What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official 2016 GOP thread: Is it really going to be Donald Trump?? (1 Viewer)

On the first ballot, aren't all 1190 pledged to Trump? On a 2nd ballot, how many of them are, maybe 1/2? That's where Cruz is doing well in getting supporters as these delegates.

If Trump doesn't get to 1237, but 1190, how many unpledged delegates are there (that for whatever reason, don't have to pledge until the convention) for the 1st vote?

It sure seems like Cruz would take a significant bit out of those 1190 on a 2nd (and beyond vote) with his organization while Trump is currently playing catch up.
I don't know that all those pledged delegates are really bound. For instance if Donald wins PA a large portion of the delegates are unbound, but the numbers will be counted in his column. And Donald is giving party people in some states like SC an out because he too has said he no longer recognizes his own pledge to be loyal to the party. And then there are states like my own LA where well.... good luck relying on pure honor.

 
The R's motto for the 2016 election could be 'We choose Cruz & lose.' That loser will get smoked by either D.

 
A few years ago I heard Jesse Ventura pitching the idea of including "none of the above" as an option on the ballot.  Imagine what kind of percentages that would command in the upcoming general.  
I prefer a more tangible choice. One that voices the sentiment that we're ####ed no matter what, so we should at least try to go with the least horrifying option:  Vote Stay Puft Marshmallow Man '16.

 
Any scenario where Trump doesn't get the nom may be a riot scenario.
I don't think so.  If he shows with X delegates and it takes Y to secure the nom and he has X-Z defect before the first ballot to Cruz to give him Y delegates, that right there is your riot.

Defections on the first ballot are somewhat meaningless unless it results in a nomination and it's not clear exactly how the floor rules would handle such a thing.  From what I understand this result would be thrown out and you would follow to the 2nd ballot anyways.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, yes, I'm sure explanations of the process, delegate courting and the rules will be well received.....

http://soopermexican.com/2016/04/06/supporters-cant-handle-trump-defeat-rage-tweet-about-supposed-election-fraud/
First line:

The nearly illiterate and barely conscious hordes of the dumber element of Trump supporters are wailing and gnashing their teeth on their Twitter accounts after his YUGE loss to the TedNado in Wisconsin.
:lmao:

 
My favorite part, and it doesn't matter if it's republicans, democrats, supporters of one candidate, etc....

When their Candidate wins :clap: :excited: The Voting process is working!!!!!!

When their Candidate loses.. FRAUD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rant: :angry:

 
I still don't get why people would riot.  It's not like he's thrown out of the race, he can still run.  The entire nomination process is a complete sham.

 
I prefer a more tangible choice. One that voices the sentiment that we're ####ed no matter what, so we should at least try to go with the least horrifying option:  Vote Stay Puft Marshmallow Man '16.
I believe Deez Nuts will be on the ballot in all 50 states.  :oldunsure:

 
I still don't get why people would riot.  It's not like he's thrown out of the race, he can still run.  The entire nomination process is a complete sham.
There won't be any riots.. 90%.. wait 85%, no make that 75%.. Dam.. can't get the figure correct in my head...  ;) ..... of the Trumpkins will just get mad and either not vote at all or vote 3rd party..

The RIOT is a scare tactic by Trump to try and force the GOP's hand.. That way if say 5% of the Trumpkins do something destructive he can claim "I Told you so!!!"

 
There won't be any riots.. 90%.. wait 85%, no make that 75%.. Dam.. can't get the figure correct in my head...  ;) ..... of the Trumpkins will just get mad and either not vote at all or vote 3rd party..

The RIOT is a scare tactic by Trump to try and force the GOP's hand.. That way if say 5% of the Trumpkins do something destructive he can claim "I Told you so!!!"
Which is doubling down on dumb, since the true threat would be for him to run as an independent if he doesn't get the R nomination. But then he'd have to actually spend his own money or come up with other funding - which I'm pretty sure he isn't interested in doing.

 
Parties are not vote counting appendages of the state.

They are organizations, corporate entities with their own interests.

The people can vote for whomever they like in the general.

 
Trump is the best loser, the best. Borowitz: 

Trump denied that he was being a poor loser.

“I am a fabulous loser,” he said. “I am the biggest loser in this country.”

 
For what it's worth, my 80 year old FiL worked a 15 hour volunteer day at the polls in his Milwaukee suburb yesterday. The reason he had to stay over two hours after the polls closed? Write-ins. Everyone's a comedian. Mickey Mouse. Elroy. Brett Favre. They all have to be hand sorted. He wasn't complaining, but I felt bad for him.

 
Cruz is much better than Trump. Not a very high standard for sure but still that should be clear to everyone.
His ideas are no less insane. And I'm not convinced these Cruz votes aren't just "not trump" votes or how you would go about even quantifying if those votes are actually genuine.

 
Didn't you vote for Obama?

I am not a Cruz fan per se but as opposed to Trump- it is an easy decision for me.
yes.  both first term senators...blah blah blah.  At least Obama had multiple years running for (winning and losing) Illinois state senates seats (7 years).   At least there is more background at the state level.  Not so much for Cruz.

 
yes.  both first term senators...blah blah blah.  At least Obama had multiple years running for (winning and losing) Illinois state senates seats (7 years).   At least there is more background at the state level.  Not so much for Cruz.
And even less for Trump. So I'm not understanding the point here.

 
Harry Enten Verified account @ForecasterEnten


Big poll here: Field Poll finds Trump up 39-32 in Cali. However, he trails in LA County and among Latinos #delegates http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article70383762.html …

Moe Lane@moelane


Moe Lane Retweeted Harry Enten

Context: LA County is, in whole or in part, represented in EIGHTEEN Congressional Districts. http://www.laalmanac.com/government/gu02.htm …

Trump leads Cruz in California 39 percent to 32 percent among likely Republican voters, according to the poll. Kasich is running a distant third.

But in Los Angeles County and areas of inland California, Cruz, the senator from Texas, holds an advantage. The regional differences are significant because California Republicans award nearly all of their 172 delegates by congressional district, three delegates each to the winner of each district. Losing even a handful of districts could hurt Trump’s effort to amass the 1,237 delegates necessary to secure the nomination.


 


***************************************************

California is states within the state.

- Cruz is winning L.A. 40-29 - that's for 18 delegates.

- Cruz is winning Central Valley 42-33 - that's for 8 delegates.

This means that Cruz has a really good chance after adding up the different regions of getting almost half of CA's 172 delegates.

Donald's magic number right now is 494. If he gets 90 in CA, 90 in NY (no guarantee), and maybe 40 of PA's 54 (being generous on the last two), that gets him to 220/494 by my count. Then there are the 4 coastals. And some more down the pike, but Cruz's ability to shave off districts in CA will be a big deal

 
Last edited by a moderator:
yes.  both first term senators...blah blah blah.  At least Obama had multiple years running for (winning and losing) Illinois state senates seats (7 years).   At least there is more background at the state level.  Not so much for Cruz.
Your partisanship is showing. :P

 
At what?  What has he accomplished?   
I'm not Cruz fan.  But he graduated Princeton with honors, Harvard Law with honors and was an editor of the Law Review, clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist, served as Solicitor General for Texas and has been elected to Congress.  That's a pretty impressive resume.

 
I'm not Cruz fan.  But he graduated Princeton with honors, Harvard Law with honors and was an editor of the Law Review, clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist, served as Solicitor General for Texas and has been elected to Congress.  That's a pretty impressive resume.
Certainly not less than Obama's when running for President the first time. Which is why it is humorous to have an Obama backer question Cruz's lack of accomplishment and/or resume. If you voted for Obama but now question Cruz on what has he accomplished then your issue is obviously not about accomplishment but something else. Most likely, you are hopelessly stuck in partisan mode and it really doesn't matter who the person is or what they have done- you will find something to not like about them.

That said- Cruz is by far not my first pick.... or second.... or third.... etc but he easily gets my endorsement over Trump. I would vote for him over Hillary though I would vote Hillary over Trump. Neither Cruz nor Hillary are exciting in any sense but as opposed to Trump or Sanders, then they are the better of the horrible choices we have.  

 
You mean like party supporters who complained about Obama being inexperienced and calling him community organizer for 7+ years now supporting 2 guys who have even less experience?
Man for a guy who claims to be an independent you sure seem to stick with one side almost every time. 

 
RBM said:
Man for a guy who claims to be an independent you sure seem to stick with one side almost every time. 
Yes...I sure praise Obama and Hillary don't I?  Oh wait, no, I don't.

The GOP has not represented me in a while.  They are only for fiscal responsibility when a democrat is in office and have catered to.much yi the fundies socially.

But I notice you can't refute what I said.

How do supporters who complained about Obamas inexperience, now support Cruz or Trump?  I would hope they realize just how hypocritical they are.

 
dparker713 said:
I'm not Cruz fan.  But he graduated Princeton with honors, Harvard Law with honors and was an editor of the Law Review, clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist, served as Solicitor General for Texas and has been elected to Congress.  That's a pretty impressive resume.
He also had posts with the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission. 

 
Chadstroma said:
Cruz is much better than Trump.
No, he isn't at all.  Cruz is the guy that wants Muslim spying programs and the U.S. to return to 1875 Little House on the Prairie ####.  He has a resume similar to what Obama had but has a fraction of the charisma, and he's cornered the market on creepy.  He's unlikable, can't get along with anyone at all, and reeks of evangelical fascism.  He's awful, in every conceivable way.  At least we know Trump is adept at talent evaluation, his cabinet would be strong.  Cruz would have a bunch of people on staff that hates him. 

Say what you want about Obama but I can tell you with personal experience, his people are tremendously loyal.  Obama is fairly likeable, GW too.  Clinton is a God to his followers, as is Reagan and GHWB is as respected as anyone ever in government.  Cruz is a menace, he's not good for anything or anyone.

I'll listen to Trump supporters, but if you are supporting Cruz you have no vision or concept of the 21st century.  If I want a picture of Ted Cruz's world I'll watch Deadwood or Django Unchained, he's a pig and a dangerous person and I have absolutely no respect for him. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top