Hugh Hewitt Says GOP Should Change Convention Rules to Dump Trump

[brendablethyn 536]

Conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt argued Wednesday morning that the Republican Party should make an unprecedented effort to change the Republican National Convention rules to allow them to dump Donald Trump as their nominee.

“It’s like ignoring stage-four cancer. You can’t do it, you gotta go attack it,” Hewitt said. “And right now the Republican Party is facing — the plane is headed towards the mountain after the last 72 hours.”

Hewitt said he disagreed with Republican senators like Lindsey Graham and Mark Kirk who said they could not vote for their party’s nominee. “I wanna support the nominee of the party, but I think the party ought to change the nominee. Because we’re going to get killed with this nominee.”

“I have never said that!” he stressed. “I waited until after the primary was over, I stayed Switzerland to the end, and in 72 hours, dovetailed to that.”

“They ought to get together and let the convention decide,” he concluded. “And if Donald Trump pulls over a makeover in the next 4 to 5 weeks, great, they can keep him. It would be better if he had done so 5 weeks ago.”

Hewitt called for either the replacement of Donald Trump by changing the rules or a major “personality transplant in Trump Tower.” But unless something changes, he warned, Republicans are headed for disaster.

http://www.mediaite.com/election-2016/hugh-hewitt-gop-should-change-convention-rules-to-dump-donald-trump/

[brizoda 4,177]

this is so undemocratic!!!!!

[Bonkers 30,860]

1 minute ago, brizoda said:

this is so undemocratic!!!!!

Remember that a nomination process isn't really about democracy, but about finding the candidate with the best chance to win in the actual election.

Trump has too many supporters to do it though. They've made their bed and should probably start worrying about 2020.

[Lion Heart 15,041]

#DumpTheTrump

[Didymus 34,380]

"It’s like ignoring stage-four cancer."

I don't really get how Trump being the nominee would bring down the Republicans in general Like.. what? Trump is obviously the Republican nominee who would get the most votes out of all of them. Isn't rejecting Trump as the nominee automatically losing too?

[brendablethyn 536]

4 minutes ago, Bonkers said:

Trump has too many supporters to do it though. They've made their bed and should probably start worrying about 2020.

I read that Ryan and co would do so except they are worried about what will happen with the Supreme Court. So many justices ready to retire or very old.

[brendablethyn 536]

1 minute ago, Didymus said:

I don't really get how Trump being the nominee would bring down the Republicans in general Like.. what? Trump is obviously the Republican nominee who would get the most votes out of all of them. Isn't rejecting Trump as the nominee automatically losing too?

If he starts spouting racist stuff it could ruin the party completely. Their brand would be destroyed and they would lose so many seats.

[FATCAT 60,888]

2 minutes ago, Didymus said:

"It’s like ignoring stage-four cancer."

I don't really get how Trump being the nominee would bring down the Republicans in general Like.. what? Trump is obviously the Republican nominee who would get the most votes out of all of them. Isn't rejecting Trump as the nominee automatically losing too?

You need independents to win an election, and Trump offers little to those voters as a whole.

[Didymus 34,380]

7 minutes ago, brendablethyn said:

If he starts spouting racist stuff it could ruin the party completely. Their brand would be destroyed and they would lose so many seats.

Are people so stupid to equate Trump's mania with the whole party though? If he got the most votes from the American people out of his party, then how could the party be restored/saved if the person who didn't get the most votes took over?

I don't get the seats part (who decides if they lose any?), but I don't know that much about US politics

6 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

You need independents to win an election, and Trump offers little to those voters as a whole.

Well, is there a Republican who does?

[FATCAT 60,888]

Just now, Didymus said:

Well, is there a Republican who does?

 Only a handful, but in the GE, sort of

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

1 minute ago, Didymus said:

Are people so stupid to equate Trump's mania with the whole party though?

Yes

[brendablethyn 536]

10 minutes ago, Didymus said:

I don't get the seats part (who decides if they lose any?), but I don't know that much about US politics

There's the race for President, but there is also voting for seats in the Senate and House of Representatives, and it's really important to win those because you need them to pass legislation. Obama has struggled because the Democrats don't have a majority in either. And having a Republican Presidential candidate who is unpopular could mean people don't support the Republican candidates for the Senate and House as strongly. Studies have found a strong correlation between the two.

[Didymus 34,380]

1 minute ago, brendablethyn said:

There's the race for President, but there is also voting for seats in the Senate and House of Representatives, and it's really important to win those because you need them to pass legislation. And having a Republican Presidential candidate who is unpopular could mean people don't support the Republican candidates for the Senate and House as strongly. Studies have found a strong correlation between the two.

Well that's stupid.

So the real idiot is the public, not Trump

Anyway, curious to see how this will end up then

Thanks for explaining