Posted on 04/12/2016 1:16:46 PM PDT by conservativeimage
Advancement by technicality is bad form. Advancement by manufactured technicality is dishonest. The GOP argument in the Colorado delegation scandal is, "No rules were broken because we make up our own rules. No rules were broken because we have the right to change the rules to our favor. 'The law means what we say it means.' If the law says something inconvenient, we'll change it." Just because no rules were broken does not mean it was ethical.
Q: What kind of person maneuvers in the shadows taking advantage of unknown weak points, many of which they have personally created, as their method of operation?
A:?
Q: What kind of person participates in a fixed game?
A:?
What kind of idiot enters a contest where the rules are known well in advance, makes no attempt to win, and then riles up his gullible followers to claim this all happens “in the shadows”?
A: The same kind of person who does the right thing when no one is looking.
It seems to have escaped notice that Colorado decided not to hold a presidential-preference poll at their caucus/convention this year because they didn’t want to be forced to abide by an RNC rule that bound delegates going into Cleveland to such poll results.
Essentially, Colorado said, “Screw you, RNC. Our delegates can vote for whomever they want. You don’t tell us what to do!”
And people are ticked off about it. Confusing.
Essentially, Colorado said, “Screw you, RNC. Our delegates can vote for whomever they want, regardless of the intentions of the caucus attendees, let alone the other 95%. You don’t tell us what to do!”
Fixed it. Why people are ticked off should be obvious.
Essentially, Colorado said, “Screw you, RNC. Our delegates can vote for whomever they want. You don’t tell us what to do!”<<<<<<<
Additionally, it means that the people of Colorado were denied THEIR choice of candidate. They were in effect TOLD who they could vote for or not vote for.
Colorado overrides the voters wishes a LOT and in many ways.
Rules meaning what we want them to mean is the very same sentiment behind their ‘’home-rule’’ policies. It’s very hard to win a case in court if you aren’t a local ‘name’ because the laws/rules are so fluid.
Very well said. And the idea that the GOP is somehow a private entity that has no obligation to the bigger issue of free elections in this country is absurd. A similar argument would be to say that our local electric companies have the right to turn off power to a city or state as a bargaining tactic to raise their rates.
Our political parties have evolved over the last 200 years as a means to facilitate the narrowing of candidates to a manageable number for free elections to work effectively. For free elections to work, that narrowing process itself needs the input of the people.
While never a perfect system, the people created the parties years ago, long before this current crop of insiders were ever born, and have the rightful expectation that they will serve the purpose of facilitating free elections. They have become part of the process to such a degree that if one of the parties rigs the result this late in election season, the system makes it next to impossible, with many state ballot deadlines already having passed, to mount an independent run for the Presidency outside one of the political parties.
Once the respect for our Constitution went out the window, and it absolutely has, then we are left being led by a country of men who have no higher power or God other than themselves. Morality, good faith, and ethics are long gone. Don’t sell me the package of ‘old time religion’ when the actions speak ore than the words.
Welcome to America.
Is the root issue that team Trump didn’t effectively manage how the Colorado delegate system works? If the system itself is a ClusterF, it is what it is. The GOP can set whatever stupid rules they want.
This isn’t a slam on Trump. Sounds to me like he needed more (or better) resources in the field.
Ah, but not really.
If Trump decides to run a Third Party, rules created by Republicans to keep him off the ballot would be deemed unConstitutional, would go to the Supreme Court, and he would win.
Trump needed more (or better) resources in the field.
Wrong. Party elites decided on who got the delegates.
The answer to question 1 is: S N A K E
The answer to question 2 is: S U C K E R
Oh my God! Someone at the state convention was against Trump and, gasp!, circulated a petition!
Shall I get the smelling salts for all of you Trump wilting ladies?
If Trump had organized, he would have had delegates loyal to him. Try understanding the process.
Dave, I don’t think you’re listening. If a delegate declared for Trump they were dismissed. That was the process. There’s nothing to understand about that. More organization and greater numbers would not have changed anything. The convention is corrupt for Cruz. And you’re defending that.
Nonsense. You are believing nonsense. Are there any credible reports of this, or is it all crybabies like that Lindsey guy who burned his card because he didn’t know there was a district convention?
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.