Conservative leaders gather to plot against Donald Trump

[CPUd]

(CNN)Conservatives at a meeting in Washington on Thursday had "absolute consensus" on trying to stop Republican front-runner Donald Trump from getting enough delegates to clinch the party's presidential nomination, according to a source familiar with the discussion.

Conservative leader Bob Fischer gathered more than a dozen activists and Republican lawmakers to discuss how to stop Trump from getting their party's nomination.

The source said the consensus was around preventing Trump from reaching 1,237 delegates, and then stopping him at the convention. The source added that the conservatives are optimistic for this option, adding they believe "it is possible."

The idea of a third party being formed to combat Trump remained a bone of contention for the group, the source said, adding, there was "real division" over the idea. But there was also discussion that if Trump is the GOP nominee, then "the GOP ceases to be a party for traditional conservatives, who must go elsewhere." The thought process at this session was to work with "an existing third party instead of trying for ballot access." That would probably be the existing Libertarian or Constitution parties.

This source said the meeting was made up mostly of "diehards of the conservative movement," including, "Reagan revolutionaries, if you will."

Not all the attendees appeared to be giving up on Trump's existing challengers.

"I'm there to support Ted Cruz," said Mike Farris, a Republican lawyer, as he left the Army and Navy Club, where the group met behind closed doors for close to three hours. "There's a lot of Cruz support."

Rep. Trent Franks, a member of the House Freedom Caucus, attended the meeting briefly. So did conservative leader Bill Wichterman.

The event was advertised as a meeting of the group Conservatives of Faith. Erick Erickson, who has floated the idea of a third-party candidate against Trump dialed in to the meeting by phone.

With wins in at least three nominating contests on Tuesday, Trump is the overwhelming front-runner in Republican delegates, though he still faces the possibility of a contested convention this summer, particularly if either of his remaining rivals, Cruz or Ohio Gov. John Kasich, gathers momentum.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/17/politi...ves/index.html

[CPUd]

Donors ask GOP consulting firm to research independent presidential bid

A group of Republicans is moving quickly to research ballot-access requirements for independent candidates in case Trump wraps up the GOP nomination next month.

By Scott Bland

02/26/16 12:44 PM EST


Conservative donors have engaged a major GOP consulting firm in Florida to research the feasibility of mounting a late, independent run for president amid growing fears that Donald Trump could win the Republican nomination.

A memo prepared for the group zeroes in on ballot access as a looming obstacle for any independent candidate, along with actually identifying a viable, widely known contender and coalescing financial support for that person. The two states with the earliest deadlines for independent candidates, Texas and North Carolina, also have some of the highest hurdles for independents to get on the ballot, according to the research.

“All this research has to happen before March 16, when inevitably Trump is the nominee, so that we have a plan in place," a source familiar with the discussions said. March 16 is the day after the GOP primary in Florida, a winner-take-all contest that Marco Rubio supporters have identified as a must-win to stop Trump's early momentum.

“It’s critical some serious attention is given to this,” the source said.

The document, stamped “confidential,” was authored by staff at Data Targeting, a Republican firm based in Gainesville, Fla. The memo notes that “it is possible to mount an independent candidacy but [it] will require immediate action on the part of this core of key funding and strategic players.”

Data Targeting did not respond to a request for comment on the memo.

The research points to Texas and North Carolina as early tests for running an independent, conservative candidate against Trump and the Democratic nominee. The candidate would need to gather over 79,900 valid petition signatures in Texas by May 9 and over 89,000 in North Carolina by June 9.

Only two other states have thresholds that high, and gathering petitions can be an expensive and time-consuming process. What’s more, the Texas signatures would have to come entirely from voters who did not vote in this year’s Democratic and Republican primaries.

But “with 38 electoral votes in play in Texas and North Carolina’s true swing state status, failing to qualify in either or both states would render any independent candidate non-viable,” the report's authors wrote. “This is logistically possible but will require immediate action.”

By July 15, the independent candidate would need more than 460,000 voter signatures to make the ballot in 11 states. Assuming an April 1 start date, the campaign would have to gather 4,345 valid signatures per day to maintain a steady pace.

the referenced memo is here:
http://static.politico.com/4b/2e/f59...lot-access.pdf

[Mr.NoSmile]

You'd think a party would want to get behind someone whose won a lot of states and contributed to slightly higher than normal voter turnout, but since Trump isn't their ideal candidate like Romney, they wind up with egg on their faces. And both Trump and his supporters are vocal enough that any attempt to stop him won't go unchallenged or unnoticed.

[acptulsa]

So, now that they've given enough publicity to the one Republican that no independent voter would ever in a million years hold his or her nose and vote for, they feel the need to try to sell us on his viability by pretending to prop up a third party to split the Republican vote?

Are they just using this as cover for activities designed to infiltrate the independent parties, and ensure they don't really tap into the general satisfaction--by giving the American public a general election choice that isn't a total clown?

Hillary wants this one bad. She's like Nixon in '72--she has it won, but can't stop ratfucking it. When will she lose her mind and commit her own Watergate break in? I realize that people with no charisma--like Hillary, and like Nixon--don't become major political figures by leaving things to chance. But did she learn nothing from the man? Or is she as determined to keep her fingers in right up until she snatches defeat from the jaws of victory the way he did?

Hey, Hillary. If your ratfucking activities are so important to you that you'll use your influence to get struck down several laws making third party ballot access easier--thus undoing a century's worth of work by the elites like you--go for it! But if this election turns out not to be the election that ends all elections, you might live to regret it.

Or do you figure you can break all the laws you want in scheming and conniving your way to the White House, because you have immunity? After all, if the first female president is immediately impeached for high crimes, the resultant bitching will be shrill, pervasive and hard to take.

[puppetmaster]

The establishment you mean. Not conservatives. Just the people who want and keep total control and have had it for years. The illusion is becoming clear

[erowe1]

You'd think a party would want to get behind someone whose won a lot of states and contributed to slightly higher than normal voter turnout, but since Trump isn't their ideal candidate like Romney, they wind up with egg on their faces. And both Trump and his supporters are vocal enough that any attempt to stop him won't go unchallenged or unnoticed.

The problem with this reasoning is that, while the number of supporters Trump has is a significant amount in the primaries, it's a pittance relative to the numbers needed to win a general election. People who actually like and respect him make up maybe 10% of the voting population. Outside of that, everybody hates him.

[erowe1]

The establishment you mean. Not conservatives. Just the people who want and keep total control and have had it for years. The illusion is becoming clear

I didn't recognize the names in the OP. But Trump is opposed both by the establishment and by conservatives, so it could be either.

[CPUd]

Cruz does not seem willing to play along with this strategy of propping up 1 candidate per state. He probably knows even if he helps force a contested convention, they aren't going to back him as the nominee.

[65fastback2+2]

You'd think a party would want to get behind someone whose won a lot of states and contributed to slightly higher than normal voter turnout, but since Trump isn't their ideal candidate like Romney, they wind up with egg on their faces. And both Trump and his supporters are vocal enough that any attempt to stop him won't go unchallenged or unnoticed.

Quite the opposite...they know an outsider-labeled candidate is what it takes to win, and they know to pump him out, they have to play up his outsider-ness. The moment they quit, his numbers would take. Its reverse psychology at its finest.

[Tywysog Cymru]

Maybe, just maybe, they don't like Trump because he's a terrible general election candidate and will drive Democratic turnout which will hurt Republicans down-ballot?

[acptulsa]

The establishment you mean. Not conservatives. Just the people who want and keep total control and have had it for years. The illusion is becoming clear

No, they mean 'conservatives'. There's only one subset of the Establishment who gives a flying flip if the GOP survives, and that is the handful whose job it is to make Establishmentarianism look good to people who think they're conservative. When the Establishment decides we no longer need the illusion of choice, those are the ones who will get laid off first.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

No, they mean 'conservatives'. There's only one subset of the Establishment who gives a flying flip if the GOP survives, and that is the handful whose job it is to make Establishmentarianism look good to people who think they're conservative. When the Establishment decides we no longer need the illusion of choice, those are the ones who will get laid off first.

That's why we need to make antidisestablishmentariasm look cool

[erowe1]

Cruz does not seem willing to play along with this strategy of propping up 1 candidate per state. He probably knows even if he helps force a contested convention, they aren't going to back him as the nominee.

He has no choice. Even if he won't get the nomination, his chances of winning it only go down more if Trump gets 1237.

[Unknown.User]

..

[Mike4Freedom]

Unknown User. What? Is this the 10th thread you spammed this into. Stop already. Sending 30000 troops into syria or a preemptive strike on north korea, killing terrorists families or expanding torture is not an anti-war position. Oh, he is against the Iraq war. Big $#@!ing deal.

[CPUd]

Unknown User, not so unknown. His time here is nearing the end.

[Dianne]

Cute, let me guess.... Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Harry Reid, John Boehner, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Romney, Jeb Bush, George Bush. All these bimbos stand to lose millions if the U.S. becomes the U.S. again, and not some other United Nations' third world nation.

[erowe1]

Unknown User, not so unknown. His time here is nearing the end.

Who is it?

[Unknown.User]

..

[Peace Piper]

Unknown User. What? Is this the 10th thread you spammed this into. Stop already. Sending 30000 troops into syria or a preemptive strike on north korea, killing terrorists families or expanding torture is not an anti-war position. Oh, he is against the Iraq war. Big $#@!ing deal.

Unknown User, not so unknown. His time here is nearing the end.

So now, along with hating Russia, supporting "free trade" agreements and ignoring lies about Iran, the board supports censorship.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.

I've got to stop clicking on RPF for awhile, it has caused heart problems.

Hopefully for the last time, WHO DO YOU SUPPORT? A scummy little Canadian sleazebag liar that isn't eligible to become president? A joke called Kasich? Until the GOP decides to take the nomination away from Trump, it's Trump vs. Clinton.

Who's worse? There's a chance with Trump. There's no chance with Clinton.

Maybe someone can get Ron and Jesse Benton to start talking about "delegates" again- of course, they'll also call for donations. Maybe Jesse needs a new Audi, or a new million dollar house.

If Trump did just one thing- stop the GD TPP - he would be a success. Maybe he'll bring back a few jobs. Maybe he'll stop bringing in refugees that the US CREATED.

[CPUd]

[Unknown.User]

..

[Mike4Freedom]

So now, along with hating Russia, supporting "free trade" agreements and ignoring lies about Iran, the board supports censorship.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.

I've got to stop clicking on RPF for awhile, it has caused heart problems.

Hopefully for the last time, WHO DO YOU SUPPORT? A scummy little Canadian sleazebag liar that isn't eligible to become president? A joke called Kasich? Until the GOP decides to take the nomination away from Trump, it's Trump vs. Clinton.

Who's worse? There's a chance with Trump. There's no chance with Clinton.

Maybe someone can get Ron and Jesse Benton to start talking about "delegates" again- of course, they'll also call for donations. Maybe Jesse needs a new Audi, or a new million dollar house.

If Trump did just one thing- stop the GD TPP - he would be a success. Maybe he'll bring back a few jobs. Maybe he'll stop bringing in refugees that the US CREATED.

I support no one. Also on the Iran deal Trump said it was the worst deal he ever saw. So he does not want peace there. The guy is full of $#@!.

[Anti-Neocon]

Should read "neoconservatives"

[Ronin Truth]

Oh goodie, more conspiracy theories. Yippee, I love it!

[euphemia]

Unless these people have a better idea, they need to just shut up and let the process run its course. The GOP has been absolutely asleep at the wheel and has found someone put an election year on the calendar without telling them. This is just stupid. It will be a huge waste of energy, time, and money, and we will be no better off for it.

This is so Junior High.