The Republican National Convention in Cleveland is only thirty days away now, and the RNC Chairman is still putting out fires.
…Reince Priebus has been quietly having conversations with state party leaders to discuss the latest push by convention delegates to nominate anyone other than Donald Trump.
Priebus has spoken with GOP party chairmen in multiple states in recent days in part to get a better sense of how large the anti-Trump faction is among their convention delegations, according to two people familiar with the conversations.
While Priebus has made clear in these conversations that he is not spearheading the latest push for a coup, his involvement sends a signal that the RNC is taking this effort to dump Trump seriously even as other movements have fizzled.
So far, the contingent of revolting, plotting delegates only numbers in the low dozens, but it’s big enough that Priebus is trying to get a handle on it.
Given the strife, a growing group of anti-Trump delegates is convinced that enough like-minded Republicans will band together in the next month to change party rules and allow delegates to vote for whomever they want at the convention, regardless of who won state caucuses or primaries.
But, of course, these folks probably aren’t factoring in the goon squad element to Trump’s support.
Second, several delegates are deeply concerned about what they say are intimidation tactics by Trump, his campaign and some state party leaders.
One delegate, who commented on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution, wrote in an email that during his state party’s first convention organizing meeting, party leaders told the delegates that if they didn’t vote for Trump, “we would be removed from the floor and replaced with an alternate.”
This time around, it’s the GOP with a serious PUMA problem.
The proofreader I am insists, Boo, on pointing out that “aren’t factoring in the good squad” should read “goon squad”.
And now I must position the lawn chair and check on the progress of the popcorn.
And that needs an “are” not “is.”
The subject is “group” (NOT “delegates”), a singular, but collective (like “team”, “class”, “cohort”, etc.), noun.
Because “group” is a singular collective noun, “are” would also be acceptable.
But so is “is”.
Nope, the predicate goes with the verb. “A group [of anti-Trump delegates] is convinced…”
Definitely not “are”. It’s a common mistake.
fine!
Nope, it’s “group is”. The delegates are just modifying the “group”. Or at least that’s what the nuns taught me…
Right. ‘A number of Trump delegates ARE wavering… But: ‘THE number of Trump of Trump deletes IS increasing.
Deletes = delegates.
link
link
plural make (re: “Grammar Nazi’s”[sic], of course).
It makes possessive.
So, “grammar Nazi’s” . . . what?
And which “grammar Nazi”?
the only thing worse than a grammar Nazi is . . . a failed grammar Nazi?
“Two nations separated by a common language”
In British English collective nouns like “mob” and “crowd” take plural verbs. In American English singulars. And of course for those lucky ducky Americans who were Rhode’s Scholars they probably take either.
Since that “group” of “anti-Trump delegates” is/are by rule American citizens “is” is decidedly the correct term.
And for the pedantic among you you can find the semi-oxymoron in “Cymrodorions Unite”.
link
Dear God, what have I unleashed?
Maybe they’ll have to allow Trump supporters to open carry at the convention.
It’s not hard to imagine that, after losing the election in November, Trump would come up with some sort of a dolchstosslegende that would shift blame for the debacle off of himself and onto the media, liberals, Muslims, Mexicans, Obama, and all the other usual suspects. It’s not hard to imagine that, to the extent that his supporters internalized this explanation, it would be A Bad Thing that would have consequences for which Trump would, again, refuse to accept responsibility. Because that’s how Trump rolls.
To see him done in by the RNC poobahs, to have him spin up a legende targeted at them, though — what a concept. As Peggy Noonan once said, “let us savor…”.
It’s not hard to imagine that, after losing the election in November, Trump would come up with some sort of a dolchstosslegende that would shift blame for the debacle off of himself and onto the media, liberals, Muslims, Mexicans, Obama, and all the other usual suspects.
Who is to say that Trump won’t blame Bill Kristol and that ilk. In other words, the GOP squishes such as they are. Now that would be interesting.
Careful Boo — interests that turn into obsessions have a way of distorting reality.
What has happen to the GOP is someone gave them the wrong playbook by mistake. Without realizing it the GOP was following the book Frankenstein. Now they are at the part where they realize that they have lost control of the monster and do not know what to do to stop it. I wonder if this will be their ruin like in the book? It will be interesting to see.
That’s a pretty damn good analogy.
.
See: Driftglass, and his Pretty Hate Machine post from 2006.
http://driftglass.blogspot.com/2006/09/reactionary.html
Looks like the Radioactive Base has overwhelmed the Liquid Bobo Coolant and the machine is melting down.
There’s no way out for them. They created this with their total obstruction, dog whistling and reality-free tactics. And now, if they try to dump the guy who got the most votes, the party will fracture. Far easier to get squishy institutional types on board the Trump Express than to convince mentally challenged iconoclasts to support Walker or Ryan or Bush or Rubio. If they run Romney again, Katie bar the door.
No, I think they’re stuck and most of the leadership knows it. They’re going down this time around and their best bet is to maintain some semblance of party unity as they do. Even if they get wiped out in both the Senate and the House (the latter a still unlikely prospect), there will be mid-terms in two years and — progressives being too cool or too ignorant to turn out then — they’ll be primed to take Congress back.
Personally, I’d rather see them try to take Trump down. I really think it could be the end of the crazy (even though, absent this dynamic, Hillary would be really vulnerable against a Ryan or Walker). I think the party leaders know that such a move would likely end the party as an effective coalition. Instead, there’d be a 30% dead-end party and a 15% right-centrist party plus another 5% libertarian block, each flailing and noncompetitive.
…. there will be mid-terms in two years and — progressives being too cool or too ignorant to turn out then — they’ll be primed to take Congress back.
That will certainly convince Democratic leaning voters to vote in the mid-terms. Why not blame the Democrats and their recruitment of shitty candidates? Place the blame where it belongs. You aren’t entitled to my vote just because you run for office as a Democrat.
Thank you. The amount of crap dished out by the neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party is endless.
Imagine for a second if the Democratic Party produced candidates more concerned with the bottom 95% than the rich. But they don’t, so the Democrats limit their voters to the people who irrationally identify with the Democratic Party despite how the leadership has behaved over the last twenty-five years.
All I see is an endless black hole of endless war fueling endless concentration of wealth.
And I’ve seen the twenty somethings in my extended family failing to vote in midterms and in other elections as well. You know, Bob, there’s always a lot more on the mid-term ballot here in Oregon than Congressional races. Is it the Democratic Party’s responsibility to make those twenty somethings pay attention to something more than the latest trivialities in their Twitter feed?
I think we as a society are doing a lousy job of promoting civic consciousness and involvement in young people, and it’s that failure that’s reflected in abysmal midterm election turnout.
In the meantime, the base of the Democratic Party really is represented by that 50 something African American woman who never misses an election. Never.
Youth get all the blame for midterm losses.
But you know who is right on their heels for drop-off?
Female POC, particularly AA, since they make up a large bloc of that.
Blue Dogs get slaughtered because they lose those two categories AND progressives.
“Imagine for a second if the Democratic Party produced candidates more concerned with the bottom 95% than the rich.”
I can imagine a whole lot of things. I’ve never found it to be a useful way to accomplish something, though.
Do you just imagine something like progressives running in a centrist political party? How well does that tend to work out?
Some people put forth effort to get progressive candidates in the party, and work on their behalf to get them into a primary and then general election. Even more people put for effort to get centrist candidates in the party, and work on their behalf to get them into a primary and then general election.
The neoliberal wing of the Democratic party is out there, acting and putting forth effort. If progressives aren’t willing to put in even more effort, the centrist political party will remain…wait for it…centrist, rather than progressive.
Act accordingly.
“You aren’t entitled to my vote just because you run for office as a Democrat.”
Exactly correct – and you aren’t entitled to the Democratic party putting up an actual progressive candidate, just because you’re registered to vote.
I’m still amazed that people expect a centrist political party like the Democratic party to put up actual progressives. If you aren’t on the ground working to get the progressive candidates into the Democratic party, why act confused when they aren’t put up to run every year/two years/four years.
Our local Dem Party is teeming with progressives. There would be no party without us. But I live in a 70% GOP area. So any Democrat, much less a progressive Democrat, who chooses to run for office knows that a loss, and likely a big one, is highly probable. But we are chipping away small bits at a time to convince people to run for office. They know that it will cost them money out of their own pockets and a significant investment of personal time, all to likely lose by a whopping margin. But they do it anyway. Because it’s important for people to see that there are actual local Democrats who are active and engaged and working to serve the community.
I don’t know about you, but I quickly tire of people who do nothing but bitch about their lack of personal awareness of active progressive Democrats running for office. There are many of us out here fighting every day to push local and state parties in a more progressive direction and who are encouraging and recruiting progressive candidates. One thing we could use, much more than this pissing and moaning by people, is help with coordinating efforts wherever people might find themselves.
We need to start taking care of our local politics and growing a more progressive party from the bottom up. People need to stop waiting for the national Party to put up magic progressive candidates. If someone is a progressive, then they need to get out on their local ground and make things happen. There are no guarantees of success. But if people do nothing but whine, then I can certainly guarantee failure.
Yes, this.
It takes a lot of work to win a primary, never mind general election. Yet, somehow people sit back and wait for a centrist party to put up SuperUltraMegaTM progressives to vote for, when clearly the centrist party itself is going to skew…centrist…everything being equal.
It’s essentially a huge cult of personality. Sanders is the new hero/martyr, and after this primary season, a whole slew of ‘Busters who weren’t paying attention and didn’t give a fuck last year, won’t be paying attention or giving a fuck this year. They’ll lament that the Democrat running for X, Y and Z offices aren’t SuperUltraMegaTM progressives, ignoring the fact that they didn’t do a damn thing to get a progressive into the primary to even run for those offices.
I’m much more interested in getting progressives into office waaaaaaay down ticket (dog catcher, underwaterbasketweaver regulator, etc) than I am about Sanders, who had a very slight chance of beating Clinton. And by looking at how Sanders seems to be transitioning a lot of his staff to work for downticket races for Congress (in 2018, though), he seems to understand it, too.
The Democratic party is centrist, and full of sane people, regardless of their level of corruption, and of course, neo-liberalism. That is more than the Republican party offers, and No. Fucking. Shit., the Democratic party is going to offer me the least worst alternative to the Republican party, as long as I sit on my ass doing nothing to change it from within.
Voting on election day, whether primary, or general, is NOT changing anything from within.
I’m from Cincinnati and live in Atlanta now, and know you’re from the northern ‘burbs, i.e. enemy territory. Thanks for all that you do up there, by the way. While it may often be fruitless, thankless work with very little immediate dividend, progressives have to get experience running campaigns, organizing staffers, creating a narrative, and translating that into progressive victories whenever and wherever they can.
People have been complaining about the shallow bench of the Democratic party. Well, the bench that exists is pretty much centrist, because progressives are having a tough time getting their candidates into office. That should be a hint that internet forum comments and $5.00 donations aren’t cutting it.
The left is almost always a minority, and always has to work from the outside to pull everyone to the left. Even the left-ish political party that it sometimes works with. Either start pulling, or don’t get butthurt when 3/4 of the population isn’t going to just walk on over and join you.
Curious if the national party has ever recruited a candidate for you that did not really get your support? Or funded a candidate in oppo to a local favorite?
If you’re unhappy about your electoral choices, learn from your mistakes, vote for the best candidates available in this election and organize more effectively for future elections so you have a better chance at better choices. Take some goddamn responsibility for the situation and stop being the helpless victim.
If you’re eligible to vote and choose not to, you’re not entitled to bitch about your governance.
Your First Amendment rights will defend your right to bitch, but your surrender of your voting power guarantees that your bitching will get you little to no response.
And that would be your fault and your responsibility, not the Democratic Party’s. Most importantly, your unhappiness would be your problem.
they don’t have the balls to take it away from him at the convention.
nobody has the balls to do it.
I agree. I just don’t see it happening.
He’s the presumptive nominee, and I would assume that right now he is involved in many convention decisions that the nominee has a say in. How do you let him plan the convention, then take the nomination away from him?
The consequences of a debacle on TV would be devistating.
.
Perhaps, and I’m just spitballin’ or whatever, Trump decides by then to just walk away. During the convention itself.
Now that would be entertaining.
I think ‘walking away’ is more likely. My dream is in a debate with Clinton he just goes ‘you know, I agree with her, she would make a great president!’
Everyone involved claims a presidential election loss is personally devistating, and takes months to get over. Would he put himself through that if it became obvious it was coming?
Right now he seems to dislike the GOP more than he dislikes Clinton. I certainly don’t remember that happening in my lifetime.
.