c*****n
发帖数: 14445 | 1 An open letter to my fellow Republican national delegates
June 24, 2016
Stefani Williams
[Updated June 27, 2016]
When Donald Trump entered the presidential race in June 2015, I decided to
give him a look. After I paid close attention, however, he completely lost
me.
He lost me because his statements were erratic, contradictory, and
untrustworthy, and many of his positions were actually very liberal. What
troubled me the most was his well-known playboy lifestyle – exemplified by
widely circulated nude pictures of Melania Trump taken aboard his plane when
they were dating, his "unrepentant" adultery in two previous marriages, and
his years of openly bragged-about womanizing – behavior not only
disturbing to decent Americans, but degrading to all women. Also deeply
troubling are his pro-abortion views (including support for Planned
Parenthood), advocacy of universal government healthcare, bullying of
opposing candidates, racially-tinged (and simplistic) attitudes, making fun
of the disabled, and routine pathological lying.
Now that he is the "presumptive GOP nominee," his rhetoric and behavior have
come increasingly under fire from the media and voters. His bigoted
statements about a "Mexican judge," his support for gun control, his blatant
self-promotion in everything he does, his thumbing his nose at the
Republican Party (saying he can "go it alone" without the party's help after
using the party to get votes in the first place), and his overall juvenile
and erratic behavior make it readily apparent that this former reality TV
star is wholly unfit to be President of the United States and the leader of
the free world.
Now, I'm certainly not advocating a Hillary Clinton presidency – she would
bring her own unprecedented corruption and extreme ideology to the White
House – but I do want to make voters aware that we have a very plausible
alternative route. We don't have to put Trump or Hillary in the Oval Office.
The path to "dump Trump"
As a Republican national delegate, I, along with the other 2,471 GOP
delegates, will convene in Cleveland this July for the Republican National
Convention. While most observers and the media assume that Donald Trump will
be anointed the GOP nominee by the convention, that presumed outcome is
becoming increasingly uncertain, as his unpopularity grows and his poll
numbers continue to slide. He has virtually no campaign funds and only a fly
-by-night organization. His naïve plan to ignore the party's base while
enlisting Democrats and independents to vote for him – through over-
reliance on Tweets and free media – will never work. Clearly, Trump has
almost zero chance of beating Hillary Clinton in November.
There is hope, however.
I belong to a rapidly growing GOP delegate movement called Free the
Delegates, which is gaining momentum. Because of the confusion and
contradiction about what delegates can and can't do, allow me a few minutes
to piece things together for you. Once you understand the subject,
everything's pretty simple.
The premise of the Free the Delegate movement is that GOP delegates are not
bound to vote for any particular candidate at the convention; they are free
to vote their conscience – according to Rules 37 and 38. (Rule 37 has been
in place for over 130 years; and Rule 38, known as the "Unit Rule,"
expressly guarantees delegates' right of conscience.) This principle of
delegate freedom has been recognized and protected by every GOP convention
since the founding of the Republican Party.
The only exception was the 1976 convention, in which RNC rules were changed
to bind delegates to Gerald Ford and keep Ronald Reagan from gaining the
nomination. This coercive rule was dropped the following convention, in 1980.
As things stand, the only RNC rule that purports to require binding is Rule
16, adopted by RNC leaders in 2013 without ratification by delegates – and
this rule has no governing authority over the convention, since it is only
among the rules (Rules 13-25) that govern the party between conventions and
that automatically expire at each new convention unless readopted. These
rules have no application to the "Standing Rules of the Convention" (Rules
26-42) that actually govern the 2016 convention.
False media narrative
Erroneously, it's being widely claimed in the media that in order for
delegates to be unbound, they have to change the rules. THIS IS NOT the case
, as explained above. The delegates are already unbound. It's important to
note that in order to bind the delegates, on the other hand, the delegates
themselves MUST CHANGE THE RULES to add such binding language to the
Standing Rules of the Convention. This is highly unlikely to happen, in view
of the growing "buyer's remorse" now becoming obvious among convention-
goers in recent weeks, as the Trump campaign continues to show itself
profoundly inept and unprepared to take on the Democrats.
Because there is so much confusion over the binding of delegates, Free the
Delegates is proposing that a "Conscience Clause" be adopted by the
Convention Rules Committee to give delegates extra reinforcement in
understanding and exercising their rights during the voting. This is not a
rule change, per se, but a clarification of existing rules – Rules 37 and
38.
In order for this clause to be adopted, it will need the approval of 57
delegates who sit on the Convention Rules Committee. If it passes this
committee, it will then be brought to the full floor for a vote and will
need the support of 1,237 delegates to pass. But regardless of whether it
passes, delegates are still unbound and free to vote their conscience, per
the Unit Rule.
State party rules and state law don't trump national party rules
Much of the confusion surrounding the Cleveland convention has to do with
conflicting state rules and the primacy of national party rules.
Historically, any state laws, for instance, that require binding of
delegates have been nullified by the courts when they contradict the rules
of national political parties. In effect, state party rules cannot "trump"
national party rules – the latter always take precedence in a dispute.
Regarding state law, the Supreme Court through several rulings has made
clear "state laws that bind delegates to vote for a specific candidate are
unconstitutional.... States [cannot] bind delegates to national party
conventions to vote according to primary results" (Curly Haugland, Unbound:
The Conscience of a Republican Delegate, page 60).
In 1975, the Court ruled in Cousins v. Wigoda that "the States themselves
have no constitutionally mandated role in the great task of the selection of
the President and Vice-President candidates."
And further, in October 2007, U.S. District Judge Richard A. Lazzara issued
this statement in a case dismissed against the Democratic National Committee
parties have a constitutionally protected right to manage and conduct their
own internal affairs, including the enforcement of delegate selection rules
and the decision as to which state delegates it will recognize, under the
First Amendment's right to freedom of association."
But didn't Donald win "fair and square"?
The only plausible counter-argument to Free the Delegates is the presumption
that "Trump won the nomination fair and square." This presumption, held by
his delegates and supporters, is his main "trump card" going into the
convention.
If he won fair and square, he has a compelling claim to the Republican
nomination. On the other hand, if he didn't win fair and square, he has no
such claim, and delegates have every right to deny him the nomination.
Here are the known facts –
Unlike any of the other candidates, Trump refused to attend two crucial
televised debates when only the strongest of the candidates were left
standing. By so doing, he made a mockery of the primary process and deprived
voters of the chance to see him fully vetted. He arrogantly announced, "We'
ve had enough debates" – as though he had taken over the GOP and usurped
its rightful role to inform the electorate. RNC chair Reince Priebus should
have told him to show up or be stripped of his delegates (or some similar
penalty) for so blatantly refusing to play fair.
Unlike all the other candidates (of both parties) going back decades, Trump
has refused to release his federal tax returns so voters could vet him even
further. It appears he has something to hide. Again, RNC chair Reince
Priebus should have told him he'd be stripped of his delegates (or suffer an
equivalent penalty) if he didn't play fair in something so basic as
releasing his taxes.
In ways never before seen in modern politics, Trump relied throughout the
primaries on a nonstop barrage of outrageous "dirty tricks" to defame and
belittle decent fellow Republicans – damaging not only their reputations,
but the credibility of the GOP itself. In doing so, he set a new low for
sleazy campaigning. For thus diverting the vetting process from substance
and policy to petty "tabloid"-style politics, he should have been told by
RNC chair Reince Priebus to stop subverting the election or he'd be
substantially penalized.
Rivaling the shady behavior of his old friend Hillary Clinton, Trump has
relied repeatedly on intentional lies, distortions, and emotional
manipulation to hide his actual positions and distract from his lack of
substance throughout his campaign. For being even more dishonest and
fraudulent in some ways than Hillary, as some allege, he should be rejected
by the convention for proving himself utterly unqualified to lead the party
and the nation.
Unlike anyone else in recent memory, it is obvious that Donald Trump has
engaged in a hostile takeover of the GOP for his own personal gain. For such
duplicity – and the unprecedented threat this con artist poses to our
nation’s security and safety, as well as that of the world – he must be
stopped at the convention, out of respect for ourselves and fairness to our
country. The American people are counting on us as delegates to stand up
against such blatantly UNFAIR overreach by this demagogue and the dirty
tricksters with whom he has surrounded himself at the core of his campaign.
The above is a reasonable assessment of Donald's "trump card" involving
fairness. It should be clear to most delegates that he's the one who's been
unfair this election – not the Republican Party, its candidates, or its
delegates as he asserts.
What about the “will of the people”?
The second most prevalent argument against Free the Delegates is that we are
trying to usurp “the will of the people” by denying Trump the nomination.
After all, he won more votes than anyone else, right? Or in Trump’s words,
he “beat everybody – but not just beat them...[he] beat the hell out of
them.”
Well, not exactly. Trump averaged only 39 percent of the vote when he had
significant opposition, 44 percent when factoring in the several weeks
during which he ran unopposed. He therefore gained only a plurality of the
votes cast – nothing like he loudly proclaims.
As the numbers show, he was rejected by the majority of Republicans who
voted! This not only bodes ill for the party in the general election, but
reveals Trump has no mandate from the voters he claims to represent, and
whose party he boasts a "presumptive" right to lead.
Take into account as well that many of his early wins were in "open”
primaries that enabled non-Republicans to skew the results, and he did much
worse among actual Republicans than the numbers suggest. Take away the non-
Republicans, and it’s likely Trump would not have beat his main competitors
, and might, himself, have been forced to drop out, rather than they.
But here’s the real issue –
Whereas Democrats believe in “direct democracy” over “representative
democracy” of the sort our Founders gave us, Republicans believe just the
opposite: representative democracy – that is, electing electors and
delegates to represent us – is a vital check against unwise outcomes that
might be chosen by an overly emotional electorate. When a dishonest
demagogue comes along and stirs up rabid support through manipulation and
emotion (see above), the Founders had in mind that civility and reason, not
anger, threats, or militancy, would prevail.
Hence the Electoral College. And hence the balancing of popular state-by-
state votes with the will of elected delegates at the GOP convention. “
Check and balance” is the American way.
This movement is not a "dirty trick"
I should note that while Trump and his surrogates claim that it is powerful
"establishment" leaders, GOP insiders, or even former opposing candidates
who are behind the effort to "free the delegates," the facts don't support
their assertions. Free the Delegates was founded by a delegate who is a
humble school teacher in Colorado. It is widely backed by the rank and file
of the Republican Party – regular folks who care about the direction of our
country and who are exasperated at the prospect of having a President
Hillary Clinton, something a Trump nomination will all but guarantee.
A June 21 editorial by the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board (linked above)
sums up things succinctly:
"Trump's campaign is a disaster waiting to happen – unless the party uses
the Cleveland convention to avert it. Republican delegates can resign
themselves to go down on a sinking ship. Or they can mount a mutiny to
install a captain who has the judgment, experience and skills needed to
guide the vessel safely home."
Fellow delegates, the choice is ours.
Stefani Williams is a delegate to the 2016 Republican National Convention.
You can reach her at [email protected]/* */ | A**d
发帖数: 13310 | 2 建制派特别喜欢派出一条又一条无名母狗出来乱咬，大概跟好莱坞烂片节省成本就找些
丑逼当一号女主差不多
by
【在 c*****n 的大作中提到】
: An open letter to my fellow Republican national delegates
: June 24, 2016
: Stefani Williams
: [Updated June 27, 2016]
: When Donald Trump entered the presidential race in June 2015, I decided to
: give him a look. After I paid close attention, however, he completely lost
: me.
: He lost me because his statements were erratic, contradictory, and
: untrustworthy, and many of his positions were actually very liberal. What
: troubled me the most was his well-known playboy lifestyle – exemplified by
| q*z
发帖数: 715 | |
|
