S. Carolina GOP Gives Trump Ultimatum-Pledge Allegiance to Rep. Nominee or You're Off Primary Ballot

Daily Mail ^ | August 25, 2015 | Francesca Chambers

[sevinufnine]

Donald Trump has until the end of next month to formally declare his allegiance to the Republican Party or his name will not appear on the South Carolina presidential primary ballot.

South Carolina GOP Chairman Matt Moore confirmed the requirement this afternoon that candidates filing as Republicans must pledge not to turn as a third-party candidate should they lose the nomination.

At least two other states - Virginia and North Carolina - are contemplating similar moves as way of keeping the unpredictable billionaire in check.

[Bigg Red]

Does SC permit write-in voting? Some states seem to make it very difficult.

[skimbell]

"..and breaks the pledge, then what..?"

Next step would be..."double secret probation!"

[catnipman]

sign it and then repudiate later if need be. not legally binding. would be wonderful if Trump later got sued by GOPe, too.

GOPe is assuring their destruction, one way or the other, something we’ve all been praying for for years. And we have DT to thank for this.

[Political Junkie Too]

Generally, I would agree with you. However, your example does violate the religious test clause of Article VI. I would call the Electoral College a "public Trust under the United States."

-PJ

[Mount Athos]

Wasn’t there an Alaskan election where the GOP refused to support the winner of the primary and got a person to run as an independent and win?

[mmichaels1970]

No one can pledge to support a nonexistent document.

Of course not. But they can pledge that they INTEND to support the nonexistent document. Then when the document is published, they can decide whether they STILL intend to support it. That's why this so-called pledge is silly.

I don't know how anybody can pledge to intend something. It's a contradiction of terms in my view.

[tennmountainman]

Yep. I can envision a backfire that “Cantor” other candidates on the ballot.

[erkelly]

Put in context of what the GOPe did in Alaska and in Mississippi, seems pretty hypocritical to me. It seems to me that the very best reason to support Trump is to rid the party of the people who are running it now. How could Trump possibly be any worse than they are anyway?

[RideForever]

Art of negotiation. GOPe think they have the ‘upper hand’, when in actuality they don’t. They control the purse strings of the GOP finances, which Mr. Trump doesn’t need.

This is borne out by the stupid disregard for the timeless adage “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.

[Hostage]

You’re off on that. You’re reading only half.

It says ***believe in*** the nominees and platform, as well as ***intend to support*** the nominees and platform.

To believe in and intend to support an unknown entity is foolish and may be actionable in federal court.

This SC GOP foolishness telegraphs one thing clearly, the machine in SC is corrupt.

[ZULU]

He should shoot back with another ultimatum to the damn rotten GOP establishment. If he loses the nomination because they are targetting him - as in this case, he and his supporters will go third party.

[TxAg1981]

Go ahead GOP!
This already looks like a Boehner-style purge. The GOP will have sealed their fate...seriously.
This type of behavior is why Trump is doing so well in the polls. The Conservatives (*formerly Republican base) have had enough. Conservatives will not be ruled by DhimmiCrat-lite candidates like Bush, McLame, etc.

GOPe, please understand. You need Conservatives to win an election. Conservatives do not need GOPe candidates, because to us, you look like the current occupant of the White House.

[mmichaels1970]

It says ***believe in***

It says "generally believe in". Plenty of wiggle room there as well. The entire "pledge" is worthless.

Let's say you tell me that you're going to write a book about conservative principles. Then I say, I "generally believe in your endeavor and that I intend to buy your book when you're done". Then, I find out you did it in Crayon and have poor reviews. Nothing I said, even if I swear it and have it notarized, binds me to buying your book.

He should sign the pledge, it's meaningless.

[kjam22]

What a bunch of idiots. That sounds like a sure fire way to get him to run third party.....

[Mouton]

It should depend on what the word “support” means. Say he loses, does support mean he has to send them money? Does it mean he is bound to do commercials for them? If it was stated that he will not run as a third party if he loses, that would be a big deal. These mealy mouthed words mean nothing.

[Hostage]

I don’t think that ‘belief’ or ‘general belief’ is a binding condition on anyone for something which is unknown.

The wording is duplicitous at best and likely willingly deceitful.

A judge will throw those pansie asses in the SC GOP out on their butts should Donald send his lawyers to strike the language. And with deadlines looming Donald can request an emergency TRO that can be done in a day.

I have a brother in SC, a former Green Beret and I’m going to talk to him about this nonsense and what he thinks of it. It is so moronic that if the RNC had any sense which they don’t they would demand these dumbasses step down immediately or change the language by COB today.

[Fledermaus]

The SC GOP is useless. They love Grahamnesty so what does that tell you?

[mmichaels1970]

It should depend on what the word “support” means.

I can see that and it only makes the pledge weaker. But I stand by the fact that the words "intend to" are the key and remove any and all forms of enforcement from this pledge.

Of course he should intend to support the nominee. At this point, he fully expects to BE the nominee.

Of course he should intend to support the party platform. At this point, he fully expects to help CRAFT the platform.

A real pledge would say something like: "I pledge to publicly support and actively campaign for the eventual GOP nominee REGARDLESS of who that may be. I pledge to not run as a third party REGARDLESS of the outcome of the GOP primary process." Remove the words "intend to" and you may have something that would hold up.

Something like that would have some teeth. The South Carolina pledge has none.

[familyop]

It’s best for South Carolina to let ill mannered socialists from the northeast, Florida and the west coast know that they don’t want them anyway.

[BlueNgold]

The parties are supposed to be instruments of the people to organize together.

The parties have assumed power at the expense of the people.

It’s all bass ackwards, and then they wonder at the appeal of someone from outside the ‘machine’.