Posted on 03/09/2016 8:09:34 AM PST by scooby321
Ted Cruz says he would have no problem with a contested convention over the summer in the event neither he nor Donald Trump secures enough delegates before then to lock up the Republican presidential nomination.
Trump suggested Wednesday morning on "Fox and Friends" that Cruz was making the statement "because he had such a bad night last night."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
I didn’t read your post.
I’ve made myself clear.
Have a nice day.
His Majesty the Donald doesn’t have the majority of delegates elected so far. Most GOP voters DON’T want him. Cruz would beat him one on one. A majority rules, not a plurality.
Why in world should Trump be entitled to the nomination if he doesn’t have a majority of the delegates? Would Romney also have been so entitled if he had fallen short in 2012?
Why in the world should Cruz be criticized for hoping his opponent doesn’t win?
If Trump was behind Cruz by 80 delegates would Trump supporters gracely concede that whoever gets 1 more delegate should win even if both are under 50%? The other delegates should go to hell rather being given the opportunity to decide whether they support Trump or Cruz on the second ballot? Especially considering that polls show Cruz is a stronger general election candidate?
I’m drowning in hypocrisy.
Ping to 442
For the record, so far in the primaries and caucuses, Donald Trump has received 34.86% of the vote (4,345,360 out of 12,465,175 votes cast). 34.86% is not even close to a majority, so it’s silly to argue that “he’s the choice of most Republican voters.”
In terms of delegates won (which is how presidential nominations are decided), Trump has obtained 43.84% of Republican delegates (463 out of 1,056 delegates elected so far). Again, that’s not particularly close to 50%+1. If the Convention was today, Trump would fall well short of being nominated *unless* delegates pledged to other candidates were to vote for Trump. If that happened, then Trump would be nominated, but if the other delegates voted for Cruz instead then Cruz would be nominated. That’s how the rules of the GOP nomination process—and of elementary mathematics—work.
Comparing apples and oranges is silly. I could appreciate it if close, but this isn’t close. Trump has majority delegates and majority votes.
You see, Republican establishment candidates have benefited with these lose primaries. Now not so much.
When a convention can be used to thwart the majority voter when no one comes close to Trump’s level of support, then you bet it’s theft.
How many times a day do Trump supporters have to post this fantasy scenario of theirs? Seriously.
Trumpsters LOVE to scream on this board that they've soured on Cruz and no longer like him now that he "lied" about Trump, took money from Goldman-Sachs, is "not eligible" for President, blah blah blah. If they really feel that way, good, then stop touting your fantasy of Cruz being Trump's shoe-shine boy in his administration. I think its safe to say that neither I nor any other Cruz supporter I've met is excited about Trumpbot fantasy of Ted Cruz working for your guy.
I think its cute how whenever Cruz blasts Trump, their talking point is "Trump lives rent-free in Ted Cruz's head". The reverse is true. Ted Cruz has zero interest in having Trump around. But the bizarro vision of "Vice President Ted Cruz" groveling to "President Trump" with a cheerful "how may I serve you today, o' great one?" lives rent-free in a Trumpbot's head and comes up in their discussions of him at least a half dozen times a day.
Get elected VP and then resign? WTH kinda crackpot idea is that?
mega dittos
OR....TRUMP/anybody but Cruz.
Well said. I am sick to death of the attacks. SICK of it...
Let’s have a fair and square election but the childishness is beyond the pale!!!
We are NOT talking BROKERED.... Cruz and most all of his supporters would scream NO NO NO!!!
Your points are well taken.
But it also is about the fantasy that Trump is anything like Cruz.
Cruz is conservative.
Trump is a liberal con man, like a chameleon, playing conservative willing to say anything that he thinks will work, and will repudiate all his recently ‘conservative’ sounding positions as soon as he thinks it will better work for him.
News that Cruz was on an hour later WAS NOT.
'Hannty' is even spelled wrong yet its still 'Breaking News'
Trump's dummies.
FR has a spellcheck function, if thats too hard for them to use then firefox has an automatic one.
Everyone makes mistakes but the title of a breaking news thread?
‘Why in world should Trump be entitled to the nomination if he doesn’t have a majority of the delegates?’
And why in the world should Cruz be entitled to the nomination if he’s not the front-runner?
That ‘Trumps’ him.
Being fine with freed up delegates is seeking to disenfranchise voters. I don’t even remember who my delegate is. And I confess I don’t even know how GOP EEEE delegates are selected.
That might sound stupid to you, but guess what?
If I don’t know, you can dxxxm well be sure that most voters don’t know. If the front-runner gets knocked out at the convention, it will be hell to pay! And Cruz knows it. He just doesn’t care.
That’s being selfish. That’s why they are getting prepared for riots at the convention.
The front runner is the guy on top. If the convention replaces the front runner with someone who had less popular support?
That’s why they are getting riot gear in place ...
Cleveland Stocking Up On Riot Gear Ahead Of Republican National Convention...
http://www.cleveland.com/rnc-2016/index.ssf/2016/03/cleveland_seeking_to_buy_riot.html
IF CRUZ WERE A STATESMAN, he would fight to be front runner himself and not utter word one about being ‘fine’ with ousting the front runner. He could simply refuse to even consider it.
He blew it. Cruz exposed himself as being more ambitious than patriotic.
I normally try to be judicious about Cruz.
But ousting the front runner at the convention? Teaming up with the Bush family? [Or is that a hoax report?]
“Being fine with freed up delegates is seeking to disenfranchise voters”
No, it isn’t, that is absolutely patently ridiculous. If no one has a majority, no one is entitled. A plurality does not rule, sorry it doesn’t work that way. After the first ballot ALL the delegates are free to vote as they will. Telling them they have to vote for Trump (if he comes in first) is disenfranchising the so far LARGE majority of primary voters that are not voting for him.
Cruz is saying, “I’m the anti-trump.”
And he’s essentially saying, “I might come in number 2 with the popular vote, but we can take out the front runner at the convention.”
Selfish. Unpatriotic. Harmful to the party.
Really that simple.
Who give’s a rat’s patootie whom you annount with the term “frontrunner”? If moderate Mitt Romney hadn’t gotten a *majority* of delegates for the 2012 Convention, I would have fought tooth and nail for Rick Santorum to have been nominated, since MAJORITY RULES and if Santorum had gotten a majority of delegates at tbe convention (by adding delegatesfor him, Newt and other conservatives) then it would mean that SANTORUM WOULD HAVE HAD MAJORITY SUPPORT. Why the heck wouldn’t we have wanted a nominee that was more conservative and who was supported by a majority of delegates (whether on the first or second ballot)? And how would it be “undemocratic” for the choice of the majority of delegates (elected by GOP primary voters for the purpose of nominating the president and VP) to win the nomination?
I see no reason to allow a liberal like Trump—who is *far* more liberal than Romney on most issues, *including immigration* (remember, Trump criticized Romney *from the left* on immigration—to get the nomination if he doesn’t have a majority of delegates. I suspect that he’ll try to make a deal with Kasich (the second most liberal Republican in the race, after Romney) to get Kasich delegates to vote for Trump and maybe get a majority that way, and it’s Trump’s right to do so, but such a result would mean that liberal Republicans, pissed-off (but liberal) Democrats and a few bamboozled conservatives would have taken over the party and nominated the most liberal candidate out there (probably with the second most liberal, Kasich, as his runningmate). I will be on the other camp, fighting to nominate conservative Ted Cruz—by far the most conservative Republican since at least Robert A. Taft to win GOP presidential primaries (yes, Cruz is more conservative than even my heroes Barry Goldwater and Ronaldus Maximus)—even if he entered the Convention lacking even more delegates than Romney to reach a majority. I would hope that all conservatives would come to their senses and back the conservative in the race.
Now you’re comparing Trump with Romney?
Hardly anyone supported Romney on this forum. He was deliberately gaming the primary. Did you know that here in Virginia I could only vote for either Romney or Ron Paul? Our state refused to allow any others to qualify.
So the establishment should have expected a convention fight the way they force fed Romney on us.
But now the establishment wants to undermine us again, and Cruz is falling into the trap, dragging his supporters into defending this divisive strategy.
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.