Welcome to politics, Mr. Trump: You won Louisiana’s battle but lost the war

Washington Times ^ | 03/28/2016 | Kelly Riddel

[SeekAndFind]

Oh, how cruel the game of politics can be — especially if you don’t have a ground game.

On Sunday night, Donald Trump tweeted, “Just to show you how unfair Republican primary politics can be, I won the State of Louisiana and get less delegates than Cruz — lawsuit coming.”

It’s true: On March 5, Mr. Trump took 41.4 percent of the Louisiana vote compared with Ted Cruz’s 37.8 percent and Marco Rubio’s 11.2 percent. Mr. Trump was awarded 18 delegates, so was Mr. Cruz, and Mr. Rubio got 5 delegates.

So what happened between March 5 and Sunday? Mr. Rubio dropped out, and under Louisiana delegate rules, those pledged to Mr. Rubio became unbound — meaning they were free to choose whatever remaining candidates were left in the race. Looks like they chose Mr. Cruz.

Mr. Cruz knows that in order to secure the number of delegates he needs to take the Republican nomination, he’s going to have to woo over Mr. Rubio’s supporters — and although he’s fallen short of an endorsement from the senator from Florida (as of now), many in the establishment lane are seeing Mr. Cruz as the only way to stop Mr. Trump.

Not to mention the grunt work Mr. Cruz’s team is putting in.

Mr. Cruz’s campaign has worked a state-by-state delegate strategy — both encouraging his supporters to run as delegates and by lobbying them to run and serve on various committees at the Republican National Convention.

As The Wall Street Journal noted last week: “Mr. Cruz’s supporters seized five of Louisiana’s six slots on the three powerful committees that will write the rules and platform at the Republican National Convention and mediate disputes over delegates’ eligibility this summer in Cleveland.”

[Nifster]

true words.

and this november could be particularly ugly

[Nifster]

yup....most states don’t even list the delegates or slate of a particular candidate. You vote for the candidate and expect the party officials to follow the will of the electorate....and they don’t

And these yobs wonder why folks are so mad at them

[Rational Thought]

Well if we don’t like the rules, why don’t we make them change the rules? Or is it only that certain folks don’t like the rules when it doesn’t play out in their favor. I suspect that....if the roles were reversed and Trump was stumping for those Rubio delegates and getting them ...in order to beat Cruz, it would all magically and suddenly be “ok”. Right?

No, not in my book. If that's your justification for actions like this, then I assume you'd be fine with a brokered convention where Cruz is given the shaft in favor of Romney, right...I mean, it would all be according to rules?

If we're going to use a delegate system, it should be proportional to the vote, no matter who's running. We should also junk the caucuses while we're at it.

[okie01]

Easy answer. Hillary.

Is it your contention that, if Cruz should defeat Trump in a head-to-head ballot at the convention, Hillary would win because...what?

Because Trump supporters would not vote for the Republican candidate?

[The Toll]

That is correct. If the frontrunner is not the nominee, there will be no point.

[XenaLee]

No, not in my book. If that's your justification for actions like this, then I assume you'd be fine with a brokered convention where Cruz is given the shaft in favor of Romney, right...I mean, it would all be according to rules?

If we're going to use a delegate system, it should be proportional to the vote, no matter who's running. We should also junk the caucuses while we're at it.

What do you mean "if" we're going to use a delegate system? We are using a delegate system, but the rules in place are rules for everyone to follow, even Trump. I really doubt that the shaft will be in favor of Romney. That's just based on rumor and speculation. Point is, it's perfectly legal for Cruz to pick up delegates that were for Rubio now. Nothing for Trump to whine about. He should have expected it if he's even half as brilliant as his supporters claim that he is.

[beandog]

You know it’s really exhausting having to stay up all night and tweet stupid stuff. How can anybody expect the Donald to keep track of insignificant issues like winning delegates. They should all just vote for him because he’s the Donald and really great at everything.

[XenaLee]

Whatever it takes to satisfy his colossal ego. Problem is, America is in distress and Trump cares more about his ego than about America, as proven by the fact that he supported the same leftist Democrats that are still, as we speak, destroying us from within.

And then there’s this....which just goes to illustrate my misgivings and suspicions about Trump all along.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ex-trump-insider-donald-doesn%e2%80%99t-want-to-be-president/ar-BBr2kwt?li=BBnb7Kz

[okie01]

If the frontrunner is not the nominee, there will be no point.

So, if the "frontrunner" never commands a majority of the delegates, as the rules require him to do in order to "win", you will take your toys and go home.

Good to know...

[nathanbedford]

Examples of this are the cartoons making fun of Allah or Mohamed,

Trump is purposely defying those standards (double standards, really) on a daily basis with the aim of destroying them along with their inherent duplicity, and I think that’s a good thing.

While I applaud the service you have rendered in distinguishing among types of speech, I cannot say that Donald Trump utters a single word out of principle but only motivated by his narcissism.

Consider the category of, "making fun of Allah." We must ask ourselves, how did Trump behave when someone actually made fun of Allah? He accused the victim, Pamela Geller, he did not stand on principle for free speech rather he raised his voice against it.

There is nothing in Donald Trump's biography that suggests that he ever did anything on principle which did not benefit Donald Trump. There is no utterance that I can think of in which Donald Trump stood for principle where it did not advantage Donald Trump. In fact, when it counted, Trump attacked the victim and stood against free speech.

The double standard I see has always been applied by Trump supporters who will tolerate anything from Donald Trump and nothing from other candidate.

[catfish1957]

The double standard I see has always been applied by Trump supporters who will tolerate anything from Donald Trump and nothing from other candidate

Maybe the best example of their supporter's hypocrisy here, is their level of "aghast" that rumors could be instigated that Trump was behind the concocted smears to Cruz via the Stone and / or Pecker connection.

....While many of the same Trump supporting group were dancing in the streets of Freeperville this weekend celebrating and perpetuating the smears against Cruz with this still unproven scandal.

Pretty strange if you ask me.

[cuban leaf]

I feel like I’m reading about this year’s election in a history book.