1. It does seem as though Mr. Trump never got a real opportunity to pledge honestly one way or the other as the major parties’ practice of general enforcement of failed nomination seekers helping the eventual nominee and not competing against in the general election makes such a pledge requisite for major party participation, period.

   That’s what makes the pledge bull; What in part makes the major parties bull. Some major force needs to assail the major parties such that they could become vulnerable to the inclusion of many independent minority partisans. Mr. Trump might not see that way and pass on the criticism of system that’s proving more than anything now, the system is vulnerable to him.

2. In re: Natural Born Citizen Party National Committee et al.
   all 13 USCA circuits
   Trump Rule
   Party Rules Rule

3. “maybe he should have been roughed up”

4. There are some stiff “sore loser” laws around. Here in Michigan, Trump was one of the R candidates on [R] SOS Ruth Johnson’s “list of the individuals generally advocated by the national news media” per MCL 168.614a, so he has until 4pm on Friday 12/11 to file an affidavit asking to be taken off that list (or to have his affiliation changed) or else he’s on the 2016/03/08 primary ballot here. And once he’s on the ballot as an R, he can’t then appear in the general election as a candidate of any other party (MCL 168.695).

   He wouldn’t have had to file an affidavit to get on the ballot, so he may not be “caught-22” and prohibited by MCL 168.692a from filing a “qualifying petition” to be an independent (“No Party Affiliation”) candidate. But MCL 168.614a says that affidavit has to either

   * say that Trump’s partisan preference is for some other party than the Rs (so he’d be a candidate on the D primary ballot or not on the ballot at all, since the Rs and Ds are the only ones on the Presidential primary here); or

   * “specifically stat[e] that [Trump] is not a presidential candidate” — at all!

   I don’t know what the latter choice would do to his legal right to “change his mind” and try an independent run after all — though someone might argue it in court, and it might make for more easy laughs at his campaign. Still, it’s fairly clear that he’d have to make some choice in the next two weeks if he wants to be on the ballot in Michigan in November as an independent/NPA or as the standard-bearer of some other party (Constitution/US Taxpayers, perhaps).

5. The Michigan state government briefs in the Gary Johnson litigation in 2012 argued forcefully that anyone can be an independent presidential candidate in Michigan, even if he or she ran in a presidential primary. That was the state’s main argument.

6. Thank you, Richard. Of course, this is an opportunity not afforded by Michigan to independent candidates for other offices. . . .

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.