[JohnBovenmyer]

In most states a "win" = your guy gets first round votes, in some he also gets second round votes. It can't equal forever round votes or you could never resolve no one having a majority. None of the above is being taken away from Trump, he still gets what he won. Like everyone else he had a fair and equal shot at winning votes in the first round AND after the first round, when the popular vote alone HAD failed to decide things so additional criteria applied. Winning by the expanded criteria requires additional work, organization and expense, but is as old as the country. In fact it's older than winning nominations by popular voting.

Trump gambled (and as a casino owner/operator he should not only understand gambling, but the houses' advantages under the rules!) he'd win in the first round and could save himself any expenses in learning the subsequent house rules and pursuing victory under them. Now he's learning what house rules are like... when he's not the house! I wonder how many gamblers at his casinos are granted waivers to house rules that bite them? Trump may still pull it out, under the rules as written. But if he wants to change the rules retrospectively, his losing casino customers should use Trump's logic to sue him for retrospective refunds.

[Nervous Tick]

>> It can’t equal forever round votes or you could never resolve no one having a majority.

Trump don’t need no stinking majority! A plurality will do. Any plurality however tiny. Because winning!