Yes but they don't define "brokered convention". Under the rules, if no one has over 50% of the delegates, which is highly possible this year, the delegates are released from their obligation to support the candidate they represent and they keep voting, in what is called a contested or open convention, and is one meaning of "brokered convention", until someone gets a majority. Under the rules there is no choice about this. It isn't something that is imposed by insiders.

If after several rounds it becomes apparent that those in the lead are not going to make it, the deal-making among delegates increases, opening up the whole process to additional candidates (like a Romney). Otherwise the only influence is insider rule changes. A broker is an intermediary in a deal. Kasich and party insiders yearn for a coup, not a convention of any kind. None of them are defining what they mean by "brokered convention".

Has any of the Republican candidates come out against the Keystone Pipeline because it relies on the use of eminent domain on behalf of a private company?

Indeed. He has already shown no restraint in publicly smearing private companies and individuals. A 'President Trump' overtly damaging private enterprise and private citizens is just another disgusting gang leader exercising the "democratic" destruction of individual rights.

Cruz is not part of the establishment. He is a rare politician who has bucked the establishment from the inside, usually on the side of limited government. Dumping anyone with political experience as "establishment" regardless of what he has been doing and seeks to do is a terrible criterion.

Gary Johnson has a shot at collecting 3 or 4 percent of the vote this time around, and could affect the outcome. The votes will come from Republicans and Democrats who intensely dislike their party's nominee, and there will be many such voters regardless of who the major parties nominate.

Stop minimizing the impact of eminent domain seizing private property. The president controls the executive branch and its policy on taking land. The agencies trample private property rights under existing sweeping authority to the degree the president wants and allows it. A president like Trump who thinks "eminent domain is wonderful" is much worse.

never watched a minute of it;;; that's my problem! -- j
.

Outrage doesn't lead to better decision making, better political ideas based on the principle of the rights of the individual is required for that. The danger is that a lot of people are increasingly outraged over the state of the country and its downward trend but don't know what is right.

Knowing what one is against doesn't tell anyone what to be for. Electing a strong-arm man on a white horse only makes the downward trend worse, leading to more desperation, more acceptance of the deprivations and injustices, and more radically statist reactions sacrificing individuals to pressure group warfare and more overt collectivism.

"his 'strength' [is] promoting himself (and his ample ego) in real estate in the locale where he has the greatest ability to use his pull. That particular "strength" is not what is needed in a president with such massive and far reaching power at his disposal. It is a recipe for dictatorship and disaster."

Take his exploitation of local eminent domain in his "deals" and multiply it by all the power of the Federal government.

Romney did what anti-intellectual Republicans always do, he found himself in a position of power and decided to "do good" in alliance with the altruist left. Trump is endorsing the same approach.

It's not an intellectual roller coaster, the intellectual trend in politics has been all down. The political policies have been zig-zag, with reactions against excesses, but a net downward trend.

The country isn't run by 50.1% mob, it's run by a political elite in the name of the mob, guided in accordance with pressure group warfare, in essence, as Ayn Rand put it, "fascism with communist slogans".

Trump is not the only non-establishment candidate, and while is not inside the political power structure he is intellectually establishment in his Pragmatist opposition to principles and his failure to acknowledge the rights of the individual. A strong-arm man on the white horse with dictatorial aspirations is not an answer to the political establishment.

Ayn Rand despised pragmatist businessmen but did not regard them as more threatening than ideological power seekers like communists and other overt collectivists.

Trump is not "better" than Hillary, only more of a risk in comparison with the dead certainty of what Hillary is. But the choice in voting in a primary is between the candidates in their own party, not an evasive comparison with a Democrat progressive as if the rest of the candidates did not exist.

Republican Congresses do not control presidents, especially when showing deference to a president of their own party. Congress also does not control the executive branch of the government operating in accordance with existing vague laws, which is where most of the activity of government rule is. Regardless of what new laws are passed, it matters a lot who is president running the actual operations of government.

There is also no certainty that the Republicans will retain control of the House and the Senate at all, especially with a backlash against a presidential candidate with the record breaking negative polling of Trump.

You can't "cut a deal" with Trump. He cuts deals at your expense, selling you out. "Deals" for anything is his Pragmatist replacement of the rights of the individual. He doesn't have principles and doesn't mention them. The solution to every problem, for him, is not to start by protecting the rights of the individual, but make a "deal" in the name of whatever problem he is demagoging at the moment in pandering for votes.

Multiple parties, especially without a parliamentary system of alliances, leads to unintended counter-intuitive results from the voting. Trump leading the primary voting without a majority by splitting the opposition is an example.

The "poison pill" was an amendment with restrictions on citizenship for illegals that the Gang would not tolerate.

Idolatry for Trump does not give him the only chance of beating Hillary. The polls show that he loses to Hillary and the other candidates beat her.

Mob rule is not voluntary.

Why? It also tips her off on how to collect welfare for a much longer time.

Clark, change to your cape and get busy.

at least until there is new information to be assimilated.

So you think HRM Donnie will accomplish something better in such a situation, and I think he will go with the flow, fill his bank accounts with graft, and set up all the future looter funding he will need for the rest of his life.
Johnson is no compromise and Trump is suicide.
We disagree and its a waste of time for both of us to continue this.

I would say that as currently configured it is a compromise on principles, as Gary Johnson would soon find out if president. He would have to veto almost everything presented to him and refuse to fund nearly all the programs Congress has already in place. It would be cool to see that, but he would be impeached or killed in short order. The statist culture is a bit too far along for a Gary johnson

That would be The Apprentice.