Why is Kasich allowed to continue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But who will amend that rule to accommodate Kasich? In 2012 the rules committee were comprised of Romney's people. This time it will be Trump and Cruz people. They will not change that rule.

Any idea how they staff the rules committee? My guess is that it will be packed with Establishment/Insider Republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who will amend that rule to accommodate Kasich? In 2012 the rules committee were comprised of Romney's people. This time it will be Trump and Cruz people. They will not change that rule.

Any idea how they staff the rules committee? My guess is that it will be packed with Establishment/Insider Republicans.

It's hard to imagine there will be many of either Trump or Cruz's people on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So while he is playing by the rules set by the RNC, he should have the "decency" to drop out? Just wondering whether it occurred to anyone that the GOP PTB are encouraging him NOT to drop out?

Well, if those voters think that their vote will determine the nominee, they clearly do not know how the nomination process works. The candidates certainly know it. Would you also say that it is unfair that someone could lose the popular vote in the GE, but still win the Presidency? My point is that the current process does not guarantee a "fair" election in the way that you are defining fairness.

You keep mentioning these magic "rules". The only rule everyone but stubborn Kasich sees is that he needs more than 120% of the available votes to win. The game is over for him. Every decent human being would have already dropped out. I don't remember anyone in the history of primary elections continue to run when he or she has long been eliminated mathematically. He can still participate the brokered convention if there is one. But he shouldn't be allowed to stay in the primary race.

If people's votes don't matter, why are we even waste a year's of time and billions of dollars to have a primary election? In the history of nomination process, I think the majority of the nominees came out of the winner of the primary election. Voters' votes do matter a lot.

There are no "magic" rules. He cannot win on the first ballot. That is only thing he has been eliminated from.

I am not sure you are consistent. On one hand, you are saying that votes matter. On the other hand, you seem to strongly imply that they only matter if the person being voted for has a chance to win.

If I were a Kasich supporter and my primary was upcoming, I would still want the ability to cast my vote for the candidate that I want - not be forced to vote for Trump or Cruz. Maybe that where his decency kicks in - giving people who supported him since jump the ability to actually cast a vote for him.

You talk about "dropping" out. What does that even mean in this context? Rubio suspended his campaign but kept his delegates - he is still in play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So while he is playing by the rules set by the RNC, he should have the "decency" to drop out? Just wondering whether it occurred to anyone that the GOP PTB are encouraging him NOT to drop out?

Well, if those voters think that their vote will determine the nominee, they clearly do not know how the nomination process works. The candidates certainly know it. Would you also say that it is unfair that someone could lose the popular vote in the GE, but still win the Presidency? My point is that the current process does not guarantee a "fair" election in the way that you are defining fairness.

You keep mentioning these magic "rules". The only rule everyone but stubborn Kasich sees is that he needs more than 120% of the available votes to win. The game is over for him. Every decent human being would have already dropped out. I don't remember anyone in the history of primary elections continue to run when he or she has long been eliminated mathematically. He can still participate the brokered convention if there is one. But he shouldn't be allowed to stay in the primary race.

If people's votes don't matter, why are we even waste a year's of time and billions of dollars to have a primary election? In the history of nomination process, I think the majority of the nominees came out of the winner of the primary election. Voters' votes do matter a lot.

There are no "magic" rules. He cannot win on the first ballot. That is only thing he has been eliminated from.

I am not sure you are consistent. On one hand, you are saying that votes matter. On the other hand, you seem to strongly imply that they only matter if the person being voted for has a chance to win.

If I were a Kasich supporter and my primary was upcoming, I would still want the ability to cast my vote for the candidate that I want - not be forced to vote for Trump or Cruz. Maybe that where his decency kicks in - giving people who supported him since jump the ability to actually cast a vote for him.

You talk about "dropping" out. What does that even mean in this context? Rubio suspended his campaign but kept his delegates - he is still in play.

What happens when a candidate "releases" his delegates? Or can the candidate force "his" delegates to support someone else.

What I imagine happening is that an outsider - like Paul Ryan - strikes a deal with Kasich, Rubio, and Cruz for their delegates, if allowed by the rules. He can then offer them appointments in his Presidency, if he wins. I can see Cruz as AG, Rubio as Commerce or Homeland Security Secretary, and Kasich as HHS Secretary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democracy doesn't work that way. He can stay in as long as he wants. Even if he drops out his name is on the ballet in those states already so what difference does it make?

(NP here) Yeah, but he should have the decency to drop out. That is what almost every other presidential contender in the past has done. Why does he not? It is very peculiar and speaks to his ego/arrogance. it must be HUGE.

Maybe his decency prevents him from dropping out. Maybe the potential of a President Trump and the vitriol that would likely come with it is morally reprehensible to Kasich and that's why he's staying in. I don't think this has anything to do with ego or arrogance, especially compared to Trump. If anyone has a HUGE ego, it's Trump, not Kasich.

For sure, Trump's ego is insane. But there isn't a path for Kasich. i LIKE him! The GOP would be much better off if he was the nominee, but his candidacy is not resonating at ALL. So, it's the decent thing for him to get out and let the front runners duke it out. For him to stay in? I do think it speaks to his ego. He must be working in a huge bubble.

[Anonymous]

Also -- does rule 40b (thou must winneth eight or more states) apply on second and subsequent ballots?

Kasich is sticking around in the hopes of doing well in the Acela Primary in three weeks. With 200-250 delegates he is well-positioned to make an impact should the convention go past the first ballot?

FWIW, when I flipped my registration to (R), I noticed that Kasich didn't have three delegates for MD-6 and MD-8 (you vote on page 1 for a candidate and on page 2 for three delegates.) That seems like he wasn't *really* expecting to make it this far. Hell, even Fiorina had two delegates for MD-6!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So while he is playing by the rules set by the RNC, he should have the "decency" to drop out? Just wondering whether it occurred to anyone that the GOP PTB are encouraging him NOT to drop out?

Well, if those voters think that their vote will determine the nominee, they clearly do not know how the nomination process works. The candidates certainly know it. Would you also say that it is unfair that someone could lose the popular vote in the GE, but still win the Presidency? My point is that the current process does not guarantee a "fair" election in the way that you are defining fairness.

You keep mentioning these magic "rules". The only rule everyone but stubborn Kasich sees is that he needs more than 120% of the available votes to win. The game is over for him. Every decent human being would have already dropped out. I don't remember anyone in the history of primary elections continue to run when he or she has long been eliminated mathematically. He can still participate the brokered convention if there is one. But he shouldn't be allowed to stay in the primary race.

If people's votes don't matter, why are we even wasting a year's of time and billions of dollars to have a primary election? In the history of nomination process, I think the majority of the nominees came out of the winner of the primary election. Voters' votes do matter a lot.

There are no "magic" rules. He cannot win on the first ballot. That is only thing he has been eliminated from.

I am not sure you are consistent. On one hand, you are saying that votes matter. On the other hand, you seem to strongly imply that they only matter if the person being voted for has a chance to win.

If I were a Kasich supporter and my primary was upcoming, I would still want the ability to cast my vote for the candidate that I want - not be forced to vote for Trump or Cruz. Maybe that where his decency kicks in - giving people who supported him since jump the ability to actually cast a vote for him.

You talk about "dropping" out. What does that even mean in this context? Rubio suspended his campaign but kept his delegates - he is still in play.

He should suspend his campaign just like everyone else did, but he may choose to keep his delegates. His name will still be on the ballot, and his voters can still vote for him.

[Anonymous]

And the rules for suspending/ending a candidacy do different things in different states. Some delegates are immediately released and others are Zombie delegates up for grabs after the Nth ballot.

Cruz is also outmaneuvering Trump on the inside baseball game. Much was made of Cruz managing to win the LA delegate count, but in other states (e.g. VA) the delegates might have to vote Trump on the first ballot but Cruz is making sure the actual delegates aren't committed to making America Great Again.

[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.

Insults only show fear. Worried now, huh?

[Anonymous]

http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/how-long-must-america-endure-john-kasichs-sad-delusions

There was an old “Saturday Night Live” fake movie trailer narrated by horror-movie veteran Christopher Lee. John Belushi played a houseguest who couldn’t take a hint from a couple that just wanted to go to bed.

The husband tells Belushi, “Look, I don’t want to be rude, but my wife is VERY tired!” Belushi responds by picking up the TV Guide and saying dismissively, “Yeah. .?.?. Hey, there’s a good movie on tonight! I think I’ll call up some friends and watch it over here!”

Then came Lee’s creepy voiceover: “It came without warning! They were just being POLITE! They didn’t realize that they’d be stuck with .?.?. ‘The Thing That Wouldn’t Leave’!”

John Kasich is this election season’s The Thing That Wouldn’t Leave.