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

[brooklynite]

Source: The Hill

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."

“We have complete autonomy and flexibility in either direction,” McKissick said. “Considering the fact that the entire party supports the president, we’ll end up doing what’s in the president’s best interest.”

He added that he doesn't think Trump will face a challenger in the primary and said there have been no official discussions about canceling the primary.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/422028-south-carolina-gop-open-to-canceling-states-2020-primary-to-protect-trump

---

Giving up SC's pre-eminency in Presidential politics to protect Donald Trump's ego?

[Racerdog1]

1. Can't fix stupid.

Orange asshole should be nothing but a bad memory by then.

[Hortensis]

25. Abe Lincoln, the single "Republican" hero Pubs are eagerly

able to claim, sorta, wasn't allowed on the ballots of a majority of southern states. Most southerners then were proud of their inability to vote for him. And most today have no idea "The Great Emancipator" is not theirs.

So, may not be conclusive proof that you can't fix stupid, but it definitely means partisan stupidity is very long lived.

"You can fool some of the people ll the time..."

[lark]

2. SC GOP wants to show they are good little Nazis and will protect Hair Furor.

[RKP5637]

3. Damn, this gets crazier all the time. tRump well demonstrates why "The Stupid" are easily taken in

by con artists.

[watoos]

4. Is that legal?

Can South Carolina just give Electoral college votes to Trump without anyone voting? So if people in South Carolina wanted to vote for Kasich the Republican party is saying they can deny their votes?

WTF. I'm slow, help me out.

[groundloop]

6. There's no electoral votes involved, this is only an internal repub matter

Pretty damned stupid though that a state party would even consider cancelling cancelling it's primary to protect anyone. And when you think about it South Carolina would probably be one of the states more favorable to Tiny, so they'd actually be denying him votes at the convention if they carry through with this.

[greymattermom]

10. So the Dems have an easy talking point.

Weak, can't even face a challenger, rinse, repeat.

[groundloop]

14. Damned straight !!!!!

Hell, Tiny could never win anyway..... oh, wait - never mind

Yeah, we absolutely need all the help we can get, and MUST have our ducks in a row. We have to crush the gopers this time, take no prisoners.

[Recursion]

7. Sure, this is just the primary. Parties aren't under any obligation to hold primaries (nt)

[Jim Lane]

29. That broad statement is subject to qualification.

In the pending fraud lawsuit against the DNC, the DNC argued that it had no obligation to hold primaries at all, but was legally entitled to pick the nominee through backroom deals if it wanted to. (This was by way of arguing that, if it does hold primaries, it has no obligation to obey its own rule that calls for neutrality among the candidates.) The federal judge rejected the DNC's defense. He wrote:

For their part, the DNC
and Wasserman Schultz have characterized the DNC charter’s promise
of “impartiality and evenhandedness” as a mere political
promise——political rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal
courts. The Court does not accept this trivialization of the DNC’s
governing principles. While it may be true in the abstract that
the DNC has the right to have its delegates “go into back rooms
like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that
way,” DE 54, at 36:22-24, the DNC, through its charter, has
committed itself to a higher principle.

(Decision, pages 15-16)

The judge dismissed the case on other grounds (a decision now under appeal). As his decision indicates, the DNC had some good arguments in favor of the dismissal. Given that, it was really stupid -- even, IMO, offensive -- for the DNC to argue that is own published rules were just PR bullshit that it could ignore at will.

Judge Zloch's decision is a precedent for a principle that should have been obvious: When a political party establishes and publishes rules, it must then adhere to them.

This principle might torpedo the South Carolina GOP's idea. If the RNC's rules say something like "Every state party will decide for itself whether to select its convention delegates by primary or by caucus," then no state party should be allowed to choose the delegates by a conclave of top party leaders, with no direct grassroots involvement.

[Recursion]

32. Right, which is why the GOP is saying "we won't have a fair or open primary"

That's what the decision is saying: if you say upfront you're going to do a smoke-filled room, that's fine. The problem is if you say one thing and then do another.

[brooklynite]

8. Remember, you don't have a RIGHT to vote for President...

The State can choose whether to have publicly funded Primaries or leave the decision to the State Party, in which case the Party can do whatever it wants.

[Codeine]

11. Sure, it's a party matter.

Throughout a good chunk of our history parties just chose their candidate at the convention (the “smoke-filled room”.) Primaries are a 20th century creation that stemmed from the early progressive movement, iirc.

[Recursion]

33. The 2016 cycle has made me nostalgic for smoke-filled rooms (nt)

[Codeine]

34. There was a certain logic to them. nt

[watoos]

5. Why so many articles from The Hill?

[watoos]

9. So if South Carolina doesn't hold a primary,

it will simply put Trump's name on the ballot for the general election? OK.

[cstanleytech]

12. I can see them doing this, after all why let the voters make the decision?

[still_one]

13. If the Republican Party actually allows that, I would think that would piss off about 40% of

registered republicans

[turbinetree]

15. So the GOP supports a criminal enterprise.....................stupid is has stupid does.............

“We have complete autonomy and flexibility in either direction,” McKissick said. “Considering the fact that the entire party supports the president, we’ll end up doing what’s in the president’s best interest.”...................................


November 3, 2020 cannot get here fast enough

[DemoTex]

16. "Considering the fact that the entire party supports the president .." - Drew McKissick (SCGOP)

Don't count on that, buddyroll. I live in deep-red upstate South Carolina, and many Repubs I know are sick of Trump. Besides, what would you do, then, if former SC-GOV Nikki Haley decides to run?

[watoos]

21. I look for a Kasich/Haley ticket.

[SWBTATTReg]

17. Probably afraid rump is going to lose, at the rate he's losing voters etc. w/ his mouth. ...

Pathetic. And by the way, I could care less as to what these thugs/SC repugs do. As far as I'm concerned, they can run to the next septic pond and jump in.

[dajoki]

18. They don't have to worry...

he won't be there that long.

[MarcA]

19. Would like to see Repubs split into splinter groups.

Battles over ballot access and divided votes should help Dems
get more Electoral Votes.

[Flaleftist]

20. If the entire parry supports Trump, there's no reason to cancel the primary.

[watoos]

22. Now there you go talking sense.

[LiberalLovinLug]

23. ...

[Takket]

24. But do go on about how drumpf and the GOP are not one in the same

He is the leader they have always dreamed of.

[denverbill]

26. I'm sure it's a coincidence that Nikki Haley is from South Carolina.

Be pretty embarrassing the the most stable genius in the world to lose one of the first primaries of the election, to a girl no less.

[RT Atlanta]

27. My birth state....

Does such 'collective' stupid decision making.

There are pockets of progressives throughout the state (my parents included) but day-um, the republicans have done such a good job of convincing average people to vote against their own self interests (education, healthcare, taxes - the roads are shit, and on and on).

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

30. It's also Nikki Haley's birth state. And she might give him a contest in a SC primary.

We can't have that.

[RT Atlanta]

31. she's a 'silver tongued devil'

and they love her for that in SC. In reality she's as crazy (IMO) as the rest of them

[keithbvadu2]

28. Super dooper gerrymandering within the party.

Super dooper gerrymandering within the party.