You're absolutely right, and furthermore, I'm rooting for Trump to get the nomination: IMO, if Cruz gets it, the Dems "only" get POTUS and the Senate, if Boy Blunder gets the nod, we get it ALL.
None of that changes the fact that Guesser cleaned your clock again, and the fact that you haven't exactly fallen over yourself to respond to him is further evidence of that, so, like the guy told Paul Newman in "Cool Hand Luke" stay down, son, you ain't winnin' this one, son...
IMO, it's not quite that bad, Trump was actually pretty reasonable not that long ago, not to mention, he has shown a strong tendency to say what much of his audience wants to hear, and does so with even less shame than most politicians. If and when he gets the nod, I expect him to move towards the center so fast it'll make the heads of many of his brainless followers spin . However, Cruz has ALWAYS been an asshole, he's not moving anywhere. That said, I'm rooting for Trump to get the nod.
[h=2]Megyn Kelly accuses Donald Trump of bullying journalists saying he could be stopped if he was banned from TV while hitting out at CNN and Bill O'Reilly for not doing more when he attacked her[/h][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]Megyn Kelly talks about her relationship with Donald Trump in a new interview and calls out CNN and Bill O'Reilly for failing to support her at times during his attacks. The Fox News host sat down with Charlie Rose for an episode of CBS Sunday Morning that will air this weekend, and revealed that she was upset when O'Reilly failed to defend her against Trump's attacks when he pulled out of the Iowa debate she moderated in January. Kelly did however say; 'I think Bill did the best he's capable of doing in those circumstances.' She also criticized CNN for airing the event Trump was holding for veterans at the same time she was hosting the debate. 'There should have been a moment of solidarity among journalists that night to say, "We will not allow ourselves to be bullied by a presidential front runner, even one as powerful and as ahead in the polls at that point as Trump was,"' said Kelly.
Donald J. Trump
We must build a great wall between Mexico and the United States! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3518397/Moment-two-drugs-smugglers-filmed-news-crew-sneaking-U-S-scaling-Arizona-border-fence.html …
[h=6]- APRIL 01, 2016 -[/h][h=1]HERE’S EVIDENCE THAT MELANIA TRUMP COULD ACTUALLY BOOST DONALD TRUMP’S POPULARITY[/h]The Washington Post
As Donald Trump continues his unforeseen march toward the Republican nomination, his opponents have made increasingly aggressive attempts to stop him, including a recent attack ad that featured his wife Melania Trump posing nude for GQ magazine. The ad, an attempt to appeal to the morality of Mormon voters in Utah, preceded Sen. Ted Cruz’s landslide caucus victory there on Tuesday, reinforcing suggestions that Mrs. Trump may be a political liability to her husband.
But my research suggests that Melania Trump could be a persuasive messenger in the campaign, especially among political independents. In fact, she could be more effective than Mr. Trump’s surrogate-in-chief, Gov. Chris Christie—and even more effective than Trump himself.
In a survey experiment conducted via Survey Sampling International over the last two weeks, I asked 3,150 Americans to read an excerpt of a speech praising Trump’s record as a leader. The text was always the same, but I randomly varied the identity of the speaker, as well as the accompanying image, to be Christie, Donald Trump, or Melania Trump. After reading the excerpt, respondents answered a series of questions designed to gauge support for Trump’s campaign.
Unsurprisingly, Democrats and Republicans were largely unmoved by any of the appeals. But independents who read the speech attributed to Melania Trump were more favorable to her husband, as the graph below indicates here.
For example, relative to those assigned to the Christie condition, they rated Trump 12 points higher on a 100-point feeling thermometer, and were 17 percentage points more likely to say they supported his candidacy, on average.
These effects were larger among independent women: Melania Trump produced a 25-point increase in their support for Trump, relative to Christie, and a 16-point increase relative to Donald Trump himself.
This pattern is consistent with other research. In my forthcoming book, “On Behalf of the President: Presidential Spouses and White House Communications Strategy Today,” I show that public appearances of spouses both on the campaign trail and in the White House have grown more common and more strategic over time. I find that spouses can be effective political surrogates because their personal relationship with the president allows them to credibly communicate his feelings, beliefs, and character while advocating for various issues, even as they avoid explicitly mentioning public policy.
This strategy has allowed presidential spouses to garner political support while staying above the fray, and to be seen in less partisan terms by the electorate than presidents themselves. Data from the American National Election Study show that since the early 1990s, one’s partisan identification has consistently been a weaker predictor of approval for the first lady than for the president.
To be sure, amidst a presidential campaign, Melania Trump would be one of countless messengers vying for voters’ attention. Although it is easy to isolate her apparent impact in an experiment, that impact could be far more muted in a presidential campaign. Complicating matters further is that true independents are less than 10 percent of a typical presidential electorate.
Nevertheless, given that Donald Trump would be the least popular presidential nominee in many years, that he is particularly unpopular among women, and that Hillary Clinton reportedly plans to emphasize his previous statements about women, Melania Trump may be his best asset.
As Donald Trump continues his unforeseen march toward the Republican nomination, his opponents have made increasingly aggressive attempts to stop him, including a recent attack ad that featured his wife Melania Trump posing nude for GQ magazine. The ad, an attempt to appeal to the morality of Mormon voters in Utah, preceded Sen. Ted Cruz’s landslide caucus victory there on Tuesday, reinforcing suggestions that Mrs. Trump may be a political liability to her husband.
But my research suggests that Melania Trump could be a persuasive messenger in the campaign, especially among political independents. In fact, she could be more effective than Mr. Trump’s surrogate-in-chief, Gov. Chris Christie—and even more effective than Trump himself.
In a survey experiment conducted via Survey Sampling International over the last two weeks, I asked 3,150 Americans to read an excerpt of a speech praising Trump’s record as a leader. The text was always the same, but I randomly varied the identity of the speaker, as well as the accompanying image, to be Christie, Donald Trump, or Melania Trump. After reading the excerpt, respondents answered a series of questions designed to gauge support for Trump’s campaign.
Unsurprisingly, Democrats and Republicans were largely unmoved by any of the appeals. But independents who read the speech attributed to Melania Trump were more favorable to her husband, as the graph below indicates here.
For example, relative to those assigned to the Christie condition, they rated Trump 12 points higher on a 100-point feeling thermometer, and were 17 percentage points more likely to say they supported his candidacy, on average.
These effects were larger among independent women: Melania Trump produced a 25-point increase in their support for Trump, relative to Christie, and a 16-point increase relative to Donald Trump himself.
This pattern is consistent with other research. In my forthcoming book, “On Behalf of the President: Presidential Spouses and White House Communications Strategy Today,” I show that public appearances of spouses both on the campaign trail and in the White House have grown more common and more strategic over time. I find that spouses can be effective political surrogates because their personal relationship with the president allows them to credibly communicate his feelings, beliefs, and character while advocating for various issues, even as they avoid explicitly mentioning public policy.
This strategy has allowed presidential spouses to garner political support while staying above the fray, and to be seen in less partisan terms by the electorate than presidents themselves. Data from the American National Election Study show that since the early 1990s, one’s partisan identification has consistently been a weaker predictor of approval for the first lady than for the president.
To be sure, amidst a presidential campaign, Melania Trump would be one of countless messengers vying for voters’ attention. Although it is easy to isolate her apparent impact in an experiment, that impact could be far more muted in a presidential campaign. Complicating matters further is that true independents are less than 10 percent of a typical presidential electorate.
Nevertheless, given that Donald Trump would be the least popular presidential nominee in many years, that he is particularly unpopular among women, and that Hillary Clinton reportedly plans to emphasize his previous statements about women, Melania Trump may be his best asset.
| Wisconsin Primary - Republican Winner | |||||||
| Tue 4/5 | 401 Ted Cruz wins Wisconsin Primary | -870 | |||||
| 6:00AM | 402 Field wins Wisconsin Primary | +490 |
| Republican Presidential Nominee - Republican National Convention | |||||||
| Mon 7/18 | 901 Donald Trump is Republican Nominee | -130 | |||||
| 8:00AM | 902 Field wins Republican Nomination | +110 | |||||
| Mon 7/18 | 903 Ted Cruz is Republican Nominee | +335 | |||||
| 8:00AM | 904 Field wins Republican Nomination | -420 | |||||
| Mon 7/18 | 905 John Kasich is Republican Nominee | +560 | |||||
| 8:00AM | 906 Field wins Republican Nomination | -1080 | |||||
| Mon 7/18 | 907 Paul Ryan is Republican Nominee | +1300 | |||||
| 8:00AM | 908 Field wins Republican Nomination | -3000 |
| Tue 11/8 | 103 Donald Trump wins Election | +515 | |||||
| 8:00AM | 104 Field wins Presidential Election | -730 |
[h=1]2016 Primary Forecasts[/h][h=2]The odds and polls for presidential primaries and caucuses, updated daily.[/h]How this works »
UPDATED 4:07 PM EDT | APR 1, 2016
Wisconsin Democratic primary Wisconsin Republican primary N.Y. Democratic primary N.Y. Republican primary Maryland Democratic primary Maryland Republican primary Penn. Democratic primary Penn. Republican primary California Democratic primary California Republican primary N.J. Democratic primary N.J. Republican primary ──────────────Alabama Democratic primary Alabama Republican primary Arizona Democratic primary Arizona Republican primary Arkansas Democratic primary Arkansas Republican primary Florida Democratic primary Florida Republican primary Georgia Democratic primary Georgia Republican primary Illinois Democratic primary Illinois Republican primary Iowa Democratic caucuses Iowa Republican caucuses Kansas Republican caucuses Louisiana Democratic primary Louisiana Republican primary Mass. Democratic primary Mass. Republican primary Michigan Democratic primary Michigan Republican primary Miss. Democratic primary Missouri Democratic primary Missouri Republican primary N.C. Democratic primary N.C. Republican primary N.H. Democratic primary N.H. Republican primary Nevada Democratic caucuses Nevada Republican caucuses Ohio Democratic primary Ohio Republican primary Oklahoma Democratic primary Oklahoma Republican primary S.C. Democratic primary S.C. Republican primary Tennessee Democratic primary Tennessee Republican primary Texas Democratic primary Texas Republican primary Utah Democratic caucuses Utah Republican caucuses Vermont Democratic primary Virginia Democratic primary Virginia Republican primary UPDATED 4:07 PM EDT | APR 1, 2016
[h=3]v Wisconsin Republican primary[/h]
According to our latest polls-plus forecast, Ted Cruz has a 94% chance of winning the Wisconsin primary.
[h=1]Wisconsin Could Be Trouble For Trump[/h]By HARRY ENTEN
Donald Trump at a campaign stop on Wednesday in Appleton, Wisconsin.
NAM Y. HUH / AP
Donald Trump’s path to the 1,237 delegates necessary to clinch the Republican presidential nomination may be about to hit a major speed bump in Wisconsin. Two polls out in the past week, from Basswood Research and Marquette University, show Ted Cruz with a lead of 5 percentage points and 10 percentage points, respectively. If Cruz wins Wisconsin by that much, Trump could get few of the state’s delegates, setting him further off pace and increasing the chances of a contested convention.
Wisconsin has 42 delegates — 18 go to the statewide winner and three go to the winner of each of the state’s eight congressional districts. So if Cruz wins Wisconsin by even one vote, the most Trump can hope to take home is 24 delegates, which is fewer than the 25 delegates our expert panelpredicted. Our panel had Trump falling just short of 1,237 even with 25 delegates in Wisconsin, and chances are — if Cruz wins statewide — Trump won’t win most of those remaining 24.[SUP]1[/SUP] You can see why in the regional breakdown of support from the Marquette poll.
Candidate support among GOP primary votersSOURCE: MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL POLL
Trump has generally benefited from running against multiple candidates; it has enabled him to win states with a plurality of support. But in Wisconsin, Cruz and John Kasich are drawing the anti-Trump vote on separate fronts.
Cruz holds comfortable leads in Milwaukee, the Milwaukee suburbs and Green Bay. Those roughly align with the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8thcongressional districts. If Cruz wins all these districts, he’ll take an additional 15 delegates. If the Marquette poll proves accurate, Trump will be competitive only in the Madison television market and the northern and western parts of the state, roughly the 2nd, 3rd and 7th congressional districts.
As the table indicates, Cruz isn’t competitive in the Madison media market, the 2nd congressional district, but Kasich is. Madison is home to the University of Wisconsin, and Kasich has done well in liberal college areassuch as around Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.
If Trump were to lose the 2nd congressional district to Kasich, in addition to the five districts to Cruz, that would leave only the six delegates up for grabs in the 3rd and 7th districts — and the trends there, in the state’s north and west, aren’t good for Trump. Cruz is clearly consolidating the anti-Trump vote there. Trump was ahead of Cruz 38 percent to 8 percent in those areas in the previous Marquette survey, conducted in February; his lead is now just a single percentage point, 41 percent to 40 percent.
Overall, if the Marquette poll is dead accurate, the delegate count from Wisconsin will likely break down something like Cruz 33 to 39, Trump 0 to 6 and Kasich 3. If the rest of the states after Wisconsin went as our expert panel predicted,[SUP]2[/SUP] Trump would end up with, at best, 1,185 delegates after the last primaries on June 7. He could still get to 1,237 on the first ballot at the Republican National Convention by securing 52 additional delegates among the more than 100 currently unbound or uncommitted delegates, but it would be a steeper hill to climb than we originally thought.
But let’s spin this forward even further: If Trump loses Wisconsin, is that merely a bump in the road or a sign of things to come? It’s easy to make too much of one contest. For instance, Wisconsin is unique in that local talk radio has been united against Trump. National talk show hosts, in contrast,are split on Trump.
Another big difference: Republicans in Wisconsin have a lot to be happy about, while Trump has drawn much of his support from voters disaffectedwith the GOP. Republicans run state government and have enacted conservative legislation (which led to the unsuccessful attempt to recall Gov. Scott Walker). Walker and U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan, who is from Wisconsin, both have favorable ratings above 75 percent among the state’s Republicans. Walker, whom Trump has gone after recently, has an 80 percent job approval rating among likely Republican primary voters.
So maybe Wisconsin just isn’t a good state for Trump (meaning that if Trump were to prevail, it would be a very good omen for his campaign).
But Trump’s problems in Wisconsin might be a sign of more serious issues for his campaign. It’s the first primary in which the vast majority of the votes will have been cast after Marco Rubio’s departure from the race,[SUP]3[/SUP] and Trump has picked up 0 percentage points since the February Marquette poll. Cruz picked up 21 percentage points, and Kasich rose by 13 percentage points. While earning 30 percent to 40 percent of the vote was enough for Trump to win a number of states in a candidate field of more than three, the coalescing of anti-Trump support for Cruz and Kasich means it may not be enough in other states down the line. Even the low-40s performances that won Trump the Missouri and North Carolina primaries likely wouldn’t be enough if those elections were held again today, without Rubio competing.
The other troubling result for Trump is that Kasich really does seem to have an appeal with a certain type of self-described moderate Republican that Cruz doesn’t. Kasich holds a statistically insignificant 35 percent to 34 percent to 23 percent lead over Trump and Cruz with moderates in the Marquette poll. He has a slightly larger 37 percent to 31 percent edge over Trump with that group in the Basswood Research survey. That’s why Kasich is winning in the Madison media market.
This type of well-educated moderate voter can be found by the barrel in the northern mid-Atlantic and southern New England states that vote in late April. Cruz will likely be uncompetitive in many congressional districts in states like Connecticut and New York, but the results coming out of Wisconsin suggest that Kasich may do well there. That wouldn’t help Cruz get any closer to 1,237, but it could keep Trump further away.
NAM Y. HUH / AP
Donald Trump’s path to the 1,237 delegates necessary to clinch the Republican presidential nomination may be about to hit a major speed bump in Wisconsin. Two polls out in the past week, from Basswood Research and Marquette University, show Ted Cruz with a lead of 5 percentage points and 10 percentage points, respectively. If Cruz wins Wisconsin by that much, Trump could get few of the state’s delegates, setting him further off pace and increasing the chances of a contested convention.
Wisconsin has 42 delegates — 18 go to the statewide winner and three go to the winner of each of the state’s eight congressional districts. So if Cruz wins Wisconsin by even one vote, the most Trump can hope to take home is 24 delegates, which is fewer than the 25 delegates our expert panelpredicted. Our panel had Trump falling just short of 1,237 even with 25 delegates in Wisconsin, and chances are — if Cruz wins statewide — Trump won’t win most of those remaining 24.[SUP]1[/SUP] You can see why in the regional breakdown of support from the Marquette poll.
| REGION | CRUZ | KASICH | TRUMP |
|---|---|---|---|
| Milwaukee City and Milwaukee County | 53% | 22% | 15% |
| Rest of Milwaukee media market | 43 | 21 | 27 |
| Madison media market | 19 | 37 | 33 |
| Green Bay media market | 41 | 15 | 32 |
| Northern and western Wisconsin | 40 | 17 | 41 |
| Overall | 40 | 21 | 30 |
Candidate support among GOP primary voters
Trump has generally benefited from running against multiple candidates; it has enabled him to win states with a plurality of support. But in Wisconsin, Cruz and John Kasich are drawing the anti-Trump vote on separate fronts.
Cruz holds comfortable leads in Milwaukee, the Milwaukee suburbs and Green Bay. Those roughly align with the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8thcongressional districts. If Cruz wins all these districts, he’ll take an additional 15 delegates. If the Marquette poll proves accurate, Trump will be competitive only in the Madison television market and the northern and western parts of the state, roughly the 2nd, 3rd and 7th congressional districts.
As the table indicates, Cruz isn’t competitive in the Madison media market, the 2nd congressional district, but Kasich is. Madison is home to the University of Wisconsin, and Kasich has done well in liberal college areassuch as around Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan.
If Trump were to lose the 2nd congressional district to Kasich, in addition to the five districts to Cruz, that would leave only the six delegates up for grabs in the 3rd and 7th districts — and the trends there, in the state’s north and west, aren’t good for Trump. Cruz is clearly consolidating the anti-Trump vote there. Trump was ahead of Cruz 38 percent to 8 percent in those areas in the previous Marquette survey, conducted in February; his lead is now just a single percentage point, 41 percent to 40 percent.
Overall, if the Marquette poll is dead accurate, the delegate count from Wisconsin will likely break down something like Cruz 33 to 39, Trump 0 to 6 and Kasich 3. If the rest of the states after Wisconsin went as our expert panel predicted,[SUP]2[/SUP] Trump would end up with, at best, 1,185 delegates after the last primaries on June 7. He could still get to 1,237 on the first ballot at the Republican National Convention by securing 52 additional delegates among the more than 100 currently unbound or uncommitted delegates, but it would be a steeper hill to climb than we originally thought.
But let’s spin this forward even further: If Trump loses Wisconsin, is that merely a bump in the road or a sign of things to come? It’s easy to make too much of one contest. For instance, Wisconsin is unique in that local talk radio has been united against Trump. National talk show hosts, in contrast,are split on Trump.
Another big difference: Republicans in Wisconsin have a lot to be happy about, while Trump has drawn much of his support from voters disaffectedwith the GOP. Republicans run state government and have enacted conservative legislation (which led to the unsuccessful attempt to recall Gov. Scott Walker). Walker and U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan, who is from Wisconsin, both have favorable ratings above 75 percent among the state’s Republicans. Walker, whom Trump has gone after recently, has an 80 percent job approval rating among likely Republican primary voters.
So maybe Wisconsin just isn’t a good state for Trump (meaning that if Trump were to prevail, it would be a very good omen for his campaign).
But Trump’s problems in Wisconsin might be a sign of more serious issues for his campaign. It’s the first primary in which the vast majority of the votes will have been cast after Marco Rubio’s departure from the race,[SUP]3[/SUP] and Trump has picked up 0 percentage points since the February Marquette poll. Cruz picked up 21 percentage points, and Kasich rose by 13 percentage points. While earning 30 percent to 40 percent of the vote was enough for Trump to win a number of states in a candidate field of more than three, the coalescing of anti-Trump support for Cruz and Kasich means it may not be enough in other states down the line. Even the low-40s performances that won Trump the Missouri and North Carolina primaries likely wouldn’t be enough if those elections were held again today, without Rubio competing.
The other troubling result for Trump is that Kasich really does seem to have an appeal with a certain type of self-described moderate Republican that Cruz doesn’t. Kasich holds a statistically insignificant 35 percent to 34 percent to 23 percent lead over Trump and Cruz with moderates in the Marquette poll. He has a slightly larger 37 percent to 31 percent edge over Trump with that group in the Basswood Research survey. That’s why Kasich is winning in the Madison media market.
This type of well-educated moderate voter can be found by the barrel in the northern mid-Atlantic and southern New England states that vote in late April. Cruz will likely be uncompetitive in many congressional districts in states like Connecticut and New York, but the results coming out of Wisconsin suggest that Kasich may do well there. That wouldn’t help Cruz get any closer to 1,237, but it could keep Trump further away.
2016 ELECTION 2:34 PM APR 1, 2016
[h=1]It’s Probably First Ballot Or Bust For Donald Trump At The GOP Convention[/h]By NATE SILVER
The final night of the 2004 Republican National Convention at Madison Square Garden in New York City.
SCOTT OLSON / GETTY IMAGES
At the prediction market Betfair on Friday morning, bettors put Donald Trump’s chances of winning the Republican presidential nomination at 56 percent. That’s down a fair bit — Trump had been hovering at about 70 percent after his win in Arizona (and loss in Utah) last week. Meanwhile, the likelihood of a contested convention according to bettors has considerably increased. There’s now a 63 percent chance[SUP]1[/SUP] that the convention in Cleveland will require multiple ballots, according to Betfair.
In other words, the markets are now betting on a contested convention. Not just a near-miss, where the nomination is resolved at some point between the last day of GOP primaries June 7 and the start of the convention July 18, but the thing that political journalists dream about: a full-blown contested convention where it takes multiple ballots to determine the Republican nominee.
Here’s the thing, though: Those markets don’t make a lot of sense. If you really think the chance of a multi-ballot convention is 63 percent, but also still have Trump with a 56 percent chance of winning the nomination, that implies there’s a fairly good chance that Trump will win if voting goes beyond the first ballot. That’s probably wrong. If Trump doesn’t win on the first ballot, he’s probably screwed.
The basic reason is simple. Most of the 2,472 delegates with a vote in Cleveland probably aren’t going to like Trump.
Let’s back up a bit. In most of our discussions about delegates here at FiveThirtyEight, we treat them as though they’re some sort of statistical unit. We might say a candidate “racked up 44 delegates” in the same way we’d say Steph Curry scored 44 points. But those delegates aren’t just a scoring mechanism: Delegates are people, my friends. Delegates are people!
And as I said, they’re mostly people who aren’t going to like Trump, at least if the excellent reporting from Politico and other news organizations is right. (If Trump turns out to have more support among GOP delegates than this reporting suggests, even marginally, that could end up mattering a great deal.) How can that be? In most states, the process to select the men and women who will serve as delegates is separate from presidential balloting. In Massachusetts, for instance, Trump won 49 percent of the GOP vote on March 1 — his highest share in any state to date — to earn 22 of the state’s 42 delegates. But the people who will serve as delegates haven’t been chosen yet. That will happen at a series of congressional district conventions later this month and then a Republican state meeting in May or June. According to Politico, most of those delegates are liable to favor Ted Cruz or John Kasich rather than Trump. Twenty-two of them will still be bound to Trump on the first ballot, but they can switch after that. The same story holds in a lot of other states: in Georgia, Louisiana and South Carolina, for instance — also states that Trump won.
Trump’s delegate problems stem from two major issues. One is his lack of organization: Trump just recently hired a strategist to oversee his delegate-selection efforts; Cruz has been working on the process for months. The other is his lack of support from “party elites.” The people who attend state caucuses and conventions are mostly dyed-in-the-wool Republican regulars and insiders, a group that is vigorously opposed to Trump. Furthermore, some delegate slots are automatically given to party leaders and elected officials, another group that strongly opposes Trump, as evident in his lack of endorsements among them.
There are various ways these delegates could cause problems for Trump. The most obvious, as I mentioned, is if the convention goes to a second ballot because no candidate wins a majority on the first. Not all delegates become free instantaneously,[SUP]2[/SUP] but most do, and left to vote their personal preference, most of them will probably oppose Trump.
Conversely, Trump isn’t totally safe even if he locks up 1,237 delegates by the time the final Republicans vote. The delegates have a lot of power, both on the convention floor and in the various rules and credentials committeesthat will begin meeting before the convention officially begins. If they wanted to, the delegates could deploy a “nuclear option” on Trump and vote to unbind themselves on the first ballot, a strategy Ted Kennedy unsuccessfully pursued against Jimmy Carter in 1980.
Although I’d place fairly long odds against this thermonuclear tactic, there’s also the possibility of piecemeal skirmishes for delegates. In South Carolina, for instance, delegates might unbind themselves on the pretext that Trump withdrew his pledge to support the Republican nominee. Remember those chaotic Nevada caucuses that Trump won? They could be the subject of a credentials challenge. There could also be disputes over the disposition of delegates from Marco Rubio and other candidates who have dropped out of the race.[SUP]3[/SUP] A final possibility is “faithless delegates,” where individual delegates simply decline to vote for Trump despite being bound to do so by party rules. It’s not clear whether this is allowed under Republican rules, but it’s also not clear what the enforcement mechanism would be.
I don’t want to make too much of these “nuclear” possibilities, given that such efforts would be blatantly undemocratic and would risk a huge backlash from Republican voters. Still, even 1,237 delegates isn’t quite a safe number for Trump, especially if he’s just barely above that threshold.
Another possibility is Trump coming up somewhat short of 1,237 delegates, but close enough that he could win on the basis of uncommitted delegates who vote for him on the first ballot. In fact, Trump finishing with something like 1,200 delegates is a strong possibility. The expert panel we convened two weeks ago had Trump finishing at 1,208 delegates — with a lot of uncertainty on either side of that estimate — and he’s run just slightly behind our projected pace since then by getting shut out of delegates in Utah.
Let’s say that Trump ends with exactly 1,200 delegates after California. He’d then need 37 uncommitted delegates to win on the first ballot. That might not seem like such a tall order — there will be at least 138 uncommitted delegates, according to Daniel Nichanian’s tracking, and Trump would need only 27 percent of those. But most of those delegates[SUP]4[/SUP] are chosen at state meetings and conventions, the same events producing unfavorable delegate slates for Trump in Massachusetts and other states.
Alternatively, Trump could try to broker a deal with another candidate — Kasich, for example — to get to 1,237. But that isn’t so easy either; whether Kasich could instruct his delegates to vote for Trump on the first ballot would vary depending on the rules in each state, and some delegates could become unbound instead of having to vote Trump. Trump and Kasich could also try to strike a deal on the second ballot — but by that point, most of their delegates would have become free to vote as they please.
This is not an exhaustive list of complications. We’ll save the discussion about Rule 40 — and why it’s largely toothless — for another time, for instance. The basic problem for Trump is that all the rules will be written and interpreted by the delegates, delegates who mostly don’t like Trump. They have a lot of power to wield at their discretion.
That’s not to say the rest of the voting doesn’t matter — it would be mucheasier, both procedurally and ethically, to block Trump from getting the nomination if he comes into the convention with 1,100 delegates instead of 1,300.
[h=1]It’s Probably First Ballot Or Bust For Donald Trump At The GOP Convention[/h]By NATE SILVER
SCOTT OLSON / GETTY IMAGES
At the prediction market Betfair on Friday morning, bettors put Donald Trump’s chances of winning the Republican presidential nomination at 56 percent. That’s down a fair bit — Trump had been hovering at about 70 percent after his win in Arizona (and loss in Utah) last week. Meanwhile, the likelihood of a contested convention according to bettors has considerably increased. There’s now a 63 percent chance[SUP]1[/SUP] that the convention in Cleveland will require multiple ballots, according to Betfair.
In other words, the markets are now betting on a contested convention. Not just a near-miss, where the nomination is resolved at some point between the last day of GOP primaries June 7 and the start of the convention July 18, but the thing that political journalists dream about: a full-blown contested convention where it takes multiple ballots to determine the Republican nominee.
Here’s the thing, though: Those markets don’t make a lot of sense. If you really think the chance of a multi-ballot convention is 63 percent, but also still have Trump with a 56 percent chance of winning the nomination, that implies there’s a fairly good chance that Trump will win if voting goes beyond the first ballot. That’s probably wrong. If Trump doesn’t win on the first ballot, he’s probably screwed.
The basic reason is simple. Most of the 2,472 delegates with a vote in Cleveland probably aren’t going to like Trump.
Let’s back up a bit. In most of our discussions about delegates here at FiveThirtyEight, we treat them as though they’re some sort of statistical unit. We might say a candidate “racked up 44 delegates” in the same way we’d say Steph Curry scored 44 points. But those delegates aren’t just a scoring mechanism: Delegates are people, my friends. Delegates are people!
And as I said, they’re mostly people who aren’t going to like Trump, at least if the excellent reporting from Politico and other news organizations is right. (If Trump turns out to have more support among GOP delegates than this reporting suggests, even marginally, that could end up mattering a great deal.) How can that be? In most states, the process to select the men and women who will serve as delegates is separate from presidential balloting. In Massachusetts, for instance, Trump won 49 percent of the GOP vote on March 1 — his highest share in any state to date — to earn 22 of the state’s 42 delegates. But the people who will serve as delegates haven’t been chosen yet. That will happen at a series of congressional district conventions later this month and then a Republican state meeting in May or June. According to Politico, most of those delegates are liable to favor Ted Cruz or John Kasich rather than Trump. Twenty-two of them will still be bound to Trump on the first ballot, but they can switch after that. The same story holds in a lot of other states: in Georgia, Louisiana and South Carolina, for instance — also states that Trump won.
Trump’s delegate problems stem from two major issues. One is his lack of organization: Trump just recently hired a strategist to oversee his delegate-selection efforts; Cruz has been working on the process for months. The other is his lack of support from “party elites.” The people who attend state caucuses and conventions are mostly dyed-in-the-wool Republican regulars and insiders, a group that is vigorously opposed to Trump. Furthermore, some delegate slots are automatically given to party leaders and elected officials, another group that strongly opposes Trump, as evident in his lack of endorsements among them.
There are various ways these delegates could cause problems for Trump. The most obvious, as I mentioned, is if the convention goes to a second ballot because no candidate wins a majority on the first. Not all delegates become free instantaneously,[SUP]2[/SUP] but most do, and left to vote their personal preference, most of them will probably oppose Trump.
Conversely, Trump isn’t totally safe even if he locks up 1,237 delegates by the time the final Republicans vote. The delegates have a lot of power, both on the convention floor and in the various rules and credentials committeesthat will begin meeting before the convention officially begins. If they wanted to, the delegates could deploy a “nuclear option” on Trump and vote to unbind themselves on the first ballot, a strategy Ted Kennedy unsuccessfully pursued against Jimmy Carter in 1980.
Although I’d place fairly long odds against this thermonuclear tactic, there’s also the possibility of piecemeal skirmishes for delegates. In South Carolina, for instance, delegates might unbind themselves on the pretext that Trump withdrew his pledge to support the Republican nominee. Remember those chaotic Nevada caucuses that Trump won? They could be the subject of a credentials challenge. There could also be disputes over the disposition of delegates from Marco Rubio and other candidates who have dropped out of the race.[SUP]3[/SUP] A final possibility is “faithless delegates,” where individual delegates simply decline to vote for Trump despite being bound to do so by party rules. It’s not clear whether this is allowed under Republican rules, but it’s also not clear what the enforcement mechanism would be.
I don’t want to make too much of these “nuclear” possibilities, given that such efforts would be blatantly undemocratic and would risk a huge backlash from Republican voters. Still, even 1,237 delegates isn’t quite a safe number for Trump, especially if he’s just barely above that threshold.
Another possibility is Trump coming up somewhat short of 1,237 delegates, but close enough that he could win on the basis of uncommitted delegates who vote for him on the first ballot. In fact, Trump finishing with something like 1,200 delegates is a strong possibility. The expert panel we convened two weeks ago had Trump finishing at 1,208 delegates — with a lot of uncertainty on either side of that estimate — and he’s run just slightly behind our projected pace since then by getting shut out of delegates in Utah.
Let’s say that Trump ends with exactly 1,200 delegates after California. He’d then need 37 uncommitted delegates to win on the first ballot. That might not seem like such a tall order — there will be at least 138 uncommitted delegates, according to Daniel Nichanian’s tracking, and Trump would need only 27 percent of those. But most of those delegates[SUP]4[/SUP] are chosen at state meetings and conventions, the same events producing unfavorable delegate slates for Trump in Massachusetts and other states.
Alternatively, Trump could try to broker a deal with another candidate — Kasich, for example — to get to 1,237. But that isn’t so easy either; whether Kasich could instruct his delegates to vote for Trump on the first ballot would vary depending on the rules in each state, and some delegates could become unbound instead of having to vote Trump. Trump and Kasich could also try to strike a deal on the second ballot — but by that point, most of their delegates would have become free to vote as they please.
This is not an exhaustive list of complications. We’ll save the discussion about Rule 40 — and why it’s largely toothless — for another time, for instance. The basic problem for Trump is that all the rules will be written and interpreted by the delegates, delegates who mostly don’t like Trump. They have a lot of power to wield at their discretion.
That’s not to say the rest of the voting doesn’t matter — it would be mucheasier, both procedurally and ethically, to block Trump from getting the nomination if he comes into the convention with 1,100 delegates instead of 1,300.
The Guesser
"Wisconsin Could Be Trouble For Trump"
GENIUS
"Wisconsin Could Be Trouble For Trump"
| Wisconsin Primary - Republican Winner | |||||||
| Tue 4/5 | 401 Ted Cruz wins Wisconsin Primary | -870 | |||||
| 6:00AM | 402 Field wins Wisconsin Primary | +490 |
GENIUS
If @megynkelly stopped covering me on her show, her ratings would drop like a rock! My h to h interview with @AC360 beat her by millions!
