Posted on 04/15/2016 5:42:17 AM PDT by xzins
If someone breaks the rules, and you miss out as a result, that's their fault.
If you don't read the rules, and miss out as a result, that's your fault.
Unlike Cruz’s father who fled to Canada in the heat of the war in 1969 when he was eligible and didn’t return until the war was over in 1975.
This guy was just mad because he didn’t go through the process to become a delegate and then thought he was just going to be let in. Rules? Who cares about the rules? I’m special you know. Give me what I want or I’ll throw a temper tantrum and post it on YouTube.
I had to select a republican ballot to vote for Trump here in Ohio. That automatically assigns you as a ‘republican’ on the state rolls. I have no problem with our downstream, local candidates. I generally know them more or less.
It’s when we get to national and state politics that I want to divorce the republican party.
The only way to really do that is to vote against them. If Trump is denied the nomination by means of dishonesty or fraud, then I’ll not vote for the republican candidate IF Trump runs a legitimate 3rd party campaign that is actually trying to win electoral votes.
Hillary is so corrupt that it is not my desire at all to have her elected. So, any 3rd party I support must be making a real AND a convincing run for electors.
Actually, that's the entire point. If people didn't find out that the system was wrong until after the primary, that proves it was the voter's fault for not keeping themselves informed.
Individual citizens have a responsibility to keep themselves informed. I do not believe for a moment that the August 2015 change in rules was never reported, or that the Colorado papers or media never mentioned the March 1 caucuses. If people really care, then turn off Wheel of Fortune for a few minutes, or skip the bar one night, or give up one afternoon of fishing, and figure out how/when you are supposed to vote. This clown didn't show up at the caucuses. Why not? Didn't see anyone asking that question, or him answering, but that's really the key question in this whole thing.
Why didn't Trump's campaign run a couple of ads prior to March 1 reminding his supporters to show up? Why didn't they have delegates sheets? Why didn't they do a better job of getting people organized? That's why "when they found out" is really all you need to know. If they didn't found out about this system until after the fact, then it was the Trump campaign in Colorado that failed.
I have zero sympathy for people who didn't bother to read the rules, and so screwed themselves. Zero.
That’s been shown to be a lie. He wasn’t a Colorado resident; he’s from New York.
Not really.
You don’t know that vote fraud has taken place until the day of the voting at a minimum. Sometimes afterwards when certain of facts are either thought about or brought to light.
It is okay at times to claim, as you have, that it should have been known. Perhaps it should have. I’m not a Coloradan, so the normal process isn’t known to me. I’d have a really good feel for it in Ohio.
It would be instructive to see how the last 3 or 4 Colorado republican primaries have been conducted.
If this one was substantially different, and if that change had been enacted by a small group of people in leadership positions, then I think it is fair to charge them with voter disenfranchisement.
There are few of them out there. I’ve been told this one is a different person.
“If Trump is denied the nomination by means of dishonesty or fraud, then I’ll not vote for the republican candidate”
But what if he’s denied it based on the actual rules that are in place right now? You know, the ones he even admitted to knowing about since last June? Are you going to stomp your feet about it?
It must be dishonesty or fraud.
When it comes to delegates at the national convention, Paul Manafort is an expert on the subject. In the race to line up delegates for 2nd, 3rd, etc rounds, then that is entirely on each of the candidates.
Personally, I do not like the rule that says the delegates can be bought. That sounds pretty slimy to me. But, if it’s the rule, if all know it, and if all don’t respond to it, then that’s on them. That would be their decision to get beaten.
Secret votes, unpublished votes, etc....those kinds of things I would probably consider fraudulent and dishonest.
And there’s a point at which slimey rules are offensive. Hypothetically, just because they pass a rule that delegates can be kidnapped to keep them from voting, that doesn’t mean it should be supported.
It was a simple yes or no question. Not sure why you had to write 3 paragraphs about it.
It wasn’t a simple yes or no question.
As I recall, it said something about ‘stomping feet’.
That tells me that the person needs a full explanation.
Do you care to actually state the things that you think he lied about, or do you just repeat what your candidate repeats over and over again? Please, if you wish to be useful to others, you should state your accusations with some backup instead of mimicking a sales pitch.
If trump is denied the nomination based on the current rules, will you stomp your feet and walk away? It really is a yes or no question.
It’s a loaded question. It assumes that I am a foot stomper.....a wife beater.
No, I’ll not foot stomp this time.
Yes, I will foot stomp this time.
It’s not really even a friendly question, but I think I’ve been more than polite.
It’s only loaded because you want it to be. Now watch how this works.
I will never vote for Donald Trump. I don’t care what the rules are. If he is the nominee, I will stay home in November.
See. It really isn’t hard.
If you're talking vote fraud, you're right. But that isn't the core of the complaint. The core of the complaint was that the delegate selection system itself, as written, was bad. And as you'll see below, that exact same system had been in effect since 2002.
The real problem is straightforward, has been reported in multiple places, and verified by people who actually attended: 1) not enough Trump supporters showed up at the March 1 caucuses, and 2) the Trump campaign was not sufficiently well organized to present those supporters who did show up with the names of preferred delegates. That's why they lost.
It would be instructive to see how the last 3 or 4 Colorado republican primaries have been conducted.
Good point. Here you go:
The caucus process this year is the same used in prior elections, where party members nominate delegates at the precinct level to higher levels, ultimately culminating in votes for national delegates at the congressional district and state conventions largely based on presidential preference.
http://www.denverpost.com/election/ci_29752109/upset-colorado-donald-trump-campaign-looks-swipe-delegates
According to that article, and you can verify it elsewhere, the Colorado caucus system has been in place since 2002.
The only change was that a non-binding (i.e., doesn't affect delegate selection) straw poll taken at prior caucuses was eliminated after the RNC changed its rules to say that if you held such a vote, it had to be binding. So, in August, Colorado eliminated their non-binding straw poll so that delegates would continue to be selected the exact same way they'd been selected for the past 14 years. And in terms of the non-binding straw poll being eliminated, none of the other caucus states have one either.
The gut was not a delegate and admitted last week that he never attended and was not even a Republican—another staged event.
Trump never loses...he’s always cheated.
It ruins his narrative of being a “winner” if he loses. Gullible people
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.