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).