Why is Kasich allowed to continue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

Why is playing by the rules unfair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

Why is playing by the rules unfair?

The rules also currently state that the candidate must have won the majority of delegates in 8 states. Under that rule, only Trump would currently qualify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

Why is playing by the rules unfair?

Marco still has more delegates today than Kasich, even he dropped out weeks ago. Everyone that doesn't have a chance has already dropped out. Most of the people have the decency to quit after the voters have spoken loud and clear. There should be a rule created to stop sore losers like Kasich.

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

Why is playing by the rules unfair?

Marco still has more delegates today than Kasich, even he dropped out weeks ago. Everyone that doesn't have a chance has already dropped out. Most of the people have the decency to quit after the voters have spoken loud and clear. There should be a rule created to stop sore losers like Kasich.

Rubio's votes are extremely important. Trump has more votes than Cruz and Kasich combined, but adding Rubio's votes puts Trump under 50%. Rubio (like the other candidates) suspended his campaign, he did not end it. For all we know, he'll give a stemwinder of a speech at the convention and get the delegates all fired up to nominate him on the second ballot. It would not be the most surprising development of this campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

Why is playing by the rules unfair?

Marco still has more delegates today than Kasich, even he dropped out weeks ago. Everyone that doesn't have a chance has already dropped out. Most of the people have the decency to quit after the voters have spoken loud and clear. There should be a rule created to stop sore losers like Kasich.

I'm sure the republicans will institute all sorts of rule changes -- for 2020. For this election cycle the rules are the rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

I'm sure that you consider the electoral college an abomination that needs to be abolished, right? Because the will of the majority of the voters is what matters. And I bet you were out in the street protesting against Bush v. Gore, right? Because a lot more people voted for Gore than Bush.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He has been mathematically eliminated. Why is Kasich allowed to continue when he needs to get more than 100% to win?

Trump, Cruz, and Kasich are done. Paul Ryan will be the next president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

I'm sure that you consider the electoral college an abomination that needs to be abolished, right? Because the will of the majority of the voters is what matters. And I bet you were out in the street protesting against Bush v. Gore, right? Because a lot more people voted for Gore than Bush.

You are not making any sense. If electoral college system were used in the Republican primaries, Donald Trump's lead would have been much bigger. He has won the vast majority of the states so far. Kasich would have been eliminated mathematically much earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has been mathematically eliminated. Why is Kasich allowed to continue when he needs to get more than 100% to win?

Trump, Cruz, and Kasich are done. Paul Ryan will be the next president.

You state this with the same “authority” as the poster, who, a couple of months ago, stated with great authority that "Jeb Bush will be the nominee.... it has been decided.” (was that you also???)
I think I will just wait until the nominee is named.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

Why is playing by the rules unfair?

Marco still has more delegates today than Kasich, even he dropped out weeks ago. Everyone that doesn't have a chance has already dropped out. Most of the people have the decency to quit after the voters have spoken loud and clear. There should be a rule created to stop sore losers like Kasich.

I'm sure the republicans will institute all sorts of rule changes -- for 2020. For this election cycle the rules are the rules.

I thought they set the rules for this convention right before this convention. Am I wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So...OP you basically want Kasich out because it gives Trump a better chance on the first ballot.

If I am the RNC (i.e. establishment GOP) and I hate Trump, why would I ever tell Kasich to get out? That would be cutting off my own foot.

Plus, the only rail to derail Trump is an open convention. It would not surprise me one bit if the RNC is encouraging Kasich to stay in the race just for that reason.

It's not about giving Trump an edge but about a fair election process. Both Cruz and Trump want him out. He can still hold on to his delegates just like Rubio did and hope for a brokered convention.

I have seen the "unfair" word used more than once and I do not see how it applies. You are saying it is unfair for him to stay in the race although he cannot "win" the nomination that way. How is it unfair and to whom? Electoral politics are not inherently "fair."

Of course Cruz and Trump want him out. They realize he could steal some states and delegates. If I am him, I stay in the race and try to rack up as many additional delegates as I can. Then at least I would be going into the convention with some leverage and some influence on the nomination.

It's unfair to the voters who wait in line for hours and stay in the caucuses for hours and think their votes will determine the nominee. It's unfair to the candidates who still have mathematical chance to clinch the nomination. Kasich needs 120% of the remaining votes. His only hope is a brokered convention where delegates picked by the voters become unbound. Basically he is staying in a voting process to try to invalidate that exact election.

I'm sure that you consider the electoral college an abomination that needs to be abolished, right? Because the will of the majority of the voters is what matters. And I bet you were out in the street protesting against Bush v. Gore, right? Because a lot more people voted for Gore than Bush.

You are not making any sense. If electoral college system were used in the Republican primaries, Donald Trump's lead would have been much bigger. He has won the vast majority of the states so far. Kasich would have been eliminated mathematically much earlier.

The electoral college is undemocratic and unfair to the voters in the larger states. Makes perfect sense.

[Anonymous]

The parties are to blame for this shitshow.

I would like to discuss getting rid of the electoral college, though. I know it had a purpose early on, but at this point, it is unnecessary. We need to switch to straight popular vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has been mathematically eliminated. Why is Kasich allowed to continue when he needs to get more than 100% to win?

Trump, Cruz, and Kasich are done. Paul Ryan will be the next president.

hahahahahahahahaha

wait, what? Eddie Munster? No thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has been mathematically eliminated. Why is Kasich allowed to continue when he needs to get more than 100% to win?

Trump, Cruz, and Kasich are done. Paul Ryan will be the next president.

hahahahahahahahaha

wait, what? Eddie Munster? No thanks.

[Anonymous]

Kasich isn't stupid. He sees that Trump is imploding, and if there's any truth to the Cruz affairs, that could be his undoing as well. He may be hoping that delegates will find it more palatable to choose another candidate who is still actually in the race rather than picking someone brand new at the convention.