Posted on 02/05/2016 5:21:09 PM PST by JSDude1
coerce: persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.
Please explain how telling a voter that you think their candidate may be dropping out of the race constitutes “using force or threats”.
I have no idea what "4 against one" is, there was no coercion, and the people attending were "caucus goers", they weren't "voters".
Do you know the difference between what a candidate can do at a caucus vs what a candidate can't do to a voter?
Don’t ask me. Ask the judge who made the statement.
I’m no lawyer.
He says Iowa law is unique in that you can’t coerce a voter. Branstad said there could be repercussions.
So, the bottom line is what their inquiries turn up.
Again...we have a suspect election in Iowa.
Rule #1 in politics:
The candidate controls the narrative handed to the press. Carson or a trusted aide did not control that narrative.
Carson may have been going to Fla in order calm down a rebelling staff. He did not control the narrative, a noobie error.
Cruz’s people informed their charges of the CNN report. Nothing more than that.
Carson’s error was one of a number of errors which he has made.
I doubt that anyone changed from Carson to Cruz or Rubio because of the screw up. Carson supporters have stuck with him through thick and thin. Their explanation is that he is not a politician. If he was they would not have supported him in the beginning. I approve of their good sense even though I am a Cruz supporter.
He said Iowa law accounted for the difference.
I think it’s called outnumbered
Apparently he's not going to waste money on actually running for office - no staff, no public events, just his bus running from place to place without him on it.
Actually, neither of us know what his plan of attack is.
He’s flush with cash, he’s streamlined, and he says he’s staying in until Cleveland.
Of course it was malicious. If only 4 voters from each of the 1500 precincts swayed their vote from Carson to Cruz, then Trump would have won.
Another thing, did they even bother to verify what CNN said by asking Carson directly. I have seen no evidence of that.
In short, they were deceitful and unethical.
But as they say, all is fair in war and politics. There is just something about Cruz that I have not liked ever since the first debate.
Just out of curiosity: Do you think his old staff made the right moves?
The statute only refers to using duress to either force a person to or prevent a person from voting, registering to vote, assisting someone to do so, or sign a petition. No one was forced to vote, and no one was prevented from voting. So someone is blowing smoke in this case. Persuading someone to vote for someone else cannot be considered coercion or duress unless you have threatened them.
Ben’s staff? I think the problem Ben has had is that he listens to Armstrong Williams too much. But the biggest problem is the candidate - he just doesn’t seem to have the fire in the belly. He is a good man and an amazing surgeon - he is just not a very good candidate.
And the judge thought it fit.
I’m not a judge. Are you?
Since when is it the responsibility of a campaign to verify what another campaign tells a news station? Maybe Trump should have verified whether or not Cruz really was NBC before speculating on it publicly - I mean I'm sure Cruz lost more votes over that than Carson lost. Isn't it Trump's responsibility to verify such a charge before he makes it?
LOL.
Morgan & Morgan is the top donor to Hillary Clinton's Campaign Committee.
Come on Xzy!
So is Goldman.
Cruz’s buddy.
And persuading someone to vote for a certain candidate is what a candidate's team is supposed to do at a caucus!
These aren't voters waiting in line to vote. They are caucus goers. The candidates' teams persuading people to vote a certain way aren't breaking electioneering laws, because persuading is what they are supposed to be doing at a caucus.
As I said, Judge Ferrer and the M & M law firm that he works for is Hillary Rodham Clinton's top Campaign CMTE donor.
She works there right?
A VP?
Lot's a people work at GS. Many years ago I interviewed at GS.
GS is giving their big money to Hillary and Rubio.
Cruz gets 99.95% of his PAC money NOT from GS, but instead from patriots.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.