No presidential candidate, to date, has ever asked the public to supply him with their written wishes for inclusions.
Ergo, NO, neither you nor Jim, nor any member of FR has any say-so in writing the platform.
Unlike you, I wrote the facts. Your embellishments don't refute what I previously had posted.
I suggest that you look up the word "presumptive". I used it correctly. The platform is written BEFORE the final day of the party convention, at which time the PRESUMPTIVE candidate ACCEPTS THE NOMINATION and becomes the CANDIDATE.
If the conservative members of a conservative party select a winning conservative candidate based on a winning conservative platform that the vast majority of said conservative members of said conservative party agree with to a "T," then the platform of said conservative party will contain the winning conservative planks of said winning conservative candidate.
And I'll eat my hat if it turns out otherwise.
Conversely, if a non conservative candidate is selected by the vast majority of the members, then I will guarantee you that at least one or more (and it's probably more) of the conservative planks listed above will be missing or misrepresented.
I do have a bit of a penchant for correct words so you're right. I do prefer it.
does NOT write the platform.......................ALONE.
Never said he did. Do you also suffer from some cognitive comprehension disorder as well as rampant liberalism?
Neither does he have the final word;
I never said he did. See above.
No presidential candidate, to date, has ever asked the public to supply him with their written wishes for inclusions.
True. Also completely irrelevant. The platform is written by the Platform Committee as I indicated previously and documented in the links I thoughtfully provided to you. I see you haven't as of yet actually used them. Perhaps if you took a few minutes away from cheerleading for a pro-infanticide, anti-2nd Amendment northeastern Liberal you might trying popping on over there and actualy reading it.
Ergo,
The word you should be using is 'therefore'.
neither you nor Jim, nor any member of FR has any say-so in writing the platform.
You have no idead whether or not any member of FR is on the Platform Committee. You're simply making an unsupported allegation without any facts. In short, you're talking through your hat.
Unlike you, I wrote the facts
You've done nothing of the sort. I seriously doubt you'd recognize a fact if it walked up to you, introduced itself, and gave you a wedgie.
I suggest that you look up the word "presumptive". I used it correctly.
You used it in a grammatically correct fashion. It was your facts that were incorrect.
And one of your more annoying qualities is your penchant for shouting at people who disagree with you. It does nothing to bolster your position. It does, however, add real credibility to the opinion that you're a flaming jerk.
L