantly voters.

They simply cannot Ron Paul The Don, it will only end p in flames. Then again the people buying elections running through depends like a kid with candy probably don't care about sides, just who they can buy.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 04:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

The notion that Trump could go independent if pissed off must strike a fear in the GOP leadership though.

I would not dare to call the victory for anyone but the candidate that has gotten the most votes by far. Talk about disenfranchising the electorate!



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Profusion

It's pretty clear at this point. If Trump isn't the nominee the GOP will be completely scuttled, losing not only party members, but more importantly voters.

They simply cannot Ron Paul The Don, it will only end p in flames. Then again the people buying elections running through depends like a kid with candy probably don't care about sides, just who they can buy.



What if Trump bails volentairly. And the gop puts in their intended shill, chosen long ago?



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12




What if Trump bails volentairly. And the gop puts in their intended shill, chosen long ago?


I have thought of that as well, but I can kind of dismiss it, because in a way Trump has gain a following but also appears to have alienated himself from the very same people he has done business with and who he as made millions with , or has he?

Pelosi logic might be right this time " You have to elect Trump , to know what trump is about" , LOL

2016 is clearly going to be a cluster F with a Hillary or Trump administration. Also say good bye to the internet as we know it.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: interupt42




2016 is clearly going to be a cluster F with a Hillary or Trump administration. Also say good bye to the internet as we know it.


With Trump the business man, he will find a way to make us pay for the .www. A made to order revenue stream . Mark my words.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12




With Trump the business man, he will find a way to make us pay for the .www. A made to order revenue stream . Mark my words.


To be fair , all politicians are business man-women , and the internet impacts all the establishment .

Hence I think regardless of trump or not we are going to go back to an AOL internet shell where your content is controlled.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Trump will build a wall around this Mexican standoff.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

To lock the nomination, a candidate needs 1,237 delegates. Current delegate counts:

Trump: 316
Cruz: 226
Rubio: 106
Kasich: 25
Carson: 8

total: 681

Prior to yesterday:

Trump: 79
Cruz: 16
Rubio: 15
Kasich: 5
Carson: 3

total: 118

Trump picked up 237 of 563 delegates yesterday — 42%. There's 1,784 delegates left to be had. If Trump only gets 42% of those remaining (749 additional), his total would only be 1,065 or 86% of what is needed. Trump would need 921 (51.6%) of the 1,784 delegates remaining to lock the nomination. IIRC, the 95%+ of GOP delegates are "bound" the upshot of which is for the first ballot at least, they've got to vote for the candidate they're pledged to.

That's a super simplistic analysis and doesn't take into account... well any of the factors that a predictive model would need to consider. Cruz undeniably got a "frontloading" boost, not least of which was picking up a bunch of his delegates from his home state of Texas. It's hard to gauge what the effects of winnowing will be — who will drop out and when and whose more likely to pick up the delegates that would have been allocated to those who dropped out (or more accurately "suspend" their campaigns).

Then there are rules which specify the type of allocation that states can do — "proportional" vs "winner-take-all" — based on a window (range of dates) and a standard set by the RNC. Essentially, the "post-proportionality window" is March 15 on. Ignoring variations in things like thresholds (many states have a threshold of 10%-20% of the vote), the takeaway is that winning the most votes in some states in these later primaries and caucuses means that a candidate gets all of the delegates (though again, the rules differ greatly). This is likely to favor Trump.

There's a good per state breakdown of proportional vs winner-take-all, thresholds and the like in this in this Time article.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 12:48 PM
link   
If it looks shady, like Trump is ahead but Cruz gets it or if Hillary wins because of the superdelegates, I hope both Sanders and Trump run independent. Let's have a wild game changing election cycle.

Can you imagine a main general election debate with all 4 of them. That's what I want. Or even Rubio. Then also invite Jill Stien and we're in for a good time!



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 03:18 PM
link   


But there’s also the fact that Trump has received only 34 percent of the Republican vote, aggregated across all primaries and caucuses to have voted so far.

He did not really improve on that figure on Super Tuesday; Trump had a combined 33 percent of the vote through the first four states (Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada); he got 34 percent in Super Tuesday states themselves.


fivethirtyeight.com...



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

I was literally just thinking the same thing. It would make the state's crazy competitive. We wouldn't see 50-50 splits we'd be looking for candidates to rack up more than 26% of the vote. It would be entirely possible that no one would reach the 270 EV's to win.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
The GOP has this problem. Trump gets killed in national election polling. Cruz does better and only Rubio stands a chance. So if your the GOP you look at the problem like this. The White House is a wash, not going to take it. So what is best for the party? With Trump as the face of the party they are afraid he will taint the rest of the GOP and bring the party massive losses at all levels. Trump will bring out the opposition en mass and keep the traditional Reagan style GOP home. That would be a disaster at all levels for the GOP. So what do they do? By passing Trump could cause some problems and even force the creation of a new party lead by Trump. That would hurt in the short term. However such a party would based completely on Trump and he will only be around so long and then that party dies as it has no ideology. In the mean time the GOP has a few years to reinvent itself and get independent and moderate voters to give it a chance again. So if your the GOP what would you do?



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: Profusion

The notion that Trump could go independent if pissed off must strike a fear in the GOP leadership though.

I would not dare to call the victory for anyone but the candidate that has gotten the most votes by far. Talk about disenfranchising the electorate!


I suspect the Republican plan, should Rubio fail is to piss off the Republicans, make Trump go independent, take their losses in the House/Senate (they're taking big losses in the Senate no matter what), and go with Hillary because she too is establishment.

Sanders/Trump are the guys that will dismantle things as they currently are, and the only other contender is Cruz who quite frankly there's so much animosity towards that many people are in the "anyone but Cruz" frame of mind.


originally posted by: amazing
If it looks shady, like Trump is ahead but Cruz gets it or if Hillary wins because of the superdelegates, I hope both Sanders and Trump run independent. Let's have a wild game changing election cycle.

Can you imagine a main general election debate with all 4 of them. That's what I want. Or even Rubio. Then also invite Jill Stien and we're in for a good time!


This scenario results in no one getting 270 EC votes most likely, which then means the House elects it, which puts in the Republican establishment candidate. That very well could be the last ditch effort to stop Trump is no one is brave enough to go for faithless electors.
edit on 2-3-2016 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Profusion

It's pretty clear at this point. If Trump isn't the nominee the GOP will be completely scuttled, losing not only party members, but more importantly voters.

They simply cannot Ron Paul The Don, it will only end p in flames. Then again the people buying elections running through depends like a kid with candy probably don't care about sides, just who they can buy.



From any logical point of view it seems they have no choice but to endorse the mad hair. Anything else would be lunacy.




posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 06:03 PM
link   
I just looked into this, if the electoral college is split too much:

What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?

If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House.


That would make for a very interesting presidency if the GOP establishment candidate doesn't get into the top 3.



posted on Mar, 4 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

This is great for libertarians.

Let the republicans implode themselves.



posted on Mar, 4 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Profusion

It's pretty clear at this point. If Trump isn't the nominee the GOP will be completely scuttled, losing not only party members, but more importantly voters.

They simply cannot Ron Paul The Don, it will only end p in flames. Then again the people buying elections running through depends like a kid with candy probably don't care about sides, just who they can buy.



From any logical point of view it seems they have no choice but to endorse the mad hair. Anything else would be lunacy.



The GOP is very familiar with "lunacy"....the party that provided us with Gov. Sarah Palin for our listening and viewing pleasure.

I deeply miss her...one of the truly unique characters to play in the political theater.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Looks like you were wrong.

Your sage words are more your hopes and dreams than actual fact.

Are you trying to act like you are a political analyst?

Well if you are you are terrible. If not you were wrong like some MSM parrot trying to paint the election to your liking.

We all know you are a Hillary fan boy. Thats why you cant see clearly


edit on 3 28 2016 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join