Of Possible Things to Come - Part 2!

Flash said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Here's the thing; Trump has to first campaign and win the GOP nomination primary in order to be the candidate against the Dems for president in 2024. That's on the RNC...if they let the SOB back in (assuming the NY courts and IRS don't chew him up), then they are equally guilty of all his crimes and abuses...."technicalities non-withstanding.
Click to expand...


The party can't prevent a candidate from running in the primaries and winning delegates.
Click to expand...

You have National Committees on both sides of the political fense. They can determine allocation of funds, campaign advertisement, and can negotiate with each other regarding the rules of engagement. Case in point; see what happened to Ralph Nader before the last candidate debate in 2000.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You have National Committees on both sides of the political fense. They can determine allocation of funds, campaign advertisement, and can negotiate with each other regarding the rules of engagement. Case in point; see what happened to Ralph Nader before the last candidate debate in 2000.
Click to expand...

The parties can't take sides during the nomination process and don't finance candidate campaigns. I don't think the parties determine who participates in debates now that they are sponsored by private organizations. Candidates with little financial support (who don't stand a chance) can still use the federal matching funds in the primaries and caucuses.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Some Right place I have been in the last few days (it was either Red State National Review or American Thinker) had a piece talking about how it is not very likely that the Never Trumpers and legacy R's are going to throw Trump and the Rebellion out of the R party...how it is almost certainly going to go the other way.

That sounded right to me.
Click to expand...

The Repubs have to thread a needle if Trump tries to run again. They lost their power and took orders from Trump, or they stayed out of his way for 4 years. Politicians are not shrinking violets and they did not want to have that happen. So they have to kneecap him without doing it too obviously.
 
Flash said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
You have National Committees on both sides of the political fense. They can determine allocation of funds, campaign advertisement, and can negotiate with each other regarding the rules of engagement. Case in point; see what happened to Ralph Nader before the last candidate debate in 2000.
Click to expand...


The parties can't take sides during the nomination process and don't finance candidate campaigns. I don't think the parties determine who participates in debates now that they are sponsored by private organizations. Candidates with little financial support (who don't stand a chance) can still use the federal matching funds in the primaries and caucuses.
Click to expand...

Sure they can....through donations by "individual" members. And even then if someone they don't like gets the nomination they can short change them in campaign by under-funding their campaign. And if a (gasp) third party comes into play, BOTH parties can agree to change the rules that will sabotage the 3rd parties campaign (see Ralph Nader). A matter of fact, a matter of history.

Trump, Bloomberg both financed their campaigns personally.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Sure they can....through donations by "individual" members. And even then if someone they don't like gets the nomination they can short change them in campaign by under-funding their campaign. And if a (gasp) third party comes into play, BOTH parties can agree to change the rules that will sabotage the 3rd parties campaign (see Ralph Nader). A matter of fact, a matter of history.

Trump, Bloomberg both financed their campaigns personally.
Click to expand...

The party does not fund candidates during the nominations or control the contributions of individual members. During the general election the campaigns are largely financed by the candidates own organization. It certainly is not in the interest of any party to underfund a candidate to allow the other party to win. Parties are decentralized organizations with little power at the top.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
The Revolution better come hard because I for one am not quitting....I am not suited for the Regressive Lefts UTOPIA....I am not going.....I intend to sabotage the bus instead.
Click to expand...

So you are at peace with the Trumps attacking the politicians and trashing the capitol. you really cannot rethink your Trumpism after that? Trump is the worst threat in the American system in hundreds of years and you do not care?
 
Flash said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Sure they can....through donations by "individual" members. And even then if someone they don't like gets the nomination they can short change them in campaign by under-funding their campaign. And if a (gasp) third party comes into play, BOTH parties can agree to change the rules that will sabotage the 3rd parties campaign (see Ralph Nader). A matter of fact, a matter of history.

Trump, Bloomberg both financed their campaigns personally.
Click to expand...


The party does not fund candidates during the nominations or control the contributions of individual members. During the general election the campaigns are largely financed by the candidates own organization. It certainly is not in the interest of any party to underfund a candidate to allow the other party to win. Parties are decentralized organizations with little power at the top.
Click to expand...

You repeated something that I disproved with a general point at how things are run. Here's how it ties in with the reality of the situation: https://aceproject.org/main/english/ei/eif01.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top