I have become an election inspector in my hometown and am frankly amazed at the work that goes into an election, even a relatively benign election at the local level. If our statewide and national elections are also run under these types of constraints, there should be no reasonable thought given to the outcomes that we disprove of as having been conducted on the up and up.
Since I have not been on the worker bee side of an election beyond that in our village, I can not say with any certainty that those other elections are conducted with the same close and careful attention given to proper protocol, the verification of the qualifications of would-be voters, and the assurance that outcomes are exactly in keeping with votes cast by qualified voters. The Iowa caucuses won by the throw of dice are an example of election outcomes that might be rightly challenged.
I have to assume this is the case, even in the hotly contested races such as we’ll be voting about nationally in the not-too-distant future.
That brings to mind the intriguing world of party politics and the determination of the standard-bearers made by the two national political parties. The Republicans are wrestling with the 800 lb. Gorilla in their world, Donald Trump, and trying to decide the best way to deal with the issues he represents. Should the rules be changed to try to blunt Trump’s success to date, or should the RNC simply play this the way they have apparently played each election cycle up to now? There are those party elders who seem to believe that making Trump the party’s candidate for President of the United States is tantamount to destroying the Republican brand.
There are also those who seem to feel almost exactly the opposite; they believe that Trump has won this fair and square and that he, therefore, is the deserving person of the nod as the Republican candidate for President. This group is, unfortunately for the Republicans, comprised of those who have voted for Trump and/or who have supported him with their voices since he represents that which they believe has been missing in national politics.
There is a real problem, though, for the party and that is the repercussons that will likely flow if the party chooses to somehow deprive Mr. Trump of what his supporters believe is his due, such as through the rejiggering of required primary election victories and resulting floor votes to nominate; 1,237 comes to mind. And those people are both current members and potentially future members of the Republican Party. Does the Republican Party owe this to its members and to its sympathizers, or is it compelled for some reason to backpedal in order to do what it might see as ‘saving face’?
That is a tough question and one that the Party elders are no doubt wrestling with today. From their perspective the questions are likely these: Are we damned if we do? And conversely, are we damned if we don’t? Now that is a Hobson’s choice of a most difficult kind.