Thread: BREAKING NEWS: Trump agrees to sign GOP loyalty pledge

BREAKING NEWS: Trump agrees to sign GOP loyalty pledge

• FoxNews.com
• Today at 11:14 AM

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announces he will pledge not to run as an independent following a meeting Thursday with the Republican National Committee chairman

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/03/rnc-presses-trump-to-pledge-no-independent-2016-run/?intcmp=hpbt2


RNC presses Trump to pledge no independent 2016 run

Published September 03, 2015 FoxNews.com



The Republican National Committee is pressing to convince Donald Trump to sign a pledge not to run as an independent in 2016, after having already secured such commitments from several other GOP candidates.

Trump, the GOP presidential frontrunner, was the only one who did not raise his hand when the 10 top-polling candidates were asked at last month's Fox News debate whether they'd commit not to mount an outside White House bid.

Fox News has learned that the RNC on Wednesday began reaching out to several GOP campaigns asking their candidates to sign the new pledge.

But RNC Chairman Reince Priebus plans to personally visit Trump in New York City on Thursday afternoon -- with the pledge at the heart of the meeting, a GOP source told Fox News.

Trump was scheduled to hold a press availability Thursday afternoon, after the meeting.

The pledge states in part that if the GOP contender does not become the nominee: "I will endorse the 2016 Republican presidential nominee regardless of who it is," and "I will not seek to run as an independent or write-in candidate nor will I seek or accept the nomination for president of another party."

More on this...

• Christie signs RNC party loyalty pledge on Fox News
  
  

The Associated Press reported that RNC officials had been working privately with Trump's campaign for several weeks to avert the possibility of Trump making a third-party run. In recent days, Trump has suggested he would soon decide whether to rule out an independent campaign.

"I think a lot of people are going to be very happy," he said Saturday in Nashville.

Several other candidates already have made a similar commitment.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed the pledge during an appearance Thursday on Fox News.

"I'm in, I signed," he said.

Commitments also came in from the campaigns of Ohio Gov. John Kasich; former New York Gov. George Pataki; former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush; former HP CEO Carly Fiorina; retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson;Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

The pledge also follows Virginia and South Carolina GOP state parties making a similar pledge effort.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015.../?intcmp=hpbt2

Won't it be interesting to watch Rand Paul and Jeb Bush 'supporting' Trump if he is the nominee?

RNC should think about what they are asking for. It works both ways.

Trump signs pledge not to run as independent in 2016

Published September 03, 2015 FoxNews.com




Donald Trump announced Thursday he has signed a GOP pledge not to run as an independent in 2016, after a personal appeal from the Republican Party chairman.

"I have signed the pledge," Trump said, holding it up.

The decision by the Republican presidential front-runner helps ease concerns among party leadership that an outside Trump bid -- should he not win the nomination -- could threaten the party's chances in the general election by peeling off votes.

The party began circulating the pledge to virtually all the Republican campaigns earlier this week. But Trump was the obvious concern. He had been the only one who did not raise his hand when the 10 top-polling candidates were asked at last month's Fox News debate whether they'd commit not to mount an independent White House bid.

Trump, after meeting Thursday with party boss Reince Priebus, said the chairman has been "extremely fair."

"I just wanted fairness from the Republican Party," Trump said. After holding up the pledge, he said, "I will be totally pledging my allegiance to the Republican Party, and the conservative principles for which it stands."

More on this...

• Christie signs RNC party loyalty pledge on Fox News
  
  

Trump said he got nothing in return, and sees no circumstances under which he would "tear up that pledge."

The pledge states in part that if the GOP contender does not become the nominee: "I will endorse the 2016 Republican presidential nominee regardless of who it is," and "I will not seek to run as an independent or write-in candidate nor will I seek or accept the nomination for president of any other party."

The Associated Press reported that RNC officials had been working privately with Trump's campaign for several weeks to avert the possibility of Trump making a third-party run.

Several other candidates already have made a similar commitment.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed the pledge during an appearance Thursday on Fox News.

"I'm in, I signed," he said.

Commitments also came in from the campaigns of Ohio Gov. John Kasich; former New York Gov. George Pataki; former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush; former HP CEO Carly Fiorina; retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson;Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

The pledge also follows Virginia and South Carolina GOP state parties making a similar pledge effort.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...dent-2016-run/

Remember that Donald Trump’s loyalty pledge means almost nothing


By Chris Cillizza September 3 at 2:35 PM
Trump pledges loyalty to RNC

GOP front-runner Donald Trump signed a formal pledge crafted by the Republican National Committee that he will not run for president as an independent if he doesn't win the party's nomination.

Which is fine. And a good thing for the RNC, which deserves credit for navigating the murky waters of Trumpworld.

But there is absolutely no reason to think that simply by the act of signing this pledge, Trump will somehow be legally bound to not run as anything but a Republican in 2016. He won't be.

This pledge is not, as my colleague Bob Costa notes, a legally binding document. It's like the sort of pledge you get your kids to sign that they will do their homework, make their beds and eat their vegetables before they can play with your iPhone. It's a statement of intention, but not a binding one.

Do I think Trump is secretly plotting a third party bid if he winds up not winning the Republican nomination? No, not at present. Do I think that Trump believes that he will be bound by this pledge from running if he decides that's what he wants to do? Absolutely not.


Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump listens during a news conference Aug. 27 after speaking at the TD Convention Center in Greenville, S.C. (Richard Shiro/AP)

What in Trump's relatively short time as a presidential candidate (or much longer time as a person who takes positions on various issues) suggests that he would feel at all compelled to abide by a pledge put together by the head of a party that he is a) only a relatively recent convert to and b) can't really hurt him, financially or otherwise, if he decides to break it?

Trump's entire candidacy is premised on how he doesn't owe anyone anything and how no one can tell him what to do. So, for the moment, it's in Trump's interest to play nice with the GOP establishment -- since it might allay some fears of voters who are thinking about being for him but wonder if he is, actually, one of them.

But if Trump, at any point over the next few months, feels hard done by the GOP establishment -- or if his poll numbers begin to fade -- is there anything in what he will sign today that keeps him from breaking the pledge not to run? No.

Yes, Trump would have to answer for his broken pledge among some Republican voters who took him at his word. But given Trump's anti-establishment message, there would almost certainly be a big chunk of disaffected Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who would likely take his side in a fight with the national party.

Point is: This is a good day for the RNC, which is showing its ability to bring some order to what has been a wild race to date.

But don't assume that Donald Trump signing a piece of paper in front of a bunch of cameras is anything more than a nicely-turned bit of political theater. Because, well, it isn't.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...lmost-nothing/

I know many folks will disagree with this and it is too bad that Trump is being forced into a corner on his issue. However, Trump running as an Independent would be a huge gift to the Democrat nominee. I don't even want to consider a continuation of Obama's policies for another 4-8 years.

this post has been deleted by me

Has anyone considered that Donald Trump has intended all along to pledge his support to the GOP and not run as a third party spoiler? Is this an example of Trump the consummate deal maker? By withholding a pledge and keeping people guessing about a third party run, he was able to get a lot of news media attention for himself, pushing the other candidates into the background. By being cagey Trump got a lot of publicity and a lot of newsmedia coverage, and it didn’t cost him a dime. Can it be that Trump took a calculated gamble that might have jeopardize the support of hardcore GOP voters for the potential prize of a lot of publicity and grabbing the spotlight, a gamble that he would ultimately gain more by not immediately promising blind party loyalty. Now those hardcore GOP voters will certainly view Trump favorably.

Is this the art of the deal being performed in politics? Perhaps a good deal maker should be willing to walk away from negotiations (at least temporarily). I think Donald Trump is much shrewder than most people realize. And it causes me to believe he would be a great president. I believe that Trump is a man who knows how to negotiate with Congressional politicians or foreign governments and get a good deal for America.

TRUMP 2016 MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

Originally Posted by csarbww

If any Republican RINO becomes president (and that includes Ben Carson) there will be continuation of Obama's policies for another 4 years and that is not an exaggeration. Look at how Republicans have done virtually nothing to stop Obama. It must be Walker, Santorum, Cruz or Trump. Anyone other than these four as president will do nothing significant to end the illegal alien invasion that is destroying our country. We would be better off to destroy the Republican Party and bring our national crisis to a rapid climax. Perhaps sudden and drastic changes would finally scare the hell out of apathetic citizens and (with conservative leaders) motivate them to take actions that would preserve liberty and our borders. The gradual continuation of Obama's Marxist policies camouflaged underneath a Republican image could keep the public unaware and passive about a gradually growing despotism until it became too late to stop.

If the GOP will not give us a hard conservative president determined to stop the illegal alien invasion (sorry Ben Carson is not a hard conservative and not likely to fight hard to end the alien invasion) we should work to destroy it quickly and drive a steak through its heart. And then quickly organize Americans to fight against a Marxists Democrat despotic government.

I'm sorry but I cannot agree with your assessment. It's my opinion that you're missing the big picture here. Furthermore, just imagine the damage a few more liberals on the U.S. Supreme Court would do. Make no mistake about it, I don't want to see a RINO end up in the White House and I will not vote for one. With that said though, I can think of something I would want to see even less and that is a Hillary Clinton presidency. We'll just have to continue to do our best at making sure we don't get a RINO or Hillary.

I agree with you on Santorum, Walker, and Trump. However, I must disagree with your position on Cruz. He may be the best of the worst but he's still part of the worst.

Ted Cruz hasn’t ruled out legal status for undocumented immigrants

03/27/15 03:13 PM—UPDATED 03/27/15 04:20 PM

By Benjy Sarlin
Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz’s office on Friday indicated the Texas senator remains open to a path to legal status for undocumented workers, putting him at odds with conservatives who deride such a position as unacceptable “amnesty.”
Cruz opposed the Senate bipartisan immigration bill and its proposed path to citizenship that passed in 2013, but he also indicated to The Texas Tribune that year that he supported giving some undocumented immigrants permission to stay in the country with more limited legal status. He noted that an amendment he had filed to strip the Senate legislation of its citizenship component deliberately “did not change the underlying work permit from the [bill]” that would allow undocumented immigrants to remain in the country without fear of deportation.

Cruz has almost never discussed his support for legalization since then, instead focusing his public statements on passing border security legislation and making changes to the legal immigration system first. In early 2014, he decried a short-lived proposal by House GOP leaders that granted legal status – but not necessarily citizenship – to certain immigrants as “amnesty for those here illegally.”

More, recently Cruz has helped lead the charge in Congress against what he calls Obama’s “illegal executive amnesty” which would grant temporary work permits to undocumented immigrants. He’s even threatening a government shutdown to block the measure.

Asked by msnbc about where Cruz stands now on legalization, campaign spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said that the senator has been “consistent” and confirmed that the views he expressed in the Tribune had not changed. She described his amendment to the Senate “gang of eight” bill as an effort ”to improve a very bad bill” that he ultimately opposed.

While Frazier said Cruz fought the bill’s path to citizenship because it “flies in the face of the rule of law,” she declined to apply the same label when asked about legal status in the right circumstances.

“I think his main priority is dealing with the border security component and making sure that we know who is coming into the country and making sure that we have control over who is coming into the country and then we can deal with what to do with the people who are already here,” she said.
Her comments come a day after rival GOP contender Scott Walker renounced his past support for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants after previously expressing support for the idea.
Cruz’s position on legal status for undocumented immigrants would put him (on paper at least) just a little closer to Jeb Bush, the Republican candidate most overtly pro-immigration reform, who has floated legal status short of citizenship as a possible legislative compromise. It also bears similarities to another potential 2016 contender, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, one of the co-sponsors of the bipartisan Senate bill. Rubio has since renounced his old legislation in favor of a piecemeal approach that starts with border security and enforcement legislation before moving on to any legalization component.
The idea anyone could get to the right of Cruz on immigration, who has repeatedly threatened to shut down the government to defund Obama’s “illegal executive amnesty” might come as a surprise. But by the terms of the immigration debate set out so far, his bona fides could absolutely come into question. Many conservatives, including the leading anti-immigration groups, consider any policy that falls short of deportation “amnesty.” It’s this fundamental divide, far more than any argument over legalization vs. citizenship, that has paralyzed GOP attempts at immigration reform.

“The baseline is anything that lets illegal aliens stay illegally,” Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors reducing immigration levels, told msnbc. “Anything else is word games.”
Krikorian told msnbc Cruz’s position easily fits the bill.

“It’s the same thing: ‘I’m against amnesty, but amnesty doesn’t include giving people work permits,’” Krikorian said. “Really? Then Obama didn’t give amnesty to all those people.”

Pro-reform Republicans object to this definition, however, arguing that “amnesty” means offering legal status to immigrants without conferring any penalties. This lack of an clear definition of amnesty, beyond “thing conservatives don’t like,” can create a lot of confusion in trying to tease out candidate’s positions.

Cruz’s views are likely to come under greater scrutiny now that he’s an official presidential candidate. Anti-immigration group NumbersUSA published a blog post on Thursday calling attention to this little-discussed part of Cruz’s legislative history, writing that he “opposes citizenship but supports work permits for illegal aliens.” It has since been removed. Roy Beck, executive director for NumbersUSA, told msnbc that the post published prematurely and was meant for a larger evaluation of the whole presidential field. He said Cruz had typically sided with the group on most issues, but was eager to learn more about his position on legalization.

“Work permits are the one thing we feel is most harmful,” Beck said. “We will be rating [Cruz] on that. I would say at this point he’s got a pretty good record, but there is some uncertainty.”

The American Immigration Council published a pro-reform piece this week noting that, beyond opposing citizenship and Obama’s executive actions on immigration, his positions are still unclear.

Almost every likely Republican 2016 candidate has at least flirted with immigration reform in the past and will face pressure to follow Walker’s lead and renounce past support for a path to citizenship before the race is over. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul both backed a path to citizenship in 2013, for example, though Paul didn’t like to call it that and both opposed the bipartisan Senate bill. Mike Huckabee recently defended his support for granting citizenship to young undocumented immigrants, commonly known as DREAMers.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ted-cruz-...nted-imigrants

Excerpt:

Cruz was highly critical of the 2013 comprehensive immigration package, sponsored by Republican Sen. Marco Rubio — another presidential contender — and seven other senators together dubbed the “Gang of Eight,” in terms of how it addressed illegal immigration. But he said the bill didn’t go “nearly far enough” to increase legal immigration, and offered amendments to build significantly on those increases.
“I think high-tech immigrants are an unambiguous good for our economy, and for our country,” he said, referring to an amendment that would raise the limit on high-skilled workers by 500 percent, from 65,000 to 325,000. “And I think bringing more high-skilled high-tech immigrants to this country generates economic growth and produces jobs.”

Another amendment Cruz offered was designed to increase the overall limit on immigration, with a priority for high-skilled workers and their nuclear families. It would also have created a new type of visa for workers in any occupation the Department of Labor designates with a labor shortage.

“I would suggest it is the bosses of unions who would like to see legal immigration limited,” he said. “I think we need to expand legal immigration, and at the same time secure the borders.”

The foreign-born population under The Gang of Eight bill would have grown at the fastest rate in American history, hitting a record high of 15 percent of the population by 2020, or one in seven Americans, according to an analysis of Congressional Budget Office numbers by Center for Immigration Studies, a research group that favors lower immigration numbers. By 2033 the population would have hit 65.2 million under the law.

A spokesman for Cruz told The Daily Caller News Foundation he stands by his 2013 comments, but that his campaign is working on a current, detailed immigration platform.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/27/cr...t-with-walker/

Cruz may or may not legalize current illegals, but one thing is for certain ........ he will send legal immigration numbers through the roof if given a chance!

http://www.alipac.us/f9/trump-hits-3...w-poll-322871/

I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY OF THEM IN THE ONE ONLY TRUMP IN THE WH THEY ARE NOT FIT TO BE IN THE WH TO ME NOT ONE OF THEM KNOW WHAT THE HELL GOING ON ALL TALK IM GOING TO DO THIS IF IM PRESIDENT THAT GOOD ONE ,I SEE THEM ALL & I DON'T LIKE THEM .TO ME THEY ARE ALL TWO FACE .TRUMP IS THE ONLY ONE THAT TELL IT LIKE IT IS . &THAT NO LIE
( GOOD LUCK ) TRUMP FROM WHAT I SEE YOU HAVE THE HOLD USA WITH YOU