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
People who defend this sort of underhanded tactic remind me of those who were unruffled when Huckabee accepted McCain’s supporters/voters simply to thwart Romney in West Virginia. I was furious because I wanted Romney then. McCain knew he had no chance in West Virginia, so he instructed his supporters to vote for Huckabee so as to take the state away from Romney. Michael Medved laughed it off as ‘politics as usual’. I was sick that our side could be as sleazy as the Democrats. Sadly, that still seems to be the case today.
No, the guy with a MAJORITY of delegates is the nominee - it has been that way since 1856.
But it wouldn't happen to Cruz and that's the point. That it is happening to The Donald flies in the face of his claim that he has the best people in place working for him, that he has a superior brain, and that he's worth $10 billion and will use it to win. He'd better get some smarter people to manage his campaign, and he'd better quit trying to run it on the cheap.
If Trump has 50%+1 then he's golden. If his voters are not the majority, then they need to come to terms with that.
The point of a party is to come together on a candidate who is acceptable to the majority.
If we allow a plurality to be the victor, then the behavior of everything changes. You will see more and more candidates sticking it out to try to keep others from having a plurality. Division will increase instead of the system working towards a union.
It really sucks to feel strongly about a 35% candidate, bu that doesn't mean he is entitled to a party's nomination. Especially when he is openly hostile to the party.
LOL. The "unwritten rulebook" that everyone in the party has read and understood, except Trump.
This should be a wake up call to the Trump team that they have to become better organized with his ground game,
****
In the videos posted at #180 there are states in which ALL delegates are UNBOUND. North Dakota, Colorado and Wyoming, and some in PA.
In the video about North Dakota, it states that Trump was able to acquire the ground game of Dr. Carson.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3416331/posts?page=180#180
":) Reply of the day, right there...!"
DITTO!
This will be positioned as candidate versus candidate, one candidate out maneuvering the other. One candidate being shrewd and the other incompetent.
In fact it is candidate versus voter. One candidate flipping votes to serve himself, one candidate ignoring the will of the voter.
If the voters fail to select a majority candidate, what do you propose to do? Have another series of primaries?
That’s what the delegates are for.
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
No, you’ve got it all wrong. A vote for Cruz is a vote for the Constitution. How could you vote against the Constitution? [Sarcasm off]
Dispense with the charade of primaries.
OK so cruz helps the establishment get their contested convention and then the establishment appoints their own guy like Rubio and you are saying well it is the rules, cruz should have ran a better campaign, I am not angry.
Yea OK
> If the voters fail to select a majority candidate, what do you propose to do? Have another series of primaries?
The point is that the voters’ selection is being undermined.
Primaries usually provide a majority candidate that the voters and party coalesce around. But you have to accept that there are times when it fails to give a majority to anyone.
Then what?
The one rule still stands. The guy with the most votes is the nominee or your party loses.
The point is that the voters’ selection is being undermined.
Huh? The point is that the voters have not given a majority to anyone. There is no "voters' selection."
Is the party supposed to automatically give the nomination to a 22% guy in a 5 guy race who supports baby killing and gun control?
The point is that voters’ selection is being undermined thereby causing the majority candidate to no longer be the majority candidate.
So, you're prepared to support the nominee who has 22% support of the voters in a 5 man race?
> The point is that the voters have not given a majority to anyone.
Not yet. But a candidate is busily undermining the will of the voter, so to prevent there being a majority candidate.
Huh? There is no majority candidate. If there was a majority candidate, then he would have a majority of the delegates.
Do you think "majority" has some other meaning?
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.