Posted on 04/11/2016 7:54:01 PM PDT by reaganaut1
“I do not have to justify my choice of candidate to you. “
Certainly, I was just making an observation!
I disagree with the article and think the author is lying when he said that conventions and caucuses are not undemocratic. I think that making it purposely more difficult for rank and file republican voters to actually vote is inherently not democratic. I do not see where I am wrong.
See, you said: I’v foudn in life that people use percents when they want to fool you. (sic)
So I said . . . aaww, forget about it.
Most people probably did not even know about this until shortly before it happened. I am sure the republican party hacks, the same people who have been screwing over their own voters for decades, did not run bunches of ads letting people know about the changes they instituted in August. I disagree with the article. I think that making it purposely more difficult for rank and file republican voters to actually vote and register their opinion is inherently not democratic. I do not see where I am wrong.
That is not what I said. I think that republicans should vote for the republican nominee. The problem I have with this is that the party hacks in Colorado purposely instituted a process in August to make it much more difficult for rank and file republican voters to actually vote so they could control the outcome. I think this highlights the contempt and distrust the party hacks have for their own voters. They would love to just cut everybody but themselves out of the process and present us party hack turds like Jeb!, Romney or Ryan to vote for in the general. I do not see how I am wrong.
It’s the rules?
That’s a strange argument coming from a party that HAS DONE NOTHING as our president and his friends have BROKEN THE LAW for the past seven years.
Why aren’t they going after Hillary for violating State Department email rules?
Or Bernie Sander’s wife - who’s ripping off the college she works for?
Why is it the rules only apply to the little people?
>>You’re really winning us over.
I’m under the considered judgement that is not possible. Those for him this long, almost nothing he does matters - maybe up to “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”
>>”Cheat Trump supporters..” Trump supporters seem to follow his lead no matter how far fetched. He either wins or was cheated. He’s either a genius or, like his view of America, a victim of others.
Again: It’s a caucus/convention state. determined in stages by attendees by precinct, county, congressional delegation, state convention.
Again.
Your guy - the youtube Trump caucus whiner - skipped the county meeting and then tried to go to state anyway.
So, he was cheated.
All you need to know is Trump lost, so it was unfair and he was cheated. Rinse and repeat.
>>>I’m more convinced than ever that Trump planned Colorado to happen the way it’s happening.
Brilliant! He planned to lose and planned to scream “I was cheated!” Gee who saw that coming?
Whenever Trump loses, he was cheated, because Trump never loses.
This actually works on a lot of folks; same folks, but he needs to keep them and they seem to buy whatever excuse he offers.
I predict, wildly, that he will claim to be the victim again and again, and the same folks will parrot it.
Are you conceding the election to Hillary?
Non sequitur and of course not.
That’s just one of the reasons I don’t support Trump’s nomination; I believe he would lose badly and be bad news on the down ballot as well.
YMMV.
What states will your favorite candidate win that Romney lost?
We all have our opinions and analysis for what little that’s worth.
But, non-subjectively, if we look to what data we have, most indicate that Trump is the worst choice for victory over Hillary, particularly in battleground states.
You're so lacking in confidence in your candidate you won't even say "X will win Ohio"? And you think that vague promise is sufficient that we should abandon Trump for some chump who's so weak he can't beat sure loser Trump? That's your plan?
This only proves what I suspect. Anti-Trumps are much, much more worried about Trump winning than they are about Hillary. What is it about patriotism that scares them so much?
BTW, Trump will win Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Florida and he has a shot at New York.
I’m happy with my response to your question. I don’t think us arguing our analysis on Ohio is worth much.
>>>we should abandon Trump for some chump who’s so weak he can’t beat sure loser Trump?
Primaries are different than general elections of course. And we haven’t yet seen whether Trump will be the winner of the primary.
>>>What is it about patriotism that scares them so much?
Trump’s problems in winning the general are, as I said, not the only reason I don’t support him for the nomination. And it’s not his nationalism. It’s his governing philosophy - or lack thereof - his failure to address the real issues and his solutions. I think he’d make a bad president economically, socially and in foreign affairs.
I don’t think it would be much of a win in terms of good for the country.
I realize you disagree, but it’s not for lack of patriotism on your part.
Look at the big picture and THINK!
I gave the big picture. It’s pretty simple to figure out.
As Donald said: “I only complain about the ones where we have difficulty.”
No you are not looking the big picture, you are flat out ignoring the obvious media play against the cologop and Cruz. Cruz is having to justify and react, he’s on the defensive. Think about it.
If we envision a bigger picture, a grander strategy for Trump it would be: Get your supporters so full of drama and convinced that if Trump doesn’t win, it’s a criminal travesty, have Trump threaten a riot... so the delegates will be too afraid not to to support Trump.
Intimidation. That would be in Trump’s wheelhouse.
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.