Posted on 04/18/2016 8:36:31 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Donald Trump is complaining that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is racking up “voterless” victories in states such as Colorado and Wyoming, where delegates are chosen by a “small handful of elites” who are “sidelining” Republican voters.
This is dead wrong. In both Colorado and Wyoming, all registered Republican voters in the state had the chance to vote and participate in the delegate selection process.
The Wyoming Republican Party website explains the process clearly: “Delegates to the state convention are elected by the county conventions. Delegates to the county convention are elected by precinct caucuses in their respective counties. Any person registered to vote Republican as of the call for precinct caucuses in a given precinct may vote in that precinct’s caucus” (emphasis added).
In other words, there is a whole lot of voting going on. All Republicans in Wyoming had the chance to go to their precinct and vote for delegates who support their preferred candidate. And they did so in record numbers. In Laramie County, for example, the lines ran out the door on Super Tuesday, and turnout was up almost 400 percent compared with 2012. “The lines outside, they are amazing,” said Glen Chavez, a first-time caucus-goer. “If you’ve never taken part in something like this, get involved. If you want to make the difference, you make the change.”
The same was true for Colorado. Under Article XII of the Colorado Republican Party’s bylaws, any person who is a resident of a precinct for 30 days and is a registered voter “affiliated with the Republican Party” for at least two months can vote in a precinct caucus. Any such person can also run for delegate.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The rules are rigged in favor of a two party system. It is very difficult for third parties to challenge the two major parties. And some of us think we really have a Uniparty with the Dems and Reps being just two wings of the same party.
In the US, the parties make their own rules, not the government.
There is plenty of government involvement (federal and state) in the electoral system. The operations of the parties are circumscribed by laws and regulations. We have campaign finance laws.
In 1975, Congress created the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to administer and enforce the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) - the statute that governs the financing of federal elections. The duties of the FEC, which is an independent regulatory agency, are to disclose campaign finance information, to enforce the provisions of the law such as the limits and prohibitions on contributions, and to oversee the public funding of Presidential elections.
The Commission is made up of six members, who are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Each member serves a six-year term, and two seats are subject to appointment every two years. By law, no more than three Commissioners can be members of the same political party, and at least four votes are required for any official Commission action. This structure was created to encourage nonpartisan decisions. The Chairmanship of the Commission rotates among the members each year, with no member serving as Chairman more than once during his or her term.
That’s exactly what I was thinking when I saw all the (Cruzer) claims that the rules were known way ahead of time.
The perception is that the CO delegate assignment was rigged. Even if the rules *were* prominently posted at our local planning department in Alpha Centauri.
It's known as strategy, and looking at the bigger picture. Trump could have wasted a lot of time and his own money courting delegates in a state where the party bosses were doing everything they could to block him out--or he could have let them have that little victory and used it for strategic advantage. And that's what it looks like he did.
It is hard to argue that Cruz has actually benefited. He's dropped to third place in some polls--which really cuts into his ability to get any more delegates.
Those delegates were stolen fair and square. Rules is rules.
Amanda for sure. Just too many public clues left by Amanda herself.
Not sure there’s any others but one is enough to puncture the religious posturing.
Pyrrhic victory for Ted.
Yep Amanda has a big mouth
Addicted to social media like many a feline today
You can see the pain on Heidi Cruz face.....unfortunately
I agree with you. The excerpt you grabbed from my post, was a quoted excerpt I grabbed from another post. ;-)
Thank you for actually proving my point.
“Colorado public notice laws require notices be uploaded to http://publicnoticecolorado.com. Go search “republican precinct caucus” and you will see the notices.”
“I await the response of dsc to your important post setting out the legal requirement to publicize a time and place of the meetings.”
Public notices are traditionally published in newspapers and posted in public places. To create a web site and pretend that everyone should magically know about it is thoroughly dishonest.
I doubt that one Coloradan in a thousand has ever heard of http://publicnoticecolorado.com. I read a lot, I talk to a lot of people…not living in a cave here, but I had never heard of it.
I’d be very interested to learn how BuckeyeTexan found out about that site.
“Newspaper ads well hidden? C’mon!”
What newspaper ads?
“Act like what?”
I was speaking of remarks like this: “Mere allegations of voter fraud, or even malicious intention and dark suspicions are not evidence.”
Not just that, but I haven’t the time or inclination for a recitation of grievances.
As for what I haven’t seen you do before, I haven’t seen you react as you do here.
“Times and places of meetings are closely held to prevent interference by the voters.”
I just spent a few minutes doing a web search on “Colorado precinct caucus locations.” One site had where you put your address in and it would give the location, but it is now closed as the caucuses are over. Maybe it never was working. http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Candidates/FAQs/caucuses.html
Another site had a map of the counties, then the precincts and click on the precincts and it gave the location. http://gazette.com/2016-caucus
All precincts were at 7 pm on March 1.
I suppose there could be errors, moved locations, etc. But it doesn’t look to me like there is a coordinated attempt to obscure the locations. (And the time isn’t confusing at all - 7 pm on March 1).
“I suppose there could be errors, moved locations, etc.”
When I searched, nothing like that came up.
All of the newspaper ads that are conveniently compiled for you and uploaded to your state website.
“When any legal notice is required by law to be published in any newspaper, the newspaper publishing the notice shall, at no additional cost to the person or entity placing the notice, place the notice on a statewide web site established and maintained by an organization representing a majority of Colorado newspapers as a repository for the notices.”
No, it isn't dishonest. It's extremely convenient for you. Newspapers still publish the traditional public notices. Now they are required by CO law to take the second step of uploading the notices to a centralized repository at that web site.
I’d be very interested to learn how BuckeyeTexan found out about that site.
Google. It's a new fangled research tool on the interwebz. ;)
Marc Thiessen, GOPe shill.
WaPo Pravda on the Potomac.
The Vogon Council has reassigned your allotment of galactic delegates.
All your Primaries belong to us.
Sincerely, the Vogon Cubanadians.
Love that phrase!
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.