Posted on 04/12/2016 7:27:57 AM PDT by bobsunshine
Ted Cruz's and Marco Rubio's supporters have teamed up in Arkansas to pack the state delegation with individuals who'll turn against Donald Trump in a contested convention.
Since Rubio ended his presidential bid March 15, his network of party insiders has lined up behind Cruz to win delegates who'd vote for the Texas senator once they're no longer bound to Trump in a floor fight. Trump won Arkansas' GOP primary March 1 with 32.8 percent of the vote compared to Cruz's 30.5 percent and Rubio's 24.9 percent. But Cruz's canny operatives, with Rubio riding shotgun, is likely to thwart Trump in the delegate election.
Trump's organization is as sloppy in Arkansas as elsewhere, just as Cruz's is an efficient machine in state after state. This could ding the Donald, costing him as many as 25 delegates after a first inconclusive ballot. Cruz, who finished with 15 out of the available 40 delegates in primary voting, stands to gain all 16 Trump delegates and the 9 won by Rubio.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
A party is a private affair. Are you not supporting freedom of association? Or should the gov’t tell private organizations how to nominate their candidate?
If you don’t like it start your own party and see how that works for you.
That's at least twice now that you posted that. It's kind of Argumentem ad nauseum. And just repeating that doesn't make the other argument Argumentem ad nauseum, but does make yours Argumentem ad nauseum.
A caucus can have rules and still be morally wrong.
Completely disregarding the people of Colorado who you are supposed to represent is morally wrong.
You are morally wrong for defending it.
End of story.
(And as an aside, if we DID form a third party, you’d whine that we were giving the election to Hillary.)
If you’re going to repeat yourself, I’m going to force you to answer the question until you give up and go trolling some other thread.
Deal with it.
You are morally wrong for not wanting to play by the rules.
Then you need to ask the question again. Deal with it.
Why are you supporting totalitarianism?
Because that’s what it is.
Answer or run away with your tail between your legs.
Seriously? A NO U response?
PFFFFFTHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Sorry, if that’s all you’ve got, you’ve just proven to everyone that your position is morally bankrupt.
You want to talk about ‘rules’? It’s ‘rules’ that got Saddam elected with 98% of the vote.
It’s ‘rules’ that make Kim Jong Un a dictator.
It’s ‘rules’ that voided the will of the voters in Colorado.
Your defense of these ‘rules’ makes you a defender of totalitarian, oligarchical governing. You are morally bankrupt or just blinded by hate.
*Mic drop*
Yes it is Kenny, every week they manufacture a new talking point and gullible followers eat it up.
Stunning to read how 1/2 the money spent on this election to date, was directly used for anti-Trump ads, to the tune of 70 million.
On one hand I’m happy to see them throw their money away, on the other hand, I’m left wondering just wth they are hiding!
So you are defending the rules that allow a 40% vote equal 100% vote.
Why didn’t you complain before? And you support 40% of the vote getting100% of the vote.
The entire south rejected them both? What don’t they get?
Whine whine whine whine. Sob sob sob. Deflect deflect deflect.
We’re not talking about Florida; we’re not talking about whether I did or did not despise the corruption in Colorado. (Which, incidentally, I did before this.)
If you don’t understand that voiding a vote doesn’t equal letting people vote, then you’re either blinded willfully or just blind.
You’re supporting a party that doesn’t even CONSIDER the will of the voters.
If CO was WTA, then I’d be fine with that.
Instead, CO’s delegates completely ignored the will of the voters. Even if Trump had scored a majority of voters in CO and had a mythical ‘ground game,’ he was never going to get a single delegate out of it, because the party had corrupted the process. HOW is that not tyranny?
And YOU are supporting it.
Address that, if you can. Or just admit that you’re a paid hack spewing talking points in a circle.
Ha ha. Your opening line sounds like trump. Too funny. Thanks for the laugh.
Keep avoiding the issue though.
Answer the question: How is that not tyranny?
Because it’s a private party.
Even if I were to accept your premise, which I don’t, it doesn’t matter.
Because once again, just because something is ‘private’ or ‘by the rules’ does NOT make it RIGHT.
Sure it does. What doesn’t make it right is when someone whines about what a private party chooses to do.
If you don’t like it start your own private party and elect your own nominee.
You’re repeating the same points as last night.
Stop trolling, bro.
But if you insist, here’s the answers.
1: If we did, you’d whine that we were going to elect Clinton.
2: Private or not, it’s forcing, yes, FORCING governance on a non-consenting people and using financial and structural coercion to force out of the running anyone who the Party doesn’t approve of before the votes even happen. Don’t try to tell me that it didn’t happen, because we have proof that it did.
3: That’s tyranny. Tell me how it’s not tyranny when a private organization uses its ‘rules’ to overthrow the consent of the governed.
4: I’m getting to be sure that you’re some kind of paid shill, or have a bad memory. Why are you repeating the same points over and over and over and over without even answering my counterpoints?
Just so you remember the point I’m trying to make here, let me repeat it.
Tell me how it’s not tyranny when a private organization uses its ‘rules’ to overthrow the consent of the governed.
Tell me how it’s not tyranny when a private organization uses its ‘rules’ to overthrow the consent of the governed.
Tell me how it’s not tyranny when a private organization uses its ‘rules’ to overthrow the consent of the governed.
Tell me how it’s not tyranny when a private organization uses its ‘rules’ to overthrow the consent of the governed.
Wow you’re on repeat blast. You’re funny.
Your question makes no sense. A private party is just that a private party.
Your question is like the riddle...
If a flying saucer lands in your backyard, how many pancakes does it take to cover your doghouse?
Get a grip. I won’t paste that over and over again like you do with your nonsense.
Enjoy your evening and I hope you can support Cruz (who will be the nominee).
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.