A Republican delegate revolt becomes more likely

[truth_seeker]

Quite right.  Can we finally discuss Trump's performance with respect to any conservative and/or republican causes?


If we're only playing odds, like the flip of a coin, a win or a non-win, then you are not correct.  Odds of repeatedly landing on heads diminish with each flip.

Wrong. The odds of landing on heads each time remain exactly the same, regardless of previous flips. (0.50)

Each flip is an independent event.

[RoosGirl]

Like I said election year fictions by opponents:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/252753-trump-on-ky-clerk-i-hate-to-see-her-put-in-jail

What was omitted in the post above, oh yeah not that he agreed with the law but he was sad she went to jail. His entire position was on obeying the law not about supporting the gay agenda.

From your article,

“I’m a believer in both sides of the issue,” the New York business mogul said.

Perhaps this is what @Norm Lenhart meant by mouthing off.

[RoosGirl]

Wrong. The odds of landing on heads each time remain exactly the same, regardless of previous flips. (0.50)

Each flip is an independent event.

That's correct if you're looking at only one event and not a series of events of odds of getting the same answer, as what was initially described.

[Mechanicos]

From your article,  Perhaps this is what @Norm Lenhart meant by mouthing off.

Pray tell what is the owner of Trump towers and many other properties in NYC going to say about the protected class of gays while hes vulnerable to their lawyers bankrupting his businesses there and forcing him to lay off thousands of workers? Oh right, this is the time and hill to die on I guess... No need to wait until he has  conservative Supreme Court justices in place. Its all about principles right now...

[Norm Lenhart]

Like I said election year fictions by opponents:


What was omitted in the post above, oh yeah not that he agreed with the law but he was sad she went to jail. His entire position was on obeying the law not about supporting the gay agenda.

You do so love to spin. Spin meaning flatly lie to serve your candidate.

"You have to go with it. The decision's been made, and that is the law of the land," the real estate mogul said Friday on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."
Trump declined to weigh in on the issue Thursday -- stating during a press conference he wasn't very familiar with the issue -- but said Friday that Davis should have let her deputies in the office certify the marriages. Davis's attorney said Friday that she has no intention to resign."

End result of Trumps refusal to stand with 5000 years of civilization and Kim Davis: Gay agenda wins.

See also

"I was just following orders"

[Norm Lenhart]

Pray tell what is the owner of Trump towers and many other properties in NYC going to say about the protected class of gays while hes vulnerable to their lawyers bankrupting his businesses there and forcing him to lay off thousands of workers? Oh right, this is the time and hill to die on I guess... No need to wait until he has  conservative Supreme Court justices in place. Its all about principles right now...

Its about principles 24/7/365. If you had any that were conservative, you'd have known that. Instead like any other liberal, you put a time and a price on whether or not they should be upheld.

Just like the historically liberal candidate you support.

[Mechanicos]

Its about principles 24/7/365. If you had any that were conservative, you'd have known that. Instead like any other liberal, you put a time and a price on whether or not they should be upheld.

Just like the historically liberal candidate you support.

When you have thousands of people relying on you for their jobs you commit economic suicide when there is no need to do so at this time. Oh and stop insulting me calling me a liberal because I have real world experience and know what risk reward analysis is. I'm not the one helping to elect the democrat here.

[truth_seeker]

That's correct if you're looking at only one event and not a series of events of odds of getting the same answer, as what was initially described.

The odds do NOT DIMINISH with each flip, they remain the same for each successive flip.

You do NOT wager on odds of past known events, but on unknown future events.

[EC]

Oh and stop insulting me calling me a liberal ....

Irritating as hell, isn't it. You might want to think on that a bit the next time you are tempted to cast that same stone.

And your link to 25 ways you know you are arguing with a liberal always gives me a smile. One of the items is "They use the term hater" - something that I've only ever seen Trump supporters do.

[Mesaclone]

This convention revolt silliness is nothing more than fantasy. The rules committee is dominated by Trump people and by colleagues of Reince Priebus...and even if that were not so, very few people at the delegate level are dumb enough to attempt to snatch a nomination by after-the-vote rules changes. Its just not going to happen and the NeverTrump crowd is setting itself up...again...for a major disappointment. Prolonging this fantasy is pointless and destructive to the party...and very helpful to Hillary Clinton. So you are actively helping her into the White House when you advocate for this idiocy.

Because this stuff has no chance of success, its only purpose is to hurt the party. Which is, pardon the directness, really stupid. Its the path to a radically liberal next 8 years. And if you think you'd get that as well with Mr. Trump, you simply do not understand how politics and our governmental structure work...much less comprehend the policies that Mr. Trump is advocating.

The choice at this point is simple...though so many on the far right don't like it.  You are faced with the election of a Hillary Clinton and an accompanying radically left wing government that will deliberately destroy your 1st, 2nd and other amendment rights. You will get much higher taxation, much bigger government, complete amnesty for 12 million illegals and an open invitation to 12 million more, and 2-4 radically left wing Supreme Court justices. On the other hand, you are faced with a GOP nominee who is to the left of Ted Cruz but WAY to the right of Hillary Clinton...and again, if you think that isn't true you are simply fooling yourself. When we elect a president, we get a platform/agenda and a host of political structure from their side of the aisle...particularly true if the party holds one or both houses of congress.

So the choice is stark...it is not between two liberals despite the numerous deluded fools who repeat that patently idiotic mantra based on positions no longer held by the GOP nominee. This election IS a choice...to be fair...between a radical leftist-globalist (Hillary)...and a somewhat socially moderate (though right of center certainly), fiscal and military conservative who is a staunch America first foreign policy advocate.

That isn't the choice many of you wanted...but that is the choice. And its time to quit pretending there are other options. There aren't, one of those two is our next President. Period.

So get over this "revolt" mirage...it ain't happening and in your heart of hearts, you all know this. You're going to have Hillary or you're going to have Mr Trump...two very different candidates who are far apart on the political spectrum. You can support whoever you want, but quit pretending that there is any other outcome possible than one of those two being president. There isn't.

Pick the guy who will give you Conservative justices and fix immigration...or...go for the gal who will give Liberal justices and 10's of millions of new immigrant citizens via amnesty. Or don't vote...or vote 3rd party...but know that HOW you vote, and whoever you vote for, will help determine if either Hillary Clinton and the Democrats...or...Donald Trump and the Republicans win this election. Your choice, of course.

[RoosGirl]

The odds do NOT DIMINISH with each flip, they remain the same for each successive flip.

You do NOT wager on odds of past known events, but on unknown future events.

Are you saying that the odds of getting 5 heads in a row are the same as getting 1 heads?  I am talking about the "odds" of the same thing happening several times in a row based on the original comment.

[RoosGirl]

The rules committee is dominated by Trump people and by colleagues of Reince Priebus

Do you actually have proof of this yet or is this just another something you say because it serves the purpose?

[Jazzhead]

I agree, Mesaclone, we have a choice to make.  And it is quite painful to conclude that Trump as President is worse than Clinton as President.  But he is. 

The problem with Trump isn't that he's not raising important issues.   A lot of his economic nationalism shtick (and from him, it is shtick)  resonates with me,  and I have no objection to the proto-Constitutional practice of tariffs (if done correctly).  And, obviously, I'd love to deny Hillary the SCOTUS picks.   

The problem with Trump is Trump.   He's brought the train so far,  but it's time to cede the controls.   He's dangerously unstable,  and temperamentally the worst thing you'd want as CIC.   He's baited and insulted a gigantic swath of the population.   I say that's pernicious, and stupid,  and the man's aggression-fueled narcissism scares the shit out of everyone I talk to.

Trump's on the verge of claiming credit for Brexit.  But the lesson of Brexit's victory is to present the issue with tact and seriousness,  with the support of serious, credible leaders.  That's how Brexit won.   The public face of the issue wasn't a ludicrous clownshow.   

Trump and the issues he represents are going to lose badly to Hillary Clinton.  To save those issues, and not to mention having a shot at defeating Clinton and saving the Senate,  a new face is needed.    Trump's got to do the right thing and respect the will of the delegates voting their consciences.       

[EasyAce]

If and when the only choice to save the ship of state is to vote for which
between two icebergs would offer a gentler collision, a none of the above
vote looks better and better every day. Since my state has the option, I'll
use it. I have no intention of helping this country stick its head any further
up its ass than it is already---and its head is already so far up its ass it could
give you spot reporting of its own ongoing root canal procedure. Just pray
that, at minimum, Donaldus Minimus doesn't wound the down-ticket . . .

[Mesaclone]

I agree, Mesaclone, we have a choice to make.  And it is quite painful to conclude that Trump as President is worse than Clinton as President.  But he is. 

The problem with Trump isn't that he's not raising important issues.   A lot of his economic nationalism shtick (and from him, it is shtick)  resonates with me,  and I have no objection to the proto-Constitutional practice of tariffs (if done correctly).  And, obviously, I'd love to deny Hillary the SCOTUS picks.   

The problem with Trump is Trump.   He's brought the train so far,  but it's time to cede the controls.   He's dangerously unstable,  and temperamentally the worst thing you'd want as CIC.   He's baited and insulted a gigantic swath of the population.   I say that's pernicious, and stupid,  and the man's aggression-fueled narcissism scares the shit out of everyone I talk to.

Trump's on the verge of claiming credit for Brexit.  But the lesson of Brexit's victory is to present the issue with tact and seriousness,  with the support of serious, credible leaders.  That's how Brexit won.   The public face of the issue wasn't a ludicrous clownshow.   

Trump and the issues he represents are going to lose badly to Hillary Clinton.  To save those issues, and not to mention having a shot at defeating Clinton and saving the Senate,  a new face is needed.    Trump's got to do the right thing and respect the will of the delegates voting their consciences.       

I'm not going to argue with how you wish to vote...beyond disagreeing. Your conclusions are subjective, as are mine, so we'll just have to see if Trump's issues are or are not ones that will lead him to a win. What's not debateable, is that Trump is going to be the GOP nominee...he won more primary votes than any GOP candidate in our history. So there isn't going to be some magic rule change that flips the nomination...that really is a childish fantasy. As for doing the right thing, that is clear. Delegates were put in place by the votes of GOP primary voters...and that is why they are not free to vote as they want, but rather as the voters put them in place to do.

It is not "their" own personal consciences that delegates are representing, but rather those of the primary voters who cast their votes under the current rules that hold delegates in place. They have no right to substitute their will/conscience for that of the citizens who actually voted....suggesting such is deeply unethical.  So, there is no moral dilemma for delegates, but rather a clear duty to voters holding them to their obligation on the first ballot. If they feel they morally cannot fulfill that duty, than all they need do is step down as a delegate thus freeing themselves from any internal dissonance they may feel.

[EC]

Are you saying that the odds of getting 5 heads in a row are the same as getting 1 heads?  I am talking about the "odds" of the same thing happening several times in a row based on the original comment.

The odds of each individual flip remain 50:50, no matter if you flip the coin once or a million times.

The odds of getting five heads in a row are 1 in 32. There are 32 possible combinations of coin results based on 5 flips, only one of which is all 5 heads.

You are each using "odds" in a different sense.

[Mesaclone]

If and when the only choice to save the ship of state is to vote for which
between two icebergs would offer a gentler collision, a none of the above
vote looks better and better every day. Since my state has the option, I'll
use it. I have no intention of helping this country stick its head any further
up its ass than it is already---and its head is already so far up its ass it could
give you spot reporting of its own ongoing root canal procedure. Just pray
that, at minimum, Donaldus Minimus doesn't wound the down-ticket . . .

You'll vote as you wish, no doubt.

But feigning some sort of equivalence between the two candidates is not rational...and its rather childish. They are not two icebergs as in the analogy, at best you could argue an iceberg vs a moderately large wave...as the impacts of putting one of the two in the White House are RADICALLY different. You may think both are bad...but they are not in proximity in such a spectrum. One brings a wildly left wing agenda AND a party infrastructure that will work to impose that radical ideology on our government...and thus the nation. That is qualitatively different....vastly different...than any argument that could be made concerning the policies of Mr Trump which ALSO come with a powerful party infrastructure that supports AND restrains his actionsl

So while you could certainly argue that you would be choosing between evils (though I disagree), you cannot rationally argue that the "evils" are in any way similar in magnitude. Nor can you argue that the potential damage of a true Democrat party left wing "possession" of our government wouldn't be vastly worse than that of the GOP nominee. And if you would argue such a thing, you simply are deluding yourself intentionally...or you are heinously misinformed as to the connection between policy and political structure.

[Emjay]

When you have thousands of people relying on you for their jobs you commit economic suicide when there is no need to do so at this time. Oh and stop insulting me calling me a liberal because I have real world experience and know what risk reward analysis is. I'm not the one helping to elect the democrat here.

Ha, ha, ha.  By the way here's a question for you.

Where was Corey escorted out by armed guards?

1. When he pushed a female reporter and bruised her arm.
or
2. When he was fired by the Donald..

One job lost.

[Silver Pines]

Everyone should watch that video to avail themselves of the ongoing effort to unbind the delegates on the first ballot.

It is important to know WHO is on the Rules Committee that will determine the rules of the convention as they are the ones who would unbind the delegates.  Perhaps some do not remember this: 

When Trump was sitting in Trump Tower rather than going after actual delegates as they were being chosen in state conventions, Cruz and his people were at every state convention to encourage their delegates to be chosen for the National Convention.   Cruz and his people were not only choosing individual delegates, they were pushing their chosen delegates to be on the RULES COMMITTEE.  It is highly likely, the majority of delegates on the Rules Committee are Cruz delegates and he has not released his delegates.  These Cruz delegates are true to Cruz, especially as Trump shows his ignorance of government and makes enemies with his mouth attacking anyone who has a thought other than his.

I pray these delegates will consider the country and unbind delegates.
@Norm Lenhart
@mystery-ak
@CatherineofAragon
@Bigun
@RoosGirl

@Victoria33

So, when we used to talk about Ted Cruz playing a long game, we didn't know just HOW long it really was.  Wow.  The man always impresses.

(Actually, YOU probably knew from your days in state politics, but I'll be the first to admit I hadn't a clue).

[RoosGirl]

The odds of each individual flip remain 50:50, no matter if you flip the coin once or a million times.

The odds of getting five heads in a row are 1 in 32. There are 32 possible combinations of coin results based on 5 flips, only one of which is all 5 heads.

You are each using "odds" in a different sense.

You are correct.  The person that originally brought it up was talking about the odds of them being correct (in a scenario of only "correct" or "incorrect" possibilities) was higher since they had been correct several times in a row previously.  I was talking about the odds of the same thing happening several times in a row with respect to that.  Of course any individual 1 or 0 outcome is 1/2 or 50%. But then the odds of that same outcome several times, say 5 like in your example,  in a row becomes 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = (0.5)^5 = 1 /32 = 0.03125 = 3.125%

[aligncare]

I'm not going to argue with how you wish to vote...beyond disagreeing. Your conclusions are subjective, as are mine, so we'll just have to see if Trump's issues are or are not ones that will lead him to a win. What's not debateable, is that Trump is going to be the GOP nominee...he won more primary votes than any GOP candidate in our history. So there isn't going to be some magic rule change that flips the nomination...that really is a childish fantasy. As for doing the right thing, that is clear. Delegates were put in place by the votes of GOP primary voters...and that is why they are not free to vote as they want, but rather as the voters put them in place to do.

It is not "their" own personal consciences that delegates are representing, but rather those of the primary voters who cast their votes under the current rules that hold delegates in place. They have no right to substitute their will/conscience for that of the citizens who actually voted....suggesting such is deeply unethical.  So, there is no moral dilemma for delegates, but rather a clear duty to voters holding them to their obligation on the first ballot. If they feel they morally cannot fulfill that duty, than all they need do is step down as a delegate thus freeing themselves from any internal dissonance they may feel.

I don't vote for democrats and I don't vote 3rd party, so my path and conscience is clear. I'm voting for the republican nominee.

Added bonus: Mr. Trump's a workaholic, a fast study and a peak achiever at whatever challenge he undertakes. His record and personal accounts from friends and associates confirm it.

Those nattering nabobs of negativism don't know what they're talking about. In fact, they're talking crazy. But that's politics for you, all passion and anger. #neverLogic and #neverReason

[roamer_1]

It is highly likely, the majority of delegates on the Rules Committee are Cruz delegates and he has not released his delegates.  These Cruz delegates are true to Cruz, especially as Trump shows his ignorance of government and makes enemies with his mouth attacking anyone who has a thought other than his.

Sweet T.E.A. 

[Silver Pines]

So the choice is stark...it is not between two liberals despite the numerous deluded fools who repeat that patently idiotic mantra based on positions no longer held by the GOP nominee. This election IS a choice...to be fair...between a radical leftist-globalist (Hillary)...and a somewhat socially moderate (though right of center certainly), fiscal and military conservative who is a staunch America first foreign policy advocate.

That isn't the choice many of you wanted...but that is the choice. And its time to quit pretending there are other options. There aren't, one of those two is our next President. Period.Donald Trump and the Republicans win this election. Your choice, of course.

@Mesaclone

Nope.  This isn't a banana republic where someone gets to tell me I MUST vote for so-and-so and there's nothing to be done about it.  NO ONE instructs me on what to do with my vote.  It belongs to no one else; I do not owe it to anyone.  It must be earned.  Neither Trump or Clinton have done anything to earn it, nor will they.  I would not in my wildest dreams consider voting for either of them.  That's MY choice.  How do you like it?

I know it's hard for you folks, only now coming up against a wall of cold, hard reality, but we meant it when we told you we wouldn't vote for Clinton or for her good buddy and donor.  I guess you're going to have to get used to it, or not.  But all the begging and tantruming in the world isn't going to change it.

[Victoria33]

@Victoria33
So, when we used to talk about Ted Cruz playing a long game, we didn't know just HOW long it really was.  Wow.  The man always impresses.  (Actually, YOU probably knew from your days in state politics, but I'll be the first to admit I hadn't a clue).

Yes, it was my experience with state politics and how conventions worked and being at a number of them, that allowed me to understand what Cruz was doing when he worked to get his delegates on the rules committee.  I have read something here today giving some of the names of the rules committee that says the rules committee has Trump people on it and saying they will all be true to him.  However, these people are not stupid and they can see now that Trump will not win, so I don't buy that all those will stay true to Trump.  There are at least two on the committee that are actively working right now to get the delegates unbound. 

I don't know what will happen, but we are sunk if Trump ends up the candidate.

[truth_seeker]

Irritating as hell, isn't it. You might want to think on that a bit the next time you are tempted to cast that same stone.

And your link to 25 ways you know you are arguing with a liberal always gives me a smile. One of the items is "They use the term hater" - something that I've only ever seen Trump supporters do.

You are kidding me, right?