Unbound: The Conscience of a Republican Delegate

[Pressing-On]

This timely book makes a powerful case that delegates to the Republican Party convention are not bound to vote for any particular candidate based on primary and caucus results, state party rules, or even state law.

FREE pdf download:

http://citizensinchargefoundation.org/unbound

[aegsm76]

Right. Nothing at all unethical in putting your name down on the ballot as a Trump delegate, having voters vote for you, then not voting for Trump.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Right. Nothing at all unethical in putting your name down on the ballot as a Trump delegate, having voters vote for you, then not voting for Trump.

When a candidate continues to turn sour, not getting better, the delegates should be unbound to vote their conscience. If he wins, then so be it, but the delegates, nonetheless, should not be bound.

This is a great Q & A with Kendal Unruh.

Unconventional #28: How this Colorado history teacher and 400 of her fellow delegates are planning to block Trump in Cleveland

At first, this new “Dump Trump” faction was fairly small. Roughly 30 delegates from 15 states participated in a conference call last Thursday night. Since then, however, the unlikely campaign appears to have picked up steam. A second conference call on Sunday night attracted a claimed 1,000 participants, and this week, both the RNC and Trump have begun to fight back with delegate strategies of their own.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/unconvent...000000818.html

[Pressing-On]

Bottom line. Call our bluff, Donald.

Hey, Donald, I Dare You: Call Our Bluff

Call our bluff.

If you really have all this support, if you really have a mandate from Republican primary voters, and weren’t catapulted this far by upwards of 12 million Democrat crossover voters, then here’s your chance to prove it. To prove your superior intellect, talent, charisma and bravado.

- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/c....lJlzXADL.dpuf

12 Million Democrats voted in the Republican Primaries

In any event our election was stolen. Trump would be in fourth, or worse, without Democrats, he would probably only have won New York and considering he would be doing so badly when that election happened it is unlikely even there. We have been tossed to the ground and electorally gang raped by Democrats.

http://www.redstate.com/diary/creins...can-primaries/

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Bottom line. Call our bluff, Donald.



12 Million Democrats voted in the Republican Primaries

In any event our election was stolen. Trump would be in fourth, or worse, without Democrats, he would probably only have won New York and considering he would be doing so badly when that election happened it is unlikely even there. We have been tossed to the ground and electorally gang raped by Democrats.

http://www.redstate.com/diary/creins...can-primaries/

Ah yes, by the same guy that said in April that Ted Cruz was the nominee and there was a less than 1% chance that Trump would win the nomination.
By the way his "analysis" of of the 12 million Dems is not statistically valid.
Which means it is an opinion, nothing more.

[Esaias]

Yeah nobody wants a candidate who gets millions of voters from right, left, and middle. A candidate who appeals to indies, dems, and republicans is not what the GOP needs. They need a candidate who ONLY appeals to a fringe minority of the party.

THAT's how you go up against Hillary.

LOL!!!

The dead elephant is just about embalmed, ready to be buried.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Ah yes, by the same guy that said in April that Ted Cruz was the nominee and there was a less than 1% chance that Trump would win the nomination.

Let's not pretend you didn't google this. LOL! Right, the article you Googled didn't take into account the tremendous crossover votes at the time.

By the way his "analysis" of of the 12 million Dems is not statistically valid.
Which means it is an opinion, nothing more.

It's on you to prove that the stats are not valid. We know there were very large numbers of crossover voters and we suspect they were Democrats putting in the weakest candidate. The Open Primaries proved that.

I agree with Steve Deace - When elections are about personality, the Democrats win and when about issues, the Republicans win. This election is about personality.

All Donald Trump needs to do is agree that the delegates be unbound. He can't unify the party, he doesn't have the base, can't win without the base, so if he thinks he is going to win - hands down - release the delegates. Man up.

As stated, if he wins with the delegates unbound, so be it.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Yeah nobody wants a candidate who gets millions of voters from right, left, and middle. A candidate who appeals to indies, dems, and republicans is not what the GOP needs. They need a candidate who ONLY appeals to a fringe minority of the party.

THAT's how you go up against Hillary.

LOL!!!

The dead elephant is just about embalmed, ready to be buried.

The people supporting the buffoon are the ones responsible for the embalming. The people who voted for Donald Trump during the primaries are the ones who broke it and now they own it.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Let's not pretend you didn't google this. LOL! Right, the article you Googled didn't take into account the tremendous crossover votes at the time.


It's on you to prove that the stats are not valid. We know there were very large numbers of crossover voters and we suspect they were Democrats putting in the weakest candidate. The Open Primaries proved that.

I agree with Steve Deace - When elections are about personality, the Democrats win and when about issues, the Republicans win. This election is about personality.

All Donald Trump needs to do is agree that the delegates be unbound. He can't unify the party, he doesn't have the base, can't win without the base, so if he thinks he is going to win - hands down - release the delegates. Man up.

As stated, if he wins with the delegates unbound, so be it.

I definitely googled it.
His "statistics" on Cruz being the nominee are as bad as they are on the 12 million dems voting for Trump.
Here is what he says about his "findings"

"After a lot of work I have finished my math calculations. A simple effort will show that from 2000 to 2008 there was a change in Primary votes of 10-12 million. Ten million more Republicans and 12 million less Democrats. But this is child's play. Getting deeper, examining States with close polling prior to the registration requirements, States with a clear winner in polls prior to registration change requirements, and you can set patterns.

Using 2000 and 2008 as baselines, the conclusion was staggering. Trump only got about 3.3 million Republican Votes. The rest are Democrats, approximately 12 million of them."

This is what he bases his "findings" on.

PO - for part of my career I was a Six Sigma Blackbelt.
That means I was heavily trained in statistical analysis.
What he did was in no way a valid statistical measurement.
It is his opinion.
It is similar to someone trying to average percentages and reach a conclusion.
He would be laughed out of any conference if he tried to present this as a paper.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Why do we even vote? How does voting matter when it comes down to someone who doesnt have to go by the popular vote?