Jump to content
270soft Forum

Official: No Platform for GOP


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Might be - what's the chronology? That was released yesterday.

The official "No Platform" was also released yesterday. I'm not sure why they would "Resolve" to have no platform and then release an agenda, which is actually a platform stance. It's like they don't know what they're doing. It could be that Trump released the agenda and the party resolved to have no platform, which is odd. That would be like there was no party but Trump -- with all authority under one person. That ceases to be a party and becomes a political cult. 

From 1832-1840, the Whigs had no official platform because their unofficial stance was just "Anti-Jackson," with the idea that this would allow more people to join. Whigs, like the Federalists, were more of a coalition than an actual party by contemporary standards. Democrats were a party (with platforms, spoils systems, newspapers, party machines, etc) on day 1. 

GOP 2020 "no platform" is under different conditions. I think it could be the following reasons:

  • Trump is the underdog so he's taking more risks, including not having a platform. 
  • Trump doesn't read and finds policy boring, but he's also too much of a control freak to let the party make a platform, so one was never made. 
  • Trump and/or GOP has too much going on or couldn't agree on anything, so no platform.
  • Trump thinks people aren't interested in platforms and elections are more about primal instincts, so no platform means the party could do anything and be anything anyone wants it to be.
  • The GOP establishment fears a Trump landslide defeat, so they made no attempt for a platform and one was not made by Trump in time. 
  • Trump is doubling down on his success/failures from 2016 platform. Odd for an incumbent only 41.5% of people like.
  • By having no platform and only a resolves to have no platform announcement that takes up only 1 page, they're trying to make the Democrats 92 page platform seem like too many things or something. Note: Official platforms ("We resolve to...." are usualy dozens and dozens of pages but a party usually only highlight key things. 
  • Trump just isn't taking the Convention seriously.
  • Something else

Whether one likes or dislikes Trump, the move is both odd and surprising.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, vcczar said:
  • Trump is the underdog so he's taking more risks, including not having a platform. 
  • Trump doesn't read and finds policy boring, but he's also too much of a control freak to let the party make a platform, so one was never made. 
  • Trump and/or GOP has too much going on or couldn't agree on anything, so no platform.
  • Trump thinks people aren't interested in platforms and elections are more about primal instincts, so no platform means the party could do anything and be anything anyone wants it to be.
  • The GOP establishment fears a Trump landslide defeat, so they made no attempt for a platform and one was not made by Trump in time. 
  • Trump is doubling down on his success/failures from 2016 platform. Odd for an incumbent only 41.5% of people like.
  • By having no platform and only a resolves to have no platform announcement that takes up only 1 page, they're trying to make the Democrats 92 page platform seem like too many things or something. Note: Official platforms ("We resolve to...." are usualy dozens and dozens of pages but a party usually only highlight key things. 
  • Trump just isn't taking the Convention seriously.
  • Something else

Ya, would be interested in the official reason by the RNC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, vcczar said:

GOP 2020 "no platform" is under different conditions

Technically, it's not clear if they don't have a platform, or if it's just the same as the 2016 one. Either way, I agree - surprising.

"That the 2020 Republican National Convention will adjourn without adopting a new platform until the 2024 Republican National Convention"

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

43 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I think it could be the following reasons

The official reason seems to be that they would be too limited by the convention format.

"in appreciation of the fact that it did not want a small contingent of delegates formulating a new platform without the breadth of perspectives within the ever-growing Republican movement"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-no-new-2020-platform-trump-agenda

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

 

The official reason seems to be that they would be too limited by the convention format.

"in appreciation of the fact that it did not want a small contingent of delegates formulating a new platform without the breadth of perspectives within the ever-growing Republican movement"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-no-new-2020-platform-trump-agenda

That just sounds like an excuse for a lack of preparation. It's basically arguing against what a platform is for -- the delegates represent the breadth of perspectives and cobble together a platform. That's like a president refusing to take office because he can't possibly represent his entire party. In regards to the last part "ever-growing Republican party," that's almost laughable. Sure, every party grows because the population increases and each generation larger in number, but if you look at polls that show Clinton-to-Trump voters and Trump-to-Biden voters, Biden has a significant lead here, and among Independents, and among 2016 3rd party voters that will vote major party in 2020. On top of this, one of the major criticism of Trump is that he pays too much attention to his base and not enough to the party. This final point might be the reason for no platform. 

Overall, it sounds like an excuse for a lack of preparation. I can't see an convincing points to suggest their excuse is a real argument, considering that statement can always apply to any part in any era. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vcczar said:

Overall, it sounds like an excuse for a lack of preparation.

Could be. My guess is Trump doesn't care much about an official party platform, thinking it makes little difference to voters. If the higher-ups thought having a new official platform was important, it would have happened.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Could be. My guess is Trump doesn't care much about an official party platform, thinking it makes little difference to voters. If the higher-ups thought having a new official platform was important, it would have happened.

I think this is probably correct. It's odd. I think Trump lacked initiative for effort because he wasn't going to have a huge crowd. My guess is that something happened--disagreements or something regarding Trump (and or his campaign team) and with McConnell, RNC chair (Romney's niece), and with other major GOPers, such as Cruz and Rubio, neither of whom were given speaking slots, which is very odd. That's akin to Biden not letting Bernie Sanders and Cory Booker speak or something. They're both expected names with large support bases. Mike Lee not being part is odd, considering UT is critical of Trump, but that might be the reason for that. TX and FL are battleground states, which you'd think would make Cruz and Rubio more imporant. Maybe they're thinking about their own survival and are distancing themselves?

Basically, nothing is making sense about the RNC Convention. I think the DNC was planned for months. I think the RNC wasn't planned until after the DNC--a week ago. They're winging it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Technically, it's not clear if they don't have a platform, or if it's just the same as the 2016 one. Either way, I agree - surprising.

Much of the 2016 platform is bashing the "current administration", so it's probably not that.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it totally incredible how the Republican Party has become the Trump Party. Whilst of course they're the party of Reagan, of Lincoln, of Teddy Roosevelt and George Bush, they've always been the party of ideas, and they've often styled themselves on being the party of common sense. What is common sense about allowing a self-serving egomaniac to turn the party into what is essentially a cult of personality?

 

I mean look at the speakers list for the RNC. Half of them have the last name Trump. God help the Republicans if Trump implodes in November because I can't see them fixing the rot that this man has inflicted on them easily.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LegolasRedbard said:

I find it totally incredible how the Republican Party has become the Trump Party. Whilst of course they're the party of Reagan, of Lincoln, of Teddy Roosevelt and George Bush, they've always been the party of ideas, and they've often styled themselves on being the party of common sense. What is common sense about allowing a self-serving egomaniac to turn the party into what is essentially a cult of personality?

 

I mean look at the speakers list for the RNC. Half of them have the last name Trump. God help the Republicans if Trump implodes in November because I can't see them fixing the rot that this man has inflicted on them easily.

I mean I'm no fan of the Democrats but at least they've gone to the effort of putting some sort of policy proposals together. Trump is still acting like he can run an outsider campaign when he's been president for a term, which from my perspective is unrealistic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...