All delegates are unbound

[r9etb]

Right...lol, SCOTUS indeed.

What SCOTUS has ruled is that any political party can make it's own rules.  Don't like it.. start your own political party.

Huh?

[Wingnut]

This ruling is theater nothing more, Hes still bound and subject to National and State Party rules.

http://thebullelephant.com/freedom-of-association-continues-to-trump-vas-criminal-laws/

Got your Pyrite King talking points from the TOS. Go forth Mecihonies, spread the word!    You rock!

[WAC]

Clever #nevertrump tricksters, ignore the will of the voters ?? #nevertrumpers are sore losers.

The party elites, eastern liberal "Republicans," phony ass conservatives, journalists like Bill Kristol, politicos like Jeb Bush, and the #nevertrumpers go to their knees before these operators ?

This is concerning as 'the voters' are what drives the delegates with the expectation they will support the candidate who won their state.... .......if the delegates are then unbound to vote "conscious"......then they might as well eliminate voters voting in the primary for pres. nominee and just vote for delegates if it's going to be left up to them as it appears it could..

[Right_in_Virginia]

This is concerning as 'the voters' are what drives the delegates with the expectation they will support the candidate who won their state.... .......if the delegates are then unbound to vote "conscious"......then they might as well eliminate voters voting in the primary for pres. nominee and just vote for delegates if it's going to be left up to them as it appears it could..

The delegates are still bound to the rules of the RNC ... supported by the court's decision today.  The jurisdiction for the distribution of votes belongs to the RNC ---- and the court refused to rule on voting "conscience".

Nothing is different today from yesterday.   ^-^   @WAC

[r9etb]

This is concerning as 'the voters' are what drives the delegates with the expectation they will support the candidate who won their state.... .......if the delegates are then unbound to vote "conscious"......then they might as well eliminate voters voting in the primary for pres. nominee and just vote for delegates if it's going to be left up to them as it appears it could..

But that's really not how it works.  For all that it's been little more than a coronation for the last 36 years, the actual purpose of the convention is for the party to pick the candidate most likely (and most qualified) to win the general election.  It is not intended to be a blind ratification of the primary results.

In a normal year we wouldn't really notice it, as the differences between the candidate and the Republican (not to mention the general) electorate are less obvious than this year.

[HonestJohn]

Truly amazing that in a nation of 315 million, THESE two cretins are the "best" we can do.  It speaks volumes about the dismal future America faces.

It's not the best we can do... it's what the politically motivated in America *WANT*.

[Mechanicos]

"The court has confirmed what we have said all along: Rule 16 is in effect and thus delegates, including Correll, are bound to vote in accordance with the election results. The court did not buy what Curly Haugland was selling, and noted that his testimony has no support in the rule's text and was contradicted by his own book, Unbound. This case puts his unbound theory to rest, and is a fatal blow to the Anti-Trump agitators.”

[sinkspur]

"The court has confirmed what we have said all along: Rule 16 is in effect and thus delegates, including Correll, are bound to vote in accordance with the election results. The court did not buy what Curly Haugland was selling, and noted that his testimony has no support in the rule's text and was contradicted by his own book, Unbound. This case puts his unbound theory to rest, and is a fatal blow to the Anti-Trump agitators.”

That's Manafort's interpretation.  Let's see what happens when the Rules Committee votes. 

Trump is hoping to buy off the delegates with a milquetoast like Mike Pence.  Don't think it's going to work.

[Fantom]

That's Manafort's interpretation.  Let's see what happens when the Rules Committee votes. 

Trump is hoping to buy off the delegates with a milquetoast like Mike Pence.  Don't think it's going to work.

Yep, in effect until Convention... 28 votes brings a change to the floor.

By the time it is over... maybe the secretary will will record any delegate voting for orange, as a delegate voting for a Conservative instead.

[Mechanicos]

Yep, in effect until Convention... 28 votes brings a change to the floor.

By the time it is over... maybe the secretary will will record any delegate voting for orange, as a delegate voting for a Conservative instead.

Are you referring to the 28 identified rule breakers who will no longer be at the convention?

[Fantom]

Are you referring to the 28 identified rule breakers who will no longer be at the convention?

Rule 16 is the actual vote.

Your trump fetish does not acknowledge that rule 16 is only invoked after all votes on the rules. That is a catch 22 for you sweetheart.

trumps fascist tendencies cannot be invoked under rule 16... until the actual first vote for Ill Douchbag. Which means rule 16 may very well kick out any who vote orange....just sayin'.

And the Courts will be fine with that. As will Americans.

[Mechanicos]

Rule 16 is the actual vote.

Your trump fetish does not acknowledge that rule 16 is only invoked after all votes on the rules. That is a catch 22 for you sweetheart.

trumps fascist tendencies cannot be invoked under rule 16... until the actual first vote for Ill Douchbag. Which means rule 16 may very well kick out any who vote orange....just sayin'.

And the Courts will be fine with that. As will Americans.

Court ruled Rule 16 is in effect NOW.

[Fantom]

Court ruled Rule 16 is in effect NOW.

The Court ruled ALL RNC ruels are in effect.

Let us play your fantasy however...... so rule 16 is in effect NOW...lol.

OK, you do know it only concerns the actual floor vote for nominee right?.. I mean you ..do..know...that..right?

Which means it only is in effect ...far after the votes on Rules. You do understand that do you not?

As much as trump..and you?  Would like to throw out the majority of Repubs who voted against trump...not going to happen.

[Mechanicos]

The Court ruled ALL RNC ruels are in effect.

Let us play your fantasy however...... so rule 16 is in effect NOW...lol.

OK, you do know it only concerns the actual floor vote for nominee right?.. I mean you ..do..know...that..right?

Which means it only is in effect ...far after the votes on Rules. You do understand that do you not?

As much as trump..and you?  Would like to throw out the majority of Repubs who voted against trump...not going to happen.

No I  do not know it only covers the floor vote. See the problem with your argument is the written Agreement the delegates have terms and one is usually they will not act against the interests of the principle. The Court upheld those agreements too.  They also allow the RNC to prevent Ron Paul type maneuvers.

[r9etb]

No I  do not know it only covers the floor vote. See the problem with your argument is the written Agreement the delegates have terms and one is usually they will not act against the interests of the principle. The Court upheld those agreements too.  They also allow the RNC to prevent Ron Paul type maneuvers.

Read the rule: it covers only the floor vote.  If it stands.  https://ballotpedia.org/Rule_16_and_its_impact_on_the_2016_Republican_National_Convention

[Suppressed]

The fact that Trump had complete access to these rules and refused to pay attention to them until after the results of the Wyoming and Colorado conventions were released doesn’t bode well for a man looking to negotiate the bestest deals in the world.

 By opposing the entire delegate system carte blanche, Trump is acting like an unprepared and incompetent student whining to the professor after failing an exam. Perhaps you should have studied and read something other than “The Art of the Deal” before running for the highest office in the land, Donald.
https://www.facebook.com/conservativeminuteman/videos/1716994298525394/

Bingo!

The Orange Clown is telling us that he's worried that he wasn't competent enough to choose delegates who will definitely support him...that he's worried that consciences won't support him, and people must be FORCED to vote for him against their will.

O! What great leadership!

[Fantom]

No I  do not know it only covers the floor vote. See the problem with your argument is the written Agreement the delegates have terms and one is usually they will not act against the interests of the principle. The Court upheld those agreements too.  They also allow the RNC to prevent Ron Paul type maneuvers.

Wrong, that you want it so... does not make it so.

Rule 16 does not preclude any delegate from working within ..ALL the RNC rules. Even if trump would have it so.

[RetBobbyMI]

Court ruled Rule 16 is in effect NOW.

Rule 16 can easily be averted by abstaining, rather than casting a vote for another candidate other than the one they are bound. They are then not violating the rule. Then if no one gets the majority of votes, most delegates are then unbound after the first vote. So there!

[txradioguy]

Yep, in effect until Convention... 28 votes brings a change to the floor.

By the time it is over... maybe the secretary will will record any delegate voting for orange, as a delegate voting for a Conservative instead.

The only problem I see with a floor vote is the possibility of Ryan doing what Boehner did in 2012.  Saying a voice vote approved a slew of rule changes when...if you listen to the audio...it was very clear it didn't.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gop-rules-change-spits-face-grassroots-conservatives-opponents-say

[Hoodat]

USSC ruled on Party rules vs Delegates trying to vote as they wanted. Bound Delegates are party rules under contract via the states to the delegates who have NO voting rights on their own but only the authority to vote as given to them by their State via the Party.

I remember that case - Mechanicos v. Truth.  If I recall correctly, the defendant won 9-0.

[montanajoe]

Nothing is different today from yesterday.   ^-^   @WAC

@Right_in_Virginia

Actually, things are quite different today from yesterday.

The most important take away from the opinion is this:

“In sum, where the State attempts to interfere with a political party’s internal governance and operation, the party is entirely free to “cancel out [the State’s] effort”

This has several implications.

First, Delegates from states that imposed criminal or other state sanctions on Delegates for failing to cast their ballot for Trump or any other candidate are now free to do so vote as they like without fear of any state repercussions.

Secondly, the RNC rules committee and the Convention as a whole are free to change or do away with Rule 16 and the Courts will not interfere. The RNC makes the rules not the Courts.

Third, this leaves the door open for Delegates to simply abstain on the first ballot in the event Rule 16 is not changed. They would then be free to vote for the candidate of their choice without any worry of sanctions by the courts or their respective States.

So yes things have changed rather dramatically, if Trump is as strong a candidate as you believe it won't matter, if not well...

[Mechanicos]

Code: [Select]

Actually, things are quite different today from yesterday.

The most important take away from the opinion is this:

“In sum, where the State attempts to interfere with a political party’s internal governance and operation, the party is entirely free to “cancel out [the State’s] effort”

This has several implications.
First, Delegates from states that imposed criminal or other state sanctions on Delegates for failing to cast their ballot for Trump or any other candidate are now free to do so without fear of any state repercussions.

Part correct. The delegates are still subject to civilian discipline from the State Party and the National party. The only thing removed was the criminal discipline option per Statute. They are still bound to vote as they agreed to and the State party Rules and the National Rules require them too. The Conscious voting/abstaining argument was addressed and rejected by the court. Either they vote as they agreed to or they can be removed from the convention and their votes recorded as they were supposed to be.

Secondly, the RNC rules committee and the Convention as a whole are free to change or do away with Rule 16 and the Courts will not interfere. The RNC makes the rules not the Courts.

Part Correct. Still involved is the written agreement with the State Party that is enforceable by the National party. The State party and national party can discipline the delegates who violate their agreement. They can do so all the way up until the rules are changed with a floor vote. That means for all particle purposes the party destroyer people can be ejected before the floor vote and their actions nullified. Happened before with the attempted Ron Paul coup.

Third, this leaves the door open for Delegates to simply abstain on the first ballot in the event Rule 16 is not changed. They would then be free to vote for the candidate of their choice without any worry of sanctions by the courts or their respective States.

The Court ruled they have to follow the State Party and National Party rules and can be disciplined civilly by National Party for failing to vote as they agreed too. The argument of abstaining was part of the rejected conscious voting position that was found not credible. The delegates have NO legal right to abstain.

So yes things have changed rather dramatically, if Trump is as strong a candidate as you believe it won't matter, if not I well...

[Smokin Joe]

Please, a moment.

It isn't conscious that we are talking about here (a state of physical and mental awareness), because if you are unconscious, you are going to have a hard time voting.

If you are voting on a basis of deeply held principle because you feel strongly that is the right thing to do, you would be voting your conscience.

Thank you.

You may feel welcome to return to your regularly scheduled disagreement.

[Mechanicos]

Please, a moment.

It isn't conscious that we are talking about here (a state of physical and mental awareness), because if you are unconscious, you are going to have a hard time voting.

If you are voting on a basis of deeply held principle because you feel strongly that is the right thing to do, you would be voting your conscience.

Thank you.

You may feel welcome to return to your regularly scheduled disagreement.

Ahh autocorrect, thanks. Regardless, they have no legal right to abstain from voting.

[montanajoe]

Please, a moment.

It isn't conscious that we are talking about here (a state of physical and mental awareness), because if you are unconscious, you are going to have a hard time voting.

If you are voting on a basis of deeply held principle because you feel strongly that is the right thing to do, you would be voting your conscience.

Thank you.

You may feel welcome to return to your regularly scheduled disagreement.

Actually that guy from TOS is on permanent ignore to protect my conscious