We know that some delegates to the National Convention want a change of rules that would allow delegates to ‘vote their conscience’. They would not be bound on the first ballot, or any ballot. Curly Haugland, a national committeeman from North Dakota, is leading the charge,
“The delegates in 2016 are free birds,” Haugland told TheBlaze in an interview. “Whether they know it or not, they’ve been lied to. I’ll confess to knowing that the staff of the Republican Party in Washington has lied repeatedly to the media and to the candidates themselves as well as to the delegates about the binding, and they continue to do it. I can’t explain why they do that; I guess they just like to lie.”
“The simple question is: do the primaries choose the party’s nominee or do the delegates to the convention choose the nominee? It’s one or the other; it can’t be both.”
“I’m on the side of the convention delegates because I’m a member of the Republican Party from the state of North Dakota,” Haugland said. “I’m a delegate to the convention. Our duty and our responsibility as delegates is to protect and defend the right of the party and its members to choose the nominee of its party for the national race.”
He added, “That right does not belong to the general public, it doesn’t belong to independent or unaffiliated voters or Democrats in many of the states that have open primaries. It belongs solely to Republicans.”
Virginia’s Republican National Committeeman Morton Blackwell, a long time member of the Convention Rules Committee, disagrees with Haugland,
“(Haugland) doesn’t seem to recognize that there are specific provisions in the rules about the binding of delegates.”
He’s a friend of mine, but he makes this claim repeatedly, and he doesn’t get support of the members of the RNC Standing Committee on Rules,” Blackwell said. “I don’t think it’s going to be enormously confusing. It’s possible to get publicity for saying such a thing, because it would be intriguing if it was valid — but it’s not valid.”
“So there’s an effort to change the rules; if what Curly said was correct, then there wouldn’t be any need to change the rules,” he added. “It’s a fantasy.”
Blackwell says there are three groups of delegates heading into the convention, Trump supporters, the establishment types, and the pro-Cruz delegates. Blackwell is one of the pro-Cruz delegates. Blackwell believes very few establishment delegates (other than Romney) support a rules change. We know the Trump delegates won’t support a rules change and Blackwell doesn’t believe the Cruz supporters will either.
There are, I know, a lot of others who were Cruz supporters who agree with me that it would be wrong to change the rules at the end of the process and know that if we did change the rules, it would split the party horribly,” he said. “So where would the support come from to get a majority either on the convention Rules Committee or on the floor of the convention to make such a change?”
Now we know that Morton Blackwell will not support a rules change and it seems most delegates will agree with him.
More here.
25 comments
There is a reason the Republican Party is called the stupid party. We have an opportunity to repel the criminal Hillary from taking the White House for possibly 8 years, stacking the Supreme Court with a majority of Socialist Judges, pushing America further into debt, increasing immigration to the point of fundamentally changing our country, and further growing the Federal Leviathan until we have no liberty at all. Leave it to the idiots in the party to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, because we don’t “believe” Trump is Republican or Conservative enough. Congratulations, we have achieved a new level of stupidity. If President Trump does half of what he says he will do we will be much better off that an extension of the Obama administration, ran by crooked Hillary.
> “… if we did change the rules, it would split the party horribly,”
And, if Trump wins, the Republican Party will not exist as we now know it. Many members will bail and become independents, Constitutional Party members, Libertarians, and this who are fed up enough to join the many who don’t vote.
Trump brought out a record 14 million votes and thousands to rallies, but all you can see is doom and gloom for the party?
Yes, he got the support of about 40% of Republicans. Not quite enough to win the general election.
No one knows what will happen in the general election. Look at the surprise Brexit vote. Also you need to remember that there will be Green and Libertarian candidates on the ballot. Without Ralph Nader in 2000, George W. would not have won.
Yes, we can and do predict the general election based on trends. So far, Trump is losing the swing states in half the polls and Utah and Georgia are now considered vulnerable. Recent odds put Trump at 20% chance of winning the general. A 1/5 chance he loses, and those odds will go against him even more the closer the general gets due to his lack of a campaign apparatus to counter the media and Democrat’s attacks.
Brexit was due, in no small part, due to the economic and refugee situations, as well as the Muslim encroachment on Britain. The EU, and Germany’s Angela Merkel, became symbols of corruption and Islam to the British people. In contrast, here in America, we have the two most corrupt candidates in modern history running. The Republican candidate is as bad the Democrat. Racism, sexism, and antisemitism, that’s what the Republican candidate has espoused this election. Trump will lose, and he will lose because he lacks the moral character to be the President. So does Clinton, but the Democrats have never held themselves accountable nor will the media suddenly begin doing so. Independents, women, and minorities won’t vote for Trump due to his deplorable conduct. Republicans have honor, morals, and principles, and won’t vote for an evil that is no lesser than the evil the Democrats are presenting.
Hopeless to try to reason with someone who believes Trump is as bad as Clinton. However, can’t help but point out the most obvious answers to such nonsense. Clinton’s hands are stained with blood from Libya. She and Obama foolishly deposed Gaddafi purely for political gain. Then Clinton went home to bed and left brave Americans fighting and waiting for help in Benghazi. More blood on her hands. Afterwards she lied to the loved ones as the bodies of our fallen heroes were returned to this country. She peddled her influence as Secretary of State to make millions of dollars. She hid her mendacity by using a private server which was undoubtedly hacked. There are some facts on the table; many more could be added. Yes, I have morals, honor and principles and I’m standing with millions more who do such as Senator Jeff Sessions, Laura Ingraham, Jerry Falwell Jr., Mike Huckabee, and Newt Gingrich in supporting Donald Trump.
Indeed? You say that but you can’t seem to come up with a single counter. People do that when they have no comeback, to disguise the fact that they don’t. You can’t come up with a reason why Trump is supposedly better.
You shoot at Clinton, but you are attacking her, not defending Trump. Big difference. I already said Clinton is reprehensible. How is Trump any better? Racism, sexism, antisemitism, driving widows out of their homes, openly admitting to crooked business practices in his books, making sexual comments about his newborn daughter? Defend this man on his own merits, if that is possible.
Jeff Sessions is on his way out, Laura Ingraham ignored the Pope to support Trump, Falwell got rebuked by his own university in the primary, Mike Huckabee has been a big government Republican since his term as Governor, the massive amount of debt he raised shows that, Newt Gingrich wants to be VP. All the people you listed have either sold out their principles or are desperately clinging to Trump for personal power. I stand with Ben Sasse, Mark Levin, Erick Erickson, Ted Cruz, Ken Cuccinelli, Charlie Baker, Justin Amash, Glenn Beck, David French, Stephen Hayes, Katie Pavlich, Ben Shapiro, and more.
The standard deviation of errors between late June polls versus November election results is more than 7%. Of course it is better to be ahead in June, but there is a long way to go before calling the election. Reagan was behind by a large amount amount with months to go before election, and yet he won by a mile. Trump is even more unconventional, and therefore more unpredictable, so I wouldn’t panic about polls right now.
Yes, Mitt Romney supporters made the same arguments in support of him when he was failing. The polls are rigged, this is the wrong time for polls, the Convention will make it better, etc. It wasn’t true then, and it isn’t true now. This is a repeat of 2012.
Reagan was way behind until March, then the gap began to narrow to single digits, he was catching up and tying in late June and early July. Trump is falling, not rising, in the polls. Plus, Trump pulling ahead relies on him having a campaign that is capable of coordinating to combat the Democrats, so far his campaign coordination is sloppy and they are running out of funds.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/07/final-analysis-gop-primary-turnout-62-year-dem-primary-turnout-21-year/
Turnout was for and against Trump, and he got less than half of overall turnout in the GOP primary.
No, the party will survive but it will no longer be a conservative party. The two major parties will be both be left-wing parties. Trump is a liberal putting on a good act. Check out his history if you don’t believe me. His political history and his con-job history.
Yes, given that he got less than half the overall votes in the primary. That means that millions more Republicans turned out against Trump than for him. And over 52% of Republicans say, right now, that they want a different candidate.
Add into that historically bad numbers with African-Americans, Hispanics, Women, and that Trump is losing Millennials, a voting block that RINO Romney won by double digits? Trump’s candidacy died the moment he became the only candidate.
Trump had 16 other candidates to split the vote and still managed 3 million more votes than everyone else so get over it Joseph.
Joseph stop parroting the same old tired response from Cruz supporters and others.
Trump faced a divided field, 16 enemies attacking each other for second place is pretty easy to beat. Divided they fell.
Get over what? Racism? Antisemitism? Sexism? Sorry, I’ve got principles and I won’t put them aside to vote for someone unfit for office because his supporters whine at me to get over it.
Cruz supporters, Rubio supporters, Kasich supporters, and more, the opposition to Trump isn’t factional, it’s widespread across the GOP. We’re repeating facts, and judging from the way you can’t refute it, I’d say that it is working.
Yes, Trump faced 16 other Republicans, and he beat every one of them. This isn’t an abstract choice at this point. The majority of Republicans do NOT want the nomination taken from Trump just to get another candidate. Even the majority of the 16 losing candidates would disagree with that action.
Anybody that thinks Clinton is no worse than Trump, is really discreditable as far as giving advice to Republicans, and should be ignored.
They beat each other. See Chris Christie attacking Rubio and Cruz for proof of that.
52% of Republicans want a different nominee, so yes the people do want the nomination taken from Trump.
“Anybody that thinks Clinton is no worse than Trump?” That phrasing implies that Trump is worse than Clinton, not the other way around.
You seem to have trouble with reading comprehension, as well as logic. They didn’t “beat each other”. Trump won “fair and square” as Ryan said last night.
My phrasing is correct as I stated it. You neverTrump zombies are willing to elect Hillary because you think she is no worse than Trump. She is in fact far worse than Trump. Whatever indiscernible logic leads you to think Republicans should just allow Hillary to win based on your hatred of Trump is something the majority of conservative Republicans have rejected. You zombies who continue to bash the Republican nominee are simply acting as surrogates for the Democrats and therefore should be ignored. Which I will try to do forthwith.
Unfortunately I don’t, I do composition for a living. You just misstated your comment in a manner that greatly detracted from your point.
Hatred? Find hatred in what I’ve said. In what 52% of Republicans agree with. Holding onto the ideals of the Republican Party isn’t hatred, nor is pointing out that someone doesn’t hold them and is unfit for office.
They have sour grapes and don’t play well in their little sandboxes that is why they are furious with Trump’s victory.
Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but the Republican party is not going to be same no matter what happens in the election. The base has thoroughly rejected the party leadership and there is no way that the party recovers as if that never happened. The party is evolving before your eyes and will get stronger with new leadership, no matter who wins. Splinter third parties are irrelevant.
Change the rules? So very wrong in so many ways.
I think Blackwell is underestimating the power of the Corporate United purse. It’s well known that a good majority of Trump/Cruz delegates are not true supporters of those candidates. They were supposedly faithful only on the first ballot because of binding. If the binding goes away, they can vote their true Corporate United financed conscience.
[…] http://thebullelephant.com/morton-blackwell-on-possible-rules-changes-at-the-convention/ […]