A subsidiary of its parent company.
Posted on 06/21/2016 8:19:16 AM PDT by Taxman
Betrayed! 1,000 delegates to ditch Trump?
Just when it appeared that the movement to dump Donald Trump as the GOP presidential candidate was defeated, it looks like it has come roaring back.
And this time, it may have more momentum than ever.
As many as 1,000 delegates to the Republican National Convention may have interest in a new push to ditch Trump and allow delegates to choose another candidate.
The new movement is calling itself “Free the Delegates,” and it’s rallying like-minded Republicans to prepare for a fight.
But critics argue that it is a petulant coup that would set aside the will of millions of voters who backed Trump.
According to insiders, the Free the Delegates movement plans to organize thousands of delegates in a plot to depose Trump with a convention rules change.
“Roughly 30 delegates from 15 states participated in a conference call Thursday night,” Yahoo! reported Monday. “Since then, however, [their] campaign appears to have picked up steam. A second conference call on Sunday night attracted an alleged 1,000 participants.”
According to The Washington Post, “The group is led by delegates seeking to block Trump at the GOP convention next month in Cleveland by changing party rules so that they can vote however they want — instead of in line with the results of state caucuses and primaries. It is quickly emerging as the most organized effort to stop Trump and coincides with his declining poll numbers.”
The Free the Delegates movement is also reportedly raising money for staff and a legal defense fund.
This establishment threat to Trump’s nomination has grown increasingly credible. The Associated Press has reported that more and more Republicans in Congress are saying they will not attend the party convention and are not endorsing his candidacy.
Trump wondered aloud Saturday who his opponents would pick as a replacement, a problem that has plagued the “Never Trump” movement for months.
“Who are they going to pick? I beat everybody. But I don’t mean beat — I beat the hell out of them,” he said.
Tell us what you think! Would you support another GOP candidate if Trump was dropped at the Republican National Convention?
The Associated Press contributed to this article.
**Tell us what you think! Would you support another GOP candidate if Trump was dropped at the Republican National Convention? **
No, another candidate would lose to Hillary. Don’t these delegates realize what they are doing?
1000?? It was only 400 according to WaPo this morning...
13,896,879 voted for Trump in the primaries.
Who else can the Convention put up that would win the general election WITHOUT those 13,896,879 disenfranchised Trump supporters?
Romney lost with 4 million disaffected voters.
==
These attempts at coups prove that the GOP establishment are more interesting in retaining the status quo than in electing a candidate for the betterment of the country.
The GOP establishment and those attaching themselves to it are the problem, not the solution.
This morning, on a “conservative” radio show, I heard
“Ryan/Rubio” (Rrr/Rrr) ticket in the making. These people are H*ell bent not to let Mr. Trump win.
This morning, on a “conservative” radio show, I heard
“Ryan/Rubio” (Rrr/Rrr) ticket in the making. These people are H*ell bent not to let Mr. Trump win.
If the GOP succeeds in this I will go scorched earth on them. Zero dollars to GOP fundraising. Zero votes for the usurper candidates. I'll probably vote for Gary Johnson (who I don't like much) for POTUS.
And, of course, continue lobbying SiriusXM to dump Beck and supporting whoever opposes Ted Cruz in the Texas primary race.
I suspect many million other rank-and-file GOP primary season participants feel the same.
No reason to worry about that. They are going to do what they are going to do. What we need to do is concentrate on what we are going to do. Play our game, not theirs.
This morning, on a “conservative” radio show, I heard
“Ryan/Rubio” (Rrr/Rrr) ticket in the making. These people are H*ell bent not to let Mr. Trump win.
This morning, on a “conservative” radio show, I heard
“Ryan/Rubio” (Rrr/Rrr) ticket in the making. These people are H*ell bent not to let Mr. Trump win.
Well argued, there is very little, if any, wiggle room, for those who attack Trump as being too harsh on ethnic issues. All office holders must take an oath to support the Constitution, and the Constitution is very clear, with respect to its American First intent. Consider the Preamble:
We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
"The people" to define the purpose & function of the Constitution, were beyond any question, the people of the specific ratifying States, in 1787 to 1791. "Justice" can sometimes be rather an abstract concept, but "domestic tranquility," obviously is our domestic tranquility, not the promotion of anything abroad, or calling for meddling with other peoples lives. (Nor will reviewing the specific grants of power that follow, suggest any non-American focus or purpose for either.)
The "common defence," both from the obvious context, as well as the specific grants of function that follow, is clearly the common protection of the people of the 13 sovereign States that ratified; as, indeed, the "general Welfare" is that generally beneficial of those same specific peoples.
Finally, with unmistakable clarity, is the language that identifies who precisely are to be the beneficiaries of the secured "Blessings of Liberty": The Founders & their "posterity": the lineal descendants of those specific peoples; the descendants of the Founders, down through the generations.
Is anything in this interpretation, even arguable? Does this statement of intent waffle in anyway, as an indication of whose interest is to be favored on any Constitutional question that involves Americans on the one hand, and any other people under the sun? Is there anything in this that suggests a duty to allow any other people a right--that is a Constitutional right to demand entrance into America; or to demand anything from the American Government under a claim of legal or moral right?
Now granted, a great many of us, our particular selves included, trace our ancestry to those who came in after the Constitutional Union was established. Our personal rights of participation grow out of acceptance into those communities Blessed with that secured Liberty in the various States. They do not, by anything in the Constitution, amount to a departure from the Constitutional purpose or concept. Nor can we, if in office, claim a moral right to alter the intent & functional purpose, we have sworn to uphold, on our own initiative.
Those Republicans, like Speaker Ryan, who wring their hands over the public media, over Donald Trump's sometimes very blunt ways of deciding between alternatives, will try to cloud these points. They cannot rebuff them if we stick to the obvious. If you honor the Constitutional intent, in all things relating to the behavior of the American Government, you must put America & the Americans first.
When challenged, always return to the basic!
One final point. Nothing, in what we have written, will prevent someone who feels a calling to preach their Faith to the people of some other land; or to become a medical missionary in some other land; or to pursue any particular calling or interest anywhere on earth; from doing so. What it does do is define what one can do with respect to the resources, functional duties and policy imperatives in applying the allocated powers and resources entrusted to the Government of the Unites States. That is our point. And properly argued, it is the key to victory!
William Flax
I suspected something awhile ago when the Cruz peeps got suddenly quiet!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440212/posts
It looks like Cruz has bedded with the DC Cartel. Cruz's unelected Colorado Delegate, Kendall Unruh, wants to unbind all delegates at the convention to allow allow them to vote their conscience at the convention so another leader can squeak in.
I’d rather just go ahead and get CWII started.
This broke on Fox Business on June 14, 2016. Had this under Breaking and Front Page News, but it was taken down by the Ad. Mod. It is a very upsetting interview. This interview needs to go viral. It will piss you off.
Anti-Trump Activist on Latest Move do Derail Trump
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440212/posts
It looks like Cruz has bedded with the DC Cartel. Cruz’s unelected Colorado Delegate, Kendall Unruh, wants to unbind all delegates at the convention to allow allow them to vote their conscience at the convention so another leader can squeak in.
This broke on Fox Business on June 14, 2016. Had this under Breaking and Front Page News, but it was taken down by the Ad. Mod. It is a very upsetting interview. This interview needs to go viral. It will piss you off.
Anti-Trump Activist on Latest Move do Derail Trump
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440212/posts
It looks like Cruz has bedded with the DC Cartel. Cruz’s unelected Colorado Delegate, Kendall Unruh, wants to unbind all delegates at the convention to allow allow them to vote their conscience at the convention so another leader can squeak in.
A 10 million man armed march on DC would be within the realm of possibility.
Here’s the deal. They do this, it’s a go-sign.
Aye, very much so. I've been praying that God helps us put those who will do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with Him into positions of authority and power. (This, I think, falls into line with God's will: as He condemns unjust judges and evil rulers.)
Yup. CW2 is coming.
A subsidiary of its parent company.
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.