Isn't that the complaint of those that want direct election instead of our current electoral system?
The jurors are picked to have an opinion. As much as I hate it, the people voted for Romney. I don’t know why this is so hard.
Hm, this is interesting; but let me ask: should the delegates that Ron Paul legitimately got be disbarred because they took advantage of their systems to get the results they wanted? (i.e. should the IRS be allowed to abrogate tax shelters because people examine the laws and use legitimate tax-shelters? There's a rule/law that lets them do this: meaning that all tax-shelters are, in effect, at the discretion of the IRS... as applied to the individual tax-payer.)
If it were the opposite like I described, you would probably be the first one on the rooftop screaming that they didn’t listen to what we picked at the polls.
If it were opposite, then what would be the point of a delegate? Just write your state's vote down on a paper and send that to the convention. We use people precisely because they are not pre-programmed machines, incapable of dealing with unexpected data/situations.
What are you talking about? We still go to the polls to tell the electoral college who we want chosen. They comply. It is not the same. Polls would be meaningless if we allowed them to pick whoever they choose.
I dont’ care whether Paul get’s his few delegates or not. If he won them fair and square, then sure. Whatever. But so did Romney.
I meant opposite as in a conservative being displaced by a RINO. We are selecting them to be pre-programmed machines. We voted for the candidate we wanted. They are selected to chose to do that. They are not an elected position in which they campaign on which delegate they would choose.