• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

South Carolina GOP open to canceling state's 2020 primary to protect Trump from challenge

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,771
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...anceling-states-2020-primary-to-protect-trump

The Republican Party in South Carolina is weighing whether to cancel its presidential nominating contest in 2020 in an effort to protect President Trump from potential challengers.

Drew McKissick, the chairman of the South Carolina GOP, told the Washington Examiner that the party would do "what's in the president's best interest."
========================================
When just voter suppression won't do, just cancel the primary.
 
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...anceling-states-2020-primary-to-protect-trump

The Republican Party in South Carolina is weighing whether to cancel its presidential nominating contest in 2020 in an effort to protect President Trump from potential challengers.

Drew McKissick, the chairman of the South Carolina GOP, told the Washington Examiner that the party would do "what's in the president's best interest."
========================================
When just voter suppression won't do, just cancel the primary.

It's a cult.
 
It's the republican party so it's their choice. But it sure seems like a stupid idea. If a sitting president can't easily win his own primary then you should probably consider allowing someone a chance to beat him so you aren't stuck with him in the general election...
 
if he's still in office in 2020, i don't believe that the former Republican party will run a challenger.
 
I have to ask

Has any state ever cancelled a primary for nominating a president?
 
I think it's more a conspiracy to rig the 2020 elections before the voting.

Why do you think that? It is a process

Nomination processes consist of two main types of elections held at the state level: primaries and caucuses. The party committee in each state determines the rules that will govern their particular election contest.

https://billofrightsinstitute.org/e...sons-plans/current-events/nomination-process/
So IF, in SC i.e., Trump isn't challenged, why waste time to go through the motion?

(oh, and save it, this would hold true if A state would want to cancel the 2020 primary if Clinton were in office)
 
I never thought I'd see the day, but in its mad rush to do whatever possible to protect Trump it is becoming fairly obvious that South Carolina loves Russia.
 
I never thought I'd see the day, but in its mad rush to do whatever possible to protect Trump it is becoming fairly obvious that South Carolina loves Russia.

Republicans who clearly love Russia and hate America should just move there. Would be better for everyone.
 
Wow, that's some DNC **** right there!
 
The DNC canceled its primaries?

Rigged them.


Not saying its right, but hey, I say good on the GOP. The sooner both of these **** parties dies, the sooner our country can go back to a clean(er) bill of health.
 
Rigged them.


Not saying its right, but hey, I say good on the GOP. The sooner both of these **** parties dies, the sooner our country can go back to a clean(er) bill of health.

In what way were they rigged? Not saying they didn't, asking what you're referring to.
 
Rigged them.


Not saying its right, but hey, I say good on the GOP. The sooner both of these **** parties dies, the sooner our country can go back to a clean(er) bill of health.

There's never been a time where we didn't have political parties except perhaps the first five or ten years of our existence.
I vote that, since it's clear that we'll always have some sort of political party arrangement, let's instead move to regulate the distortions of organized money in party politics.
We had a cleaner bill of health when there were more restrictions on how political money got spent and applied to the democratic process.
 
In what way were they rigged? Not saying they didn't, asking what you're referring to.

The collusion between the DNC and major media outlets, to stone wall Bernie, whom I would have voted for. As proven (and not once denied by ANYONE) in the emails during that hole mess.
 
There's never been a time where we didn't have political parties except perhaps the first five or ten years of our existence.
I vote that, since it's clear that we'll always have some sort of political party arrangement, let's instead move to regulate the distortions of organized money in party politics.
We had a cleaner bill of health when there were more restrictions on how political money got spent and applied to the democratic process.

The money is the root cause, but I don't see significant campaign finance reform happening without killing the big 2. Its simply not in their financial best interests.
 
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...anceling-states-2020-primary-to-protect-trump

The Republican Party in South Carolina is weighing whether to cancel its presidential nominating contest in 2020 in an effort to protect President Trump from potential challengers.

Drew McKissick, the chairman of the South Carolina GOP, told the Washington Examiner that the party would do "what's in the president's best interest."
========================================
When just voter suppression won't do, just cancel the primary.

Republicans in state after state after state demonstrate quite clearly that they see the people as an inconvenient obstacle which must be navigated around in order to achieve their goals.
 
The collusion between the DNC and major media outlets, to stone wall Bernie, whom I would have voted for. As proven (and not once denied by ANYONE) in the emails during that hole mess.

Emotionally and morally I agree with you but technically, the reason the DNC did what they did is quite logical.
I'm not saying everything that they did was moral or even legal in some cases, but it was entirely logical.

You cannot have a football game between the Cowboys and the Redskins and then suddenly, a San Francisco 49-er runs onto the line of scrimmage and says that he's playing on the Redskins team.
Bernie refused to join the Democratic Party, and that means that he is not a Democrat, even if he says he is running "as a Democrat".
Because according to the rules of both parties, "running as a Democrat" (or as a Republican) might more accurately be:
"Running as if I was a Democrat".

There simply are no party provisions for people running "as if" they were a member, you have to BE a member of the party.
And so, because Bernie was NOT a member of the party, the party chose someone else. I'm fairly certain that, if it had been anyone else instead of Hillary, they would have done much the same thing, namely: PROTECT THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.

Because in the end, whether you and I agree what they did was immoral or even sometimes illegal, they did what a party is required to do, select a candidate and then protect them.

Right now as you read this, the South Carolina GOP is pondering the idea of canceling their 2020 GOP SC state primary ALTOGETHER, in order to protect Trump.

That means, if enough states cancel their GOP primaries altogether in 2020, NO ONE "running as if they are Republican" has a chance because no other REPUBLICAN PARTY MEMBER even has a chance.

When seen through that kind of lens, all of a sudden the DNC closing ranks around Hillary seems rather tame by comparison.
Bernie, as much as I love the guy, should have tossed his silly and sentimental "Democratic Socialist" tag in the trash the day he set foot on Capitol Hill for the first time, because in reality, according to the work he has done, he's a liberal New Deal Democrat in the style (and largely platform) of FDR.

Had he done that all those years ago, I suspect that the DNC would have been transformed by him* a long time ago, and they would have had no choice but to run him in 2016.

(*Witness his considerable grass roots 2016 crowdfunding mojo - now extrapolate that out ten years prior all the way up till 2016)
 
Back
Top Bottom