started out hoping that Cruz would be the nominee.However, its things like this that push me away. We the people are fed up with politicians
That is an entirely naive view. Politicians of all stripes do what is in their best interest it is the people whom you should blame, for failing to vote their interest on an intelligent informed basis.
I would put those propose to vote for Donald Trump in that category.
Really now Nathan, would you feel that way if one of Trump’s people had gone on Chris Matthews and stated that even if Ted Cruz had a plurality of votes to be nominated that it would be perfectly ok to cast that aside in favor of a ‘brokered convention’?
I can hear the shrieks and wailing now.
it is the people whom you should blame, for failing to vote their interest on an intelligent informed basis.Of course you would because everyone knows you're the most intelligent, best informed person to ever walk the planet and your comment, as idiotic as it seems, has nothing to do with your disdain for Trump and his supportersI would put those propose[sic] to vote for Donald Trump in that category.
I agree with you.
The person who wants to be president should pay for all of the extra delegates he needs to become President, if his or her nomination is in doubt.
“That is an entirely naive view. Politicians of all stripes do what is in their best interest it is the people whom you should blame, for failing to vote their interest on an intelligent informed basis.”
You’re defending not only a brokered convention but Cruz’s plan to steal the election by it?
Cruz has shown he’s just a typical politician, just as slimy as all the rest.
Between this and attacking Trump behind closed doors then not being man enough to admit it, I see his true colors. I think his being the bad boy of the Senate was just an act to run for president on it. I wouldn’t vote for him now.
Trump actually acknowledged the issue the other day when he said that he believes the convention would give him trouble if he was even two votes short of a majority of the delegates. That’s not agreeing to such a thing, but it is acknowledging that the convention sees differently a candidate who has a majority and one who doesn’t.
That’s actually a sane way for a party to look at a primary. A plurality vote winner is not necessarily the best candidate depending on small their plurality is.
If Trump were to have 34%, Cruz 33%, and Rubio 33%, then Trump would have more people having voted for him than the other leading candidate, but in terms of republican voters across America, 67% would have NOT supported him.
It would only be sane to sit down and discuss the best course of action. I don’t think the right answer is to impose someone who ran even more weakly or who hasn’t run at all on the party (A Bush, A Romney, A Pence), but I do think that it calls on them to find some way to get as many of those votes on that ticket as possible.
They should take the VP selection away from the Front Runner. If his plurality is just 34%, he should also have to agree on appointed X person as SecDef or SecState. He hasn’t demonstrated sufficient support to be permitted to make such selections purely on his own strength of support.
These are all party rules and not constitutional issues, so they could be implemented fairly easily if so desired.
Why would something that someone from a super PAC says push you away from Cruz? You do know that by law Cruz has no control over what any PAC says or does on his behalf, right?
Politicians of all stripes do what is in their best interest it is the people whom you should blame, for failing to vote their interest on an intelligent informed basis...
I think the people who voted for Cruz for Senator thought they were voting on an intelligent, informed basis. He ran as a tea party candidate didn’t he? He went to Washington, immediately supports big government when convenient, makes plans to abandon his Senate position to run for President and now is at the beck and call of very big money. And still misleading his backers.
So says a guy who makes his life outside of the U.S.
Love ya, Nathan, but you've developed a narrow and blinkered view of where America is, and what we most need for our national survival at this time. More and more, your views sound like so much theoretical pontificating.
Perhaps you need to come home for a spell and spend some time in the trenches under the current regime to truly understand Trump's appeal.