Posted on 04/01/2016 5:03:48 AM PDT by Bratch
Townhall reporter Guy Benson today admitted the Cruz campaign is stealing Trump delegates in states that Trump won.
The Ted Cruz campaign is running Cruz supporters as Trump delegates in states that Trump won. That way they can steal the nomination from Trump in Cleveland although they’ve only won a fraction of the states Trump has won.
Guy Benson: This has been percolating for several months. He has a very sharp legal team that know the rules inside and out in a way the Trump campaign clearly does not. It’s not just Louisiana. And it’s not just finagling to just get Rubio delegates or unbound delegates. What they’re also doing is getting people elected as Trump delegates who are not, in fact, Trump loyalists. So they would be bound to Donald Trump on the first ballot only. After which, although they are technically Trump delegates, they’ve been sort of put in place to jump.
And these are the same people who call Trump supporters ‘morons’ one day and beg them to support Ted Cruz the next.
CONFIRMED: Cruz Camp Stealing Trump Delegates at State Level
Because Ted is sooooo ethical and pure don’t ya know?
Lyon’ Ted - 2016 Most Unethical Candidate Award
It’s called disingenuous
their hypocrisy stinks to high heaven.
They know damn well voting for cruz now is voting for the establishments contested convention and they should never be shocked when cruz is stabbed in the back
“there would be no logjam after the first ballot, if the simple and obvious process of the candidate with the preponderance of bound delegates were the nominee; the artificial imposition of a bound delegate threshold, and then employing tactics designed to prevent a candidate from reaching it, is counterproductive and idiotic on its face...”
Do you really believe that requiring a majority of delegates for nomination is “counterproductive and idiotic”? Or, do you support that position because it is favorable to your favorite candidate?
Politics is the art of building coalitions. Frankly, if a candidate cannot build a coalition sufficient to secure a majority within the rules, then that candidate does not deserve the nomination. And, that statement applies to all candidates.
No it is the way the party elite have always kept the voters at bay. Go ahead and vote and then we will have our guys tell you what you really want
Okay, I need some Trump supporters to help me understand this:
1) How can Trump supporters be so worked up over a supposed "Cruz adultery scandal" if Trump is not only provably guilty of that very thing, but BRAGGED about it in a BOOK? That says to me that "adultery" isn't the real reason for the agitation against Cruz.
2) How can Trump supporters be so worked up over a supposed "Cruz underhanded finagling of delegates" when Trump spends the vast majority of his time not only pulling underhanded deals... er... I mean, "shrewdly working the system to his advantage" (think of multiple bankruptcies and his stated reasons for seeking them, attempts to use eminent domain to take over private property and his stated reasons for doing so, etc.)? That says to me that "working the system" isn't the real reason for being worked up against Cruz.
So... Trump supporters are worked up over things which their beloved candidate has not only done, but done brazenly. Does the brazen way he did them somehow give him a "free pass"?
I've heard some people try to argue, "It's different, because at least Trump isn't a hypocrite about it!" Mm-hmm. I see. That reminds me of the various arguments I've had with atheists who can trumpet their own crimes and sexual deviances with abandon, but who howl with glee and/or indignation whenever they think they've caught a Christian doing the same... since, apparently, hypocrisy is the only "sin" for a liberal. (Ironic, since they're guilty of that, too... but apparently, if you don't admit it, then you're not guilty of it.) Yeah. That didn't strike me as being very logical (or honest) THEN, either. Just so, with that dumb argument trying to defend Trump.
Go ahead and support Trump, if you like. But can we at least cut out the posturing and the disingenuous attacks on Cruz for things that "the Donald" has done, and worse? The irony is thick enough to make my teeth hurt.
Headline is bogus.
If delegates are rewarded proportionally, all candidates ‘won’.
It should read that Trump had more votes in that state, not that he ‘won’ a state.
It just makes no sense under the voting process we have to declare a ‘win’ unless it is a winner-take-all state.
I’m not trying to snipe. My apologies.
I’ve been involved with campaigns.
A prime rule for candidates is never endorse other candidates/agendas: you can never gain support that way, only lose it.
It doesn’t surprise me that he didn’t sign.
Not smarter just part of the party elite that makes sure the voters aren’t heard
Cruz is not “stealing delegates”. The delegates are still obligated to vote for Trump on the first ballot. Trump has just as much right to get his supporters in those slots if he can. But Trump is getting out-organized in a lot of places, because in a lot of states, Trump has basically dismantled his organization once the primary was over. He apparently didn’t realize that the delegate selection process would be critical in an open convention, or he just didn’t think it was important.
Following the rules is sleazy?
True words well said
Lost a sentence in there, in the third paragraph. Oh, well...
The exact phrase that was directed at me was "betraying the country." That came from a man I greatly respected, and it stung.
I have yet to see the same phrase directed at Trumpeteers.
Then and only then will I address the rest of your post, because with all due respect, I don’t think you’re understanding my point here.
I understand perfectly what you’re saying...but the entire concept of a ‘bound delegate’ reverting to ‘free agency’ in the event of an artificial threshold (which is the topic being discussed here, is it not?) is subversive to your original vote..and we know there are delegates who intend to do just that, should the occasion arise, because they know better than you or I...
what I don’t get is why you would support a system that, however infrequent, would allow for your original vote to be voided...?
There are some state laws that say such, but this has never been tested. Say the "president" chosen in November rapes and murders a nun before the election in December. You telling me that the electors chosen can't vote for anyone else?
Nonsense. Electors are entirely free to vote as they see fit.
If it was happening to Cruz, I'd be pissed at him for being so poorly prepared. Unlike Trump, who seems to fly by the seat of his pants, Cruz has thought through all of the possibilities and has prepared for them since he even thought about entering the race. As the Bible said, it is a foolish man that builds a house without considering the cost before he starts - in other words, if you start a venture without thinking it all the way through and planning for all contingencies, you are foolish.
Med check needed
It is in the upside down world of a tRumpster. Words and deeds must be redefined in order to fit in with their support of the Donald.
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.