Chaos in Cleveland redux: deja vu all over again

This article is a good reminder worth a read. Circa 1912 — dang how history warns.

Rules of the GOP Fraternal Order

A lesson from the 1912 Taft-TR Convention.

By Jeffrey Lord – 4.15.16 | American Spectator

Rule One: Don’t question the rules.

Rule Two: Unless you want to change the rules to preserve the Ruling Order.

The other day, a surely very nice guy who was identified as a former Colorado Republican Party Chairman appeared on CNN to discuss the latest state of play in the Trump-RNC dust-up. Among other things he dismissed concern over Colorado’s rules for selecting delegates by saying that they had been in place since… 1912.

Uh-oh. In saying this the ex-chairman clearly unwittingly opened a door that makes Donald Trump’s point about GOP Establishment-types monkeying with the rules, and makes it more or less exactly. Why? Well, hop into the time traveling machine and come with me back to, yes, 1912.

The Republican Party is in absolute turmoil. President William Howard Taft is in the White House, the protégé of his predecessor and old friend President Theodore Roosevelt having won the White House four years earlier after TR declined to run for a third term. But now? Teddy Roosevelt is upset with his old friend. It seems Will Taft has turned out to be a tad more conservative than the trust-busting TR approved. OK, actually a lot more conservative. And so TR, more than furious, has plunged headlong into the presidential race, directly challenging Taft for the GOP nomination. Also in the race was a third candidate: the liberal Wisconsin Senator Robert LaFollette.

They battle across the country, with Roosevelt winning 9 of 12 states that had primaries. But the rest of the then-48 states had no primaries. And as the Chicago Convention approached, the delegate numbers stood this way: …/

Continue reading: http://spectator.org/articles/66052/rules-gop-fraternal-order

Well, it did happen before. Oops, what was that Teddy called it?
“We stand at Armageddon, and we battle for the Lord.”
Them are pretty inflammatory words.

What sticks in my craw is that they all accused Trump of issuing threats for predicting or stating that there very well could be trouble at the convention. But countless other people, even Cruz, are apparently free to speak about the coming chaos in Cleveland. . However threat accusations come only as Trump talks about pending pandemonium.

(The Hill) “Any time you hear someone talking about a brokered convention, it is the Washington establishment in a fevered frenzy, they are really frustrated because all their chosen candidates, their golden children, the voters keep rejecting,

So they seize on this plan of a brokered convention, and the D.C. power brokers will drop someone in who is exactly to the liking of the Washington establishment. If that would happen, we would have a manifest revolt on our hands all across this country.” — Cruz to CPAC

Even the media has alluded to problems. In fact, media has talked about the ensuing Convention turmoil as good for their business. Trump warns about problems and they accuse him of inciting violence. At this point, it would be hard to believe there would not be problems at the convention. I mean I wonder what Vegas odds are predicting?

Of course to talk about the desperate Party apparatus and fed up voters is now construed as a threat. Meanwhile, GOPe have contemplated running an independent candidate. No, let us focus on predictions and warnings as threats.