Posted on 04/18/2016 2:51:08 AM PDT by markomalley
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told reporters at a press conference Sunday in Staten Island that the Republican primary nomination process is “rigged” against him and he refuses to play by the rules established by GOP state party committees he deems unfair.
“I don’t want to play the rule game, because I’ll tell you what, we live in a democracy and it’s all about getting the bosses out. The bosses are picking. Now I’m winning, you will say. I’m wining by 200 delegates. I’m winning, more importantly in my opinion, I’m winning by 2 million votes. In other words I’ve gotten more than 2 million votes,” Trump said, when asked why he does not work within the rules different state contests have.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz swept up all of Wyoming’s available delegates at the state’s GOP convention Saturday night. Although Wyoming Republican voters caucused on March 12 at local conventions to begin the delegate election process, Trump and his supporters called it a voter-less primary.
A similar situation occurred in Colorado where Cruz delegates won all the open slots to go to the convention through a process that began at local caucuses on March 1.
RNC Chairman Reince Priebus fired back at Trump this week for accusing the party of having a rigged system.
New York Republican Rep. Peter King told Fox News earlier on Sunday that the “system is what it is.” Ohio Gov. John Kasich as well as Cruz could call the New York primary unfair too, should Trump win at least 50 percent of the GOP vote statewide and receive at least 50 percent of the Republican votes in most or all of the Empire State’s congressional districts.
“He may get 53 or 54 percent of the vote, but if he gets 100 percent of the delegates, now, Cruz or Kasich could say, ‘That’s unfair.’ The very nature of a nominating process is always — Iowa has caucuses. Some have open primaries. Others just have local conventions. That’s just the way it’s been and it’s not meant to be easy. Whatever it is, I don’t see it as an attempt to stop Donald Trump,” King said. “These rules have been in effect in one way or another, with their idiosyncracies, for one hundred years. And in some cases, others get changed every few years, but that’s part of running for president. you have to learn how to navigate the minefields,” he added.
Just more evidence that Trump has no idea about how our government works, and that if elected, he will not allow himself to be constrained by laws or the Constitution... Hey Donald - we are NOT a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic. And that means the “rules” apply to everyone, even YOU!
If Trump is not willing to work within the GOP rules, they why the heck is he running as a GOP candidate? If he really feels they are so unfair, he should run as an independent or third-party (although most of the minor parties don't have primaries at all). If he wants to be the GOP nominee, he should play by the rules that everyone else follows and shut up.
we’re a constitutional republic which is pretty much the complete opposite of an anarchy. your logical analysis fails you.
The constitution calls for a form of government that is not a monarchy or a similar form of oligarchy. It does not call for “not a democracy”.
No, we don't. See:
US Constitution
keep reading the thread. It has been well explained.
I was taught we were a representative republic.
That's right - because the rules in some states require that a candidate earning more than 50+% of the vote earns 100% of the delegates.
Is that rule "fair"? What about the 49% who wanted someone else being disenfranchised?
Will Trump whine about that rule or is that rule ok?
... lol ... I will vote for Trump but I don't like it that he has to moan about and threaten to go indie b/c of rules. I'm pretty sure he won't moan and whine about rules that work in his favor - I'm just as certain no other candidate will moan and whine about the rule giving Trump 100% of the delegates even though he'll win only 55% of the vote - they will probably mock Trump but that's it.
“It’s officially the Democratic Party”
True, because they can choose whatever name they wish as the official name for their party.
However, I loved the way Ronald Reagan would instead say “Democrat Party” and even correct people when they said “Democratic Party”.
Why did he (and many other non Democrats) prefer Democrat Party? Because ‘democratic’ is an adjective and therefore it’s use suggests that the word is being used as a modifier rather than simply a name. The adjective ‘democratic’ connotes fairness or responsiveness to the will of the people, and Reagan wished to deprive them of that positive association. After all, the Democrat Party is no more democratic than other parties. Trump calls it the Democrat Party too, which I like. My Republican parents and grandparents all said Democrat Party.
It is much like the Fair Tax. It’s just a name, and it’s proponents can choose whatever name they wish, but opponents of the plan may choose to boycott the self aggrandizing name choice, and call it something else. Same with Patient Protection And Affordable Health Care Act. Opponents prefer to call it ObamaCare, as this removes the positive connotations of protection and affordability, and instead adds a somewhat negative association.
Regarding the subject of whether or not this is a Democracy, I think context is important. We conservatives like to stress that we are a constitutional republic, because the founding fathers knew that direct democracy without a constitution placing limits on democracy would lead to tyranny of the majority.
While we do not put executive decisions to a vote, there are clearly strong elements of democracy in our constitutional republic, especially the process of electing representatives and public officials. Pure direct democracy essentially means voting on everything including what’s for breakfast, and although there are many things we don’t vote on (thank God), there are some we do, such as who should hold various representative offices and that’s what we’re all talking about right now. That’s what Trump is talking about so I think in the context of electing a president it doesn’t hurt to acknowledge the democracy in our political system.
Read federalist 39
It’s only the people who will be writing the laws we all have to live by...
If you can’t take the time to “baby sit” them, maybe you just don’t care enough.
We live in a republic........as in FREE REPUBLIC. This is STILL the Free Republic website is it not?
read post #17.
Article I, Section 2.
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States,
and
Section 4
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;
We have not lived in a republic for a very long time. We live in an oligopoly. A republic does not have Unbound (Super) Representatives nor ones who are for sale to the highest bidder,
Cruz won 66% of the vote in Wyoming last month. Please adjust your talking points so that they don’t make you look a moron.
Amen, I was wondering when someone would put precision into the discussion.
We live in a democratic republic, so we absolutely should have voters involved. Trump is right about that.
The party bosses claiming the system has been in place for a hundred years are lying. Primaries are newer than that and a reaction against the infamous smoke filled rooms.
Also, party insiders picking insider delegates is not a republic. That is command fascism.
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.