“Most indications are that the majority of people who are voting for other candidates are firmly opposed to them. Trump getting the nomination disenfranchises them. That’s why we have things called run-off elections in many places. You don’t win until you hit 50% “
LOL, but then Cruz shouldn’t get it either. Even millions of more voters would be disenfranchised, by your logic.
You Cruz supporters certainly spin a lit to try to make dirty politics seem acceptable. Is Cruz going to give back delegates in the WTA states? How about in Iowa, where he won by lying?
The most conservative, most Christian candidate ever certainly is dirtier than all the rest.
Winning fair and square is one thing. Cheating will make millions not vote for him, and Hillary wins.
You guys have built up a whole mythology to support Trump. Trump, who accuses others of lying, but does it routinely himself, even in the accusation.
Cruz did not win Iowa by lying. He didn't even lie. And playing by the rules of the delegate process is not dirty politics.
It’s Trump and his supporters who spin a web of lies and deceit against Cruz.
Cruz didn’t “lie” in Iowa, period, end of story. There’s nothing “dirty” about Cruz. He’s one of the most honest conservatives to ever be elected, never breaking a campaign promise.
The dirtiest, currently active political operative anyone knows of is Roger Stone, a man with deep ties to Trump as an employee, lobbyist, strategist, confidante, supporter, etc. for decades. Trump has slimed more Republicans in this campaign than Bernie or Hillary has to date. Whose side is Trump on?
Trump doesn’t gain many, if any votes as other candidates drop out. That shows us the majority seems to want someone else and just has their vote split among Trump alternatives. That’s why we have a fair process to pick a nominee when no one demonstrates 50% support. Until you show me where a candidate violated a rule or a law, there has been no “cheating.” Just pure spin on your part to use such loaded, inaccurate terms.