Poll Which candidate do you think will be the Republican Candidate for President?

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by wedgar, Apr 7, 2016.


Which candidate do you think will be the Republican candidate for President in 2016?

  1. Cruz

  2. Kasich

  3. Trump

  4. Other

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. wedgar

    wedgar Administrator Staff Member Gold Member

    With the primary race for the Republican Presidential candidate going on, here's a poll to see what members think who will be the winner to represent the Republican party this year.
  2. Jeremy

    Jeremy Active Member

    Trump will go into the convention with the most delegates, but there is a strong possibility that there will be a dark horse candidate selected due to the delegate process.
  3. wedgar

    wedgar Administrator Staff Member Gold Member

    Do you think that may harm the Republican party if Trump won the majority of the popular vote and most delegates would not be voted as the Republican candidate?
  4. Jeremy

    Jeremy Active Member

    This election cycle is waking up many people about how the political parties select candidates, and how little their individual votes matter in the big scheme of things. If the majority of Republican voters vote for a candidate who is then denied the nomination by party rules, it will cause an uproar. I suspect that the immediate fallout would be for them not to vote, but I'm not sure what the long term effects would be. I don't know if would spell the end of the party or not, but I don't think it would absent another party waiting in the wings.
    wedgar likes this.
  5. Tony

    Tony Moderator Staff Member

    Here's my view of the whole nomination affair. Notice I did not say election. I said nomination.

    Give this some thought.

    Political parties are not public as such, as far as I can see. The are private "parties," from my view point. Private, say, as much as the Communist Party, or any other political party.

    A private party, therefore, can set any rules it wishes. If you don't like the rules, you have three choices: Accept them, attempt to gain leadership and change them, or leave the party.

    With the number of people carping about the party rules, including friends of mine, I am surprised people stay a member of a party.

    The private parties hold their elections, which we call nominations, and advance their candidates in the general election.

    The general election is the only place where all of us are heard, but only to the extent that we elect electors, members of the Electoral College, who may or may not follow our instructions.

    The biggest puzzle of this whole affair is why we as members of the public, including the 40 percent of us who are not registered with a party, have to pay for primary elections. This is no different that if we were all required to pay for corporate board elections or something similar.

    Why do we pay for private elections in which almost half of us cannot vote? Why don't the counties bill the political parties for collecting and tabulating ballots?

    The entire primary system appears to be nonsense and of merit only to those members of political parties. And the Independent registrants, a very large minority, are forced to pay the bill.
    wedgar likes this.
  6. wedgar

    wedgar Administrator Staff Member Gold Member

    I agree with you that this election is waking up both Democratic party voters with the super-delegates and Republican party voters.

    In my opinion, I think both parties could use some cleaning up and making the selection process a little more responsive to the popular votes of their voters.

    I sent a letter to Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Priebus explaining why I would not send any financial support to the RNC and received a letter in reply essentially blowing me off.
    Tony likes this.
  7. wedgar

    wedgar Administrator Staff Member Gold Member

    Generally our election process is a two party system. Perhaps it is time for one or more new political parties to emerge to replace the old established ones.
  8. Tony

    Tony Moderator Staff Member

    I agree with that, but it troubles me in its formation. The start of a third party generally tends to allow the most distasteful of the hacks to gain entrance to office. Until the third party gets strong, it's candidates serve only as spoilers. Ralph Nader comes to mind.

    With the third party comes coalition governments. Very confusing. You're never really sure who or what you're electing.

    I don't like parties either way. They breed elitism, king-making and corruption. The corruption runs from ideological agendas of Justices of the United States to city councilors, from bribery to established cronyism. It's about power, not serving the public.

    If you're a party member you generally have to accept the candidate the leadership wants.

    If you want pure democracy, you'd best study a little history.

    This all generally doesn't bother us until the politics of hate and oppression bubble to the top.
    wedgar likes this.
  9. Jeremy

    Jeremy Active Member

    I agree with Tony with these comments 1) the system is rigged in favor of the 2 established parties. Examples include taxpayer funded primaries, and the more lax rules to get their candidates on the ballot in many states. 3rd parties, especially established ones like the Green and Libertarian parties, are often forced to collect far more signatures and will face challenges to those signatures to get their candidates on the ballots. States should NOT be deciding who is on the ballot by such means. There should be a uniform standard for all candidates in accordance with the Constitution in the process to select the Electoral College. Add this reality, the fact that the media basically blacks third party candidates out, and you have a loaded deck to work against. In 2008 the most substantive debates I saw were held by the 3rd party candidates. 2) the fact that the 2 major parties make it easy to use party rules to avoid the will of the people is troubling. I am not for a pure democracy by any means, but I want my republic well seasoned with democracy so that the will of the people is known and followed.
    wedgar likes this.
  10. wedgar

    wedgar Administrator Staff Member Gold Member

    Tony, as much as it pains me to agree with you ( :p ), I think you are spot on.
  11. wedgar

    wedgar Administrator Staff Member Gold Member

    You are also spot on. I believe most Americans are fed up with the two party system which is why in my opinion, we saw Trump garnering the most votes among the GOP primaries and why Bernie has done as well as he had done.

    Power corrupts and both the Democratic and Republican party leadership certainly shows that in my humble opinion...

Share This Page