Yesterday, it was reported that Republican "establishment figures" gathered in Washington, DC to "lunch" and foment a plan to derail Donald Trump. Of course, this is only one plan in the works hatched by Republican oligarchs to place their desired "golden boy" or another loser in the election against another Democrat, socialist/communist. Desperation is running rampant among Republicans. The question is "how desperate is the Republican Party to thwart Donald Trump?"
On Friday, the Republican National Standing Rules Committee informed its "membership convention delegates are not bound to the will of Americans who voted in the primary." If this is the case, what is the point in having a primary?
Curly Haugland of the Republican National Committeeman for North Dakota said in a letter sent out on March 11 delegates may "vote according to their personal choice in all matters to come before the Republican National Convention, including the vote to nominate the Republican Candidate for President" and disregard voters.
Haugland dismisses primaries as "nearly worthless 'beauty contests'" and believes delegates "have been bound only once in the history of the Republican Party."
According to the letter sent by Haugland, "In 1976, the Ford campaign, afraid of losing "pledged" delegates to Reagan forces and having the strength of delegate numbers needed, forced the adoption of the "Justice Resolution" which amended the convention rules to bind the delegates to cast their convention votes according to the results of binding primaries. This historic event was the first convention in the history of the Republican Party where the delegates were denied the freedom to vote as they wished in the nomination vote for President. And, 1976 was also the last time delegates have been bound by convention rules to cast their votes according to the results of binding primary elections, since the 1980 convention rescinded the Justice Resolution entirely restoring the prohibition of binding."
In other words, every delegate is a superdelegate. It is a tactic that has been used by the Democrat Party for years. As Nate Silver explains, "Superdelegates were created in part to give Democratic Party elites the opportunity to put their finger on the scale and prevent nominations like those of George McGovern in 1972 or Jimmy Carter in 1976, which displeased party insiders."
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Committee chair, admitted in February the system is rigged, but for the sake of diversity.
Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grass-roots activists. We are, as a Democratic Party, really highlight and emphasize inclusiveness and diversity at our convention, and so we want to give every opportunity to grass-roots activists and diverse committed Democrats to be able to participate, attend and be a delegate at the convention. And so we separate out those unpledged delegates to make sure that there isn't competition between them.
She further clarified to make this more pleasant to the PC sensitive in the Democratic Party.
We separate those so that we don't have elected officials and party leaders running against the activists, but want to make sure are helping to diversify our convention. That is something we take great pride in. A Native-American cancer survivor. Those people should have an opportunity to be delegates, too. And they shouldn't have to deal with very well-known officials and party leaders. And that's why we separate them.
This has nothing to do with diversity or making sure "those people" have the opportunity to be delegates as well. It is about rigging the system to insure that establishment Democrats are the ones that end up running as a presidential candidate.
According to an article by Lambert Strethor, cited by Infowars.com, the Democratic Party establishment has not yet rigged the nomination system for Hillary Clinton, but they still could. "...even though Clinton and Sanders tied for the popular vote in Iowa, and Sanders won decisively in New Hampshire, the delegate counts – that is, the delegates who will ultimately nominate the Democratic Presidential candidate – don't reflect the popular vote."
Stethor offers a little history noted by Nate Silver.
While Sanders does have a modest 36-32 lead among elected delegates — those that are bound to the candidates based on the results of voting in primaries and caucuses — Clinton leads 362-8 among superdelegates, who are Democratic elected officials and other party insiders allowed to support whichever candidate they like.
If you're a Sanders supporter, you might think this seems profoundly unfair. And you'd be right: It's profoundly unfair. Superdelegates were created in part to give Democratic party elites the opportunity to put their finger on the scale and prevent nominations like those of George McGovern in 1972 or Jimmy Carter in 1976, which displeased party insiders.
A chart further down in Strethor's article shows how in 2008 Hillary Clinton's early superdelegate lead evaporated to give the nation Barack Hussein Soetoro Soebarkah. It reveals the corporate allegiance of superdelegates during the Obama presidential run: they worked for Goldman Sachs, Verizon, JPMorgan, Pfizer, News Corp., and various Super PACs controlled by corporate clients."
According to Silver, the Republican Party could stop Trump by using Democratic Party rules. To fully understand how this is possible, the article should be read in its entirety. As Silver points out, Republicans could award the nomination to the "anchor baby" Rubio or questionable "citizen" Cruz based on which rules apply when.
The articles by Silver and Strethor are must reads in order to understand fully what America is truly facing in the political election process for president as both parties use the "superdelegates" to give the people of the nation the illusion of choice. Republicans have now adopted the Democratic "rigging" system to "fix" the race among Republican contenders so Donald Trump does not emerge as the convention winner.
In recalling what happened in 2008, Strethor remarks, "And I also remember that when DNC took Michigan delegates away from Clinton and gave them to Obama, they violated procedural rules to do so; like changing the agenda during lunch, IIRC. So these people are not necessarily concerned with the niceties."
By no means am I a Trump supporter or fan. In fact, none of the candidates stand scrutiny when looking at issues from a constitutional standpoint. However, every candidate vying for the nomination should have a fair chance to be the nominee, if they meet all constitutional eligibility requirements for the office, and the elites should not swindle the American voter out of choosing the candidate based on the primary voting for Democrat or Republican candidates. Yet, this is exactly what is occurring in both parties.
So, why a primary? It is to maintain the illusion of choice, when in reality, the voters of America are being given no choice, but the choice of the oligarchy establishment elites. In the past, it could be said to be the "lesser of two evils." However, in this day and age, both Republicans and Democrats are evil where the establishment is concerned.
The Republican Party establishment elite oligarchy has pulled out loser Mitt Romney in an effort to "stump Trump." CNN reported that Romney instructed his "closest advisors" to investigate the possibility of stumping Trump at the convention. His focus is centered on preventing Trump from accumulating the 1,237 delegates needed to secure the nomination.
It is being reported that Mitt has a condition – he is willing to "step in" and carry the Republican banner in the fall general election as the Republican nominee. But, another name has been thrown out as a potential banner carrier. None other than House Speaker Paul Ryan.
Infowars.com puts it this way:
Romney and Ryan did not run in the 2016 primary and are not the choice of primary voters, but this does not matter. The only thing that matters in 2016 is saving the party and the establishment from the dangerous and resented outsider Donald Trump.
There should be no doubt that the Republican and Democrat Parties are different sides of the same butt cheek, with Republicans willing to resort to Democratic tactics. At this point, Republicans are not interested in winning the White House, only stopping Donald Trump. They will use any means to do so, including alienating the voter base, giving the Democrats a win and destroying the party. But, Republicans have cared not about the voter base as America witnessed in 2014 when given a majority in the Senate. They awarded voters a "thumbing of the nose" in gratitude.
Briefly stated, Republican elite oligarchs would rather turn this nation into a one-party nation ruled by communists/socialists/Marxists and ideologies anathema to this nation's founding than abide by the people's choice in a primary, if the winner turns out to be an outsider. But, isn't that something we already knew? The question is, "What is this nation's citizenry going to do regarding the rigged political system of both parties?"Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.