I'm fine with that. Trump would still win the plurality. Now, stfu, hack.
But plurality has never nominated the GOP candidate. That's not the rules... you don't want a "rigged" system do you? The nominee must receive a MAJORITY of delegates.. been that way since the party's inception in 1856. You say you wan't "will of the people" but the will of the people is they mostly don't want Trump. So do you WANT will of the people or NOT?
You can't honestly make that claim. First off, Colorado changed their game plan last summer, not 1856. The field was very large in the beginning and even now there are three dividing up the delegate count. If you have evidence all the votes that didn't go to Trump was a vote against him then post it up. All we know is people preferred someone else. Trump could have been their second pick for all you know.
Uhm... Yes I can honestly make that claim because it's the truth. Colorado can change it's game plan, so can every other state party, so can the national party. Heck, the national party can change it's game plan at the convention. This has also always been the case since 1856. What has never changed is the requirement for the nominee to get a majority of delegates and not simply a plurality.
I never claimed that delegates not going to Trump were delegates against Trump. The nominee is not chosen on the basis of how many or few delegates are against them. The nominee is also not chosen on the basis of who is second most popular. Since the party's inception in 1856, it has been the candidate with a majority of delegates. There is a process to follow if no one gets the majority on the first ballot.
If the GOP based the nomination on plurality, we would have never nominated Abraham Lincoln, the GOP candidate in 1860 would have been William Seward. He had the plurality of delegates on the first ballot.... but that's not how the GOP nominates a candidate. That's not the process. They MUST get a majority, not a plurality.
Now, you Trumpettes will whine about "will of the people" and how it's not fair but the rules are a majority and not a plurality precisely because of "will of the people." If the majority of delegates support someone other than Trump, that's the will of the people. Some of the candidates they are bound to support are no longer in the race. Some have no chance of securing a majority of delegates. After the first ballot, if no one has a majority, the delegates are released from their obligation to support a specific candidate.
You'll say, but that's not fair, the people voted for the delegates and their vote should count... but that's not how political parties select candidates. The GOP is not obligated to a democratic process. This is not a "one-man-one-vote" process. Even the presidency itself is not determined on the basis of popular vote. So the GOP has a process as do the Democrats and the process will be followed as it always is. I'm sorry that so many Americans seems to be confused or lack the education to understand the process but that's life... it's not always fair.
I would think that Mr. Trump would be comfortable with a brokered convention. After all, isn't his big claim to fame his ability to cut deals and negotiate? Well, this is where that will come into play. After the first ballot, the front-runners will lobby delegates to come over to their camp. Trump has the same opportunity as Cruz, Kasich or others. The problem as I see it is, Trump hasn't made too many friends. Maybe I am wrong... maybe people deep down love Trump? Maybe Trump has the ability to apply his masterful negotiation and deal making skills in order to secure the needed delegates?
In any event, the GOP nominee will be the first person to obtain a majority of the delegates at the convention. This isn't a democratic process, it never has been. This is not the NFL playoffs or American Idol. Who people voted for has no real bearing on who the party nominates as their candidate. Just as the president is not elected by the popular vote, that's the process... that's how this works.