[gg188]

I know this is a repost of the ARTICLE, but this post is for the purpose of focusing on the last paragraph: the rules could COMPLETELY unbind the delegates, i.e., for the first vote, second, third, everything.

What do you think are the chances of this? Cruz's strategy now seems clearer in light of this possibility.

What would be the repercussions? Cruz Supporters: Would you support this rule change?

[BlackAdderess]

The GOP delegate fight explained:
They are weasels

[Pollster1]

No. That would be, even by political standards, shockingly corrupt. They make marginal changes, like they did going from 5 to 8 states in 2012 to block Rand, but unbinding bound delegates would offend everyone.

We will know when the rules are approved a week before the convention how many delegates are loyal to Trump and to Cruz, and how loyal they are. I’m not ruling out sleaze, but even sleaze has to appear fair. They won’t go that far.

[JediJones]

How about a new rule that any candidate who skipped a debate without first suspending his campaign is not eligible?

[Sasparilla]

I heard a local party official say that the public is too low information and easily manipulated by the media to be of any use in selecting a Republican candidate. So, the party will act in its own best interests in selecting a candidate themselves.

[HarleyLady27]

https://themarshallreport.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/the-gop-is-now-the-communist-party-first-the-caucus-states-then-the-rest/

[Outlaw76]

That depends.
On the surface, no I would not.

However, if the rules allowed for all delegates whose candidate is no longer running to become ‘ubound’ - I could get behind that. Saves time and money.

The rules exist for good reason, and does allowing rules to change.

It's also a good idea for the party to control - to some extent - who is nominated. I know that's going to sound horrible to some right now but if a true leftist ran as a republican (think somewhere to the left of kasich) and masses of democrats flocked to the GOP in every liberal state they could take over the party. That would be very bad.

Generally speaking, I think the rules should stay in place until after the nomination is made.

Rules changes should be in place at least six months before the first vote is cast. (By caucus or direct vote). If the campaign can't get it's act together in six months they'll likely be a disaster in office where you don't get six months to learn how legislation works.

[TMSuchman]

An open letter to America from the Pennsylvania Veterans Party of America Chair Gary Garvine: This is why to vote for Third Party: The biggest objection to voting for a Third Party is the “wasted vote” argument — the idea that if you vote for someone who will not win, then the vote does not count. Voting for a third party, contrary to popular belief, is not a wasted vote. It’s a chance to tell the country — and perhaps even the world — what your vision of government and society really is. But how do most of us vote? Most of us vote the “lesser of two evils” — a defensive vote, rather than an offensive one. So what happens after you vote the defensive vote? Well, then you have sold out your personal beliefs. You have become a political prostitute. You aren’t standing up for what you believe in by voting “the lesser of two evils.” I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of being a political hooker. If you think the Republican or the Democrat really does best mirror your beliefs, by all means, vote for that candidate. But if you don’t, and you still vote for them, you’re helping to preserve the status quo you probably despise. So What’s the Point of Voting? We vote to tell everyone else which choice best represents the direction which we want the country to go. When you vote, you gain a certain power that a non-voter doesn’t have; the power to change America. Hence voting lesser evil sends the wrong message; it’s sending a message of compromise. In effect, a defensive vote says “I will settle for a good America, not the best America possible.” I urge you not to settle. In other words, if you want change, then create change. The history of third parties in America is that they serve as the vanguard for new ideas. It is these ideas that make the world go round. If a Third Party begins to draw votes, one or both of the two big parties steal their ideas. The most successful third party in the 20th Century was the Socialist Party. While never winning any significant elections, their small but growing vote totals were a threat to the Democrats. Thus the Democrats, and then later the Republicans, adopted piecemeal every major tenet of the 1916 Socialist Party platform. So rather than waste your vote on Democrats or Republicans, cast a meaningful ballot that clearly says what you believe. ‪#‎VPA‬ ‪#‎VPPA‬ ‪#‎VPofA‬ @VetsPA www.vpofa.org www.veteranspartyofamerica.org www.chriskeniston2016.com

[DoughtyOne]

[truth_seeker]

Pigs can now fly, and Ted Cruz is now willing to be the Establishment GOP candidate.

[Chainmail]

Corrupt Banana Republicans.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Let me say this again for those who haven’t read it.

There are no rules. Period.

Each convention passes a set of rules to govern the convention. Until the rules are passed by the whole convention, there are only guidelines.

[Hatteras]

You may have to explain it in crayon for the Trumpers...

[LTC.Ret]

So if the GOPe messes with the rules and shoves an establishment candidate in place of both Trump and Cruz -—

I sincerely hope that BOTH will pull out, let bygones be bygones, and form an independent Trump/Cruz ticket that should WIN even as a third party.

Leave the GOPe sitting among the balloons on the convention floor wondering what happened!!!