Wh? Well let's see:
1. According to a majority here on FR, Trump is the presumptive nominee, so Ted Cruz and john kasick's promises are moot.
2. No one else running has made as many or (to the media and others) so many big and in some cases over the top promises.(Hey I like alot of them myself).
3. Why not Hillary or Bernie? Seriously? They're demonrats, the protected class.
4. Why now? See number 1, since Trump is the presumptive nominee the liberal press can waste no time in attacking and attempting to marginalize him.
Those were all rhetorical questions weren't they?
In most eyes here but not media and the odd hold out. So fair time on all sides is still technically viable, n'est pas?
2. No one else running has made as many or (to the media and others) so many big and in some cases over the top promises.(Hey I like alot of them myself).
Why make promises when you can manipulate delegates without the hassle of addressing real voters' concerns?
3. Why not Hillary or Bernie? Seriously? They're demonrats, the protected class
Why just apply this logic against Trump then and for the implied benefit to Cruz with no holding to the same standard to Democrats - the presumed possible opponents for a wild card Cruz nomination?
4. Why now? See number 1, since Trump is the presumptive nominee the liberal press can waste no time in attacking and attempting to marginalize him.
While presumption is practical, there are still the realities that certain other candidates will never cede genuine voter defeat. Then it is incumbent on us to at least consider the questions being asked of candidate Trump- -as- presumptive-nominee should also be applied to those engineering convention machinations against him.
Where are all the ranchers along the border excited that they’ve been asked for easements for the wall? That’s a year long process in itself, or more, what with flood plain considerations.