Replies

“The majority of the Party isn’t going to be disenfranchised so that a plurality bent on destroying the Party can prevail.”

Sounds like angry pretzel logic.

Here’s the thing. Something like 40 - 45% of Republican voters have chosen Trump. The other 55 - 60% are divided amongst the remaining two candidates, and candidates who’ve left the race.

The 50 - 60% are disunited. They haven’t coalesced or come to an agreement on which individual should be the nominee. It’s a fractured aggregate of people who are only united in their opposition to the Democrats.

Because that aggregate is composed of several pockets of smaller numbers who all agree on one candidate (Cruz, for example), they’re powerless to affect the eventual outcome of the contest. That can only be changed if those in the remaining primary states rally around one Not Trump candidate now.

Perhaps they will, but the available polling data for the remaining states says that Trump will handily take most of the votes.

At the end of the primary process, it will be clear to one and all that more voters have chosen Trump, than any other candidate. In every endeavor in life, that’s considered a clean win.

My point to you, is that any game that is structured in such a way that a clear win can be taken from the winner, then awarded to a loser or even a non-competitor, is illegitimate on its face, and will be seen that way by all those who backed the clear winner.

You can scream, “rules!”, all you want, but close to half of the voters won’t hear you. They’re going to tell you to put your rules where the sun don’t shine.

At that point, the Republican party and the country are finished. Madame President will see to that. You won’t have a country any longer, but at least you’ll still have your precious rules to cling to.