Posted on 03/15/2016 2:48:59 AM PDT by trebb
Having it both ways. Cruz says he’s against a contested convention. He says he’s for a contested convention. He says he wants the Gang of Eight to pass. He says he never wanted it to pass. He says he’s anti Establishment. Then he hires the Bush team, including the crook Neil.
I was quite clear. I’m sick of Cruz insisting he can have everything both ways. A little of that kind of duplicity goes a long way.
Can you show me where Cruz says he is FOR a BROKERED convention. That link is the reporters take.
By definition a contested convention is when someone does not have enough delegates on his/her own. How can you be against that. If someone has 49% of the delegates the 1% needed to win come from somewhere. That is a contested convention.
I think you are referring to a brokered convention where the elites decide who will be the nominee. Cruz has consistently argued against this.
If you want to hate Cruz, go ahead. But Cruz and Trump are on the same page with regards to brokered conventions. NO!
GOP 1976 was a contested convention, with uncommitted delegates casting the deciding votes. Nobody calls 1976 a brokered convention.
Sorry, that's not correct.
Four million white voters “stayed home” in 2012, but they were not Conservatives.
Romney got 1.5 million more white votes in 2012 than McCain got in 2008.
Obama lost 5.5 million white votes in 2012 compared to 2008.
In fact, Romney was the first presidential candidate in American history to get 59% of the white vote - and lose!
Bottom Line - in 2012, non-white voters had their largest turn out ever, and 82% of them voted to re-elect Obama.
You’re not reading my posts carefully enough. I posted only the link where Cruz says he’s against a “contested convention.” I didn’t post a link in which he says he favors a contested convention. Instead, I laid out the key words I used in my search, and conveyed that I got many hits.
He told Megyn Kelly he favors a contested convention. But he said at CPAC that he doesn’t—and that was a quote.
It’s not my fault that Cruz talks out of both sides of his mouth. I’m just glad I’m not the one who has to justify Cruz taking opposite positions on so many issues.
I think what Trump supporters are concerned with is, let's say Trump goes to the convention with 1150 delegates and Cruz gets 1000. Both short. What I think I hear is since Trump has the plurality he should win. I disagree with this. I think at that point it is up to each of the candidates to make deals to line up candidates.
Now if the elites try to push Kasich and his 66 delegates as the nominee that would be a brokered convention and cause massive unrest.
I actually think with my scenario Trump and Cruz would find a way to work it out. They both detest the elites.
I am not trying to being obtuse. Cruz never says he is against contested conventions. That is what the writer says in the article at the link, He then quotes Cruz directly who says he is against brokered conventions.
I think the issue is the reporter of this article doesn’t understand the difference between contested and brokered conventions. He hears Cruz say he is against brokered conventions and writes Cruz is against contested conventions. Read it again and you will see what I mean.
From the same link:
“If you want to beat Donald Trump here’s how you do it: You beat Donald Trump with the voters,” he said.’
Again:
‘”If you want to beat him, you have to beat him at the ballot box,” Cruz said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”’
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ted-cruz-beat-donald-trump-ballot-box-not-gop-convention/
So which Cruz do you believe, the one who adamantly insists Trump must be defeated by voters at the ballot box, or the one who wants a contested convention?
Same guy. He wants to beat him fair and square. But if no one gets majority wants to beat him at contested convention.
Listened to Rush today, he makes the point Cruz wants to go one on one with Trump because Cruz believes that way either he or Trump will get majority. Rush thinks the elite will try to take from either.
Most of us voted for those two sacks of garbage and get tired of being preached to about it.
You called it. Hillary is up to her neck in this.
So when Cruz says you *have* to beat Trump at the ballot box, it’s with a smirk and a wink.
We’ll see. I’m capable of making my own decisions, thank you.
We’ll see if there is a viable 3rd party.
I heard about some of GHW Bush’s Republican team today bemoaning Trump.
Makes me on his side more and more.
I believe and hope that you are right - it looks like we'll get a chance to test that hypothesis.
Tell that to the judge when one guy spits on your wife or daughter and the other one rapes and mutilates them....
Easy to sound "pure of heart and spirit" when lecturing someone else but the real crux is that you're only so "pure" when lecturing - real life shows that they're are shades of gray in our human world and only God can go to pure Black and White mode.
Either take your head out of the sand or bury the rest of you to join it.
Can’t deny, however, that lots stayed home rather than vote for the foul Romney.
“what happened in Chicago wasn’t a “Republican Plan”. ... The plan was hatched in Sea Island Georgia.”
Really? Not a Republican plan?
REPUBLICAN attendees at Sea Island:
Karl Rove (agent of all things Bush including Neil Bush, Cruz’ newest campaign insider)
Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.)
Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.)
Speaker of the House Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.)
Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.)
Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas)
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.)
Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.)
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas)
Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.
DEMOCRAT attendee:
Rep. John Delaney (D-Md.)
Others:
Tim Cook, billionaire Apple CEO
Larry Page, billionaire Google co-founder
Sean Parker, billionaire Napster creator and Facebook investor
Elon Musk, billionaire Tesla Motors and SpaceX founder
Arthur Sulzberger, billionaire publisher of The New York Times
Philip Anschutz, billionaire businessman and GOP donor
Ok, duly noted. I should have said GOPe plan perhaps, which, in my mind has morphed into something different than the Republican brand used to be. Strange bedfellows here, but convenient ones. Shared goals.
The meeting was secret. We only have assurances from some attendees that the discussion was limited to how the Trump phenomenon happened. I don’t believe for a minute they didn’t discuss how to stop Trump, and possibly formulate some plans as to how to move forward against him. John Delaney and Arthur Sulzberger could have been Hillary’s eyes and ears at that meeting. Overt coordination with the Hillary camp? Probably not. Taking out Trump is a goal they all share, no?
There were many, many, Hillary signs at the Chicago Trump rally protest. Only Bernie signs were shown on CNN, Fox News. It just seems so convenient that purported Bernie supporters were the only belligerents at the Trump rally. It’s my theory that Bernie was being set up to be the patsy if anything happened to Trump. That narrative is now in place. I most certainly could be wrong. We’ll see. If Trump is assassinated, Bernie camp could be blamed and President Hillary could sweep it all under the rug. Trillions at stake here.These people are serious, and Trump’s life is in danger. If Im wrong, then I’m wrong.
“It just seems so convenient that purported Bernie supporters were the only belligerents at the Trump rally. It’s my theory that Bernie was being set up to be the patsy if anything happened to Trump.”
Exactly what I believe! I believe the setup is by GOPe primarily, and Hillary secondarily.
Rove was there, at the secret meeting. We have connections:
Rove - Bush (Bush 41, Bush 43, Neil)
Bush - Clinton (Bush 41 & Bill go back to the ‘80s at least)
Clinton B. - Clinton, H. (obvious)
Ayers - Clinton
Bush - Cruz (Neil Bush on Cruz’ campaign)
I think Bernie is the patsy for GOPe. He’s a commie but I think he’s not pure evil as Hillary is, and is pretty much WYSIWYG with him. When it comes to conniving, Hillary’s the girl. He said they weren’t his people, and I kind-of believe him, although a few might have been there.
When the GOPe said they were going “Full Mississippi” on Trump, that referred to the McDaniel v. Cochran race. They readily admitted paying democrats to cause a ruckus.
And, as I’ve posted before, anybody can go to a print shop and have “Bernie” signs made. It doesn’t have to be a Bernie supporter.
I just hope this is exposed some day — before we’ve passed through the Pearly Gates.
Yes. I agree.
With today's cancellation by Trump of the Salt Lake City debate, we have evidence that Trump is now aware of the danger he may be in. Chicago was his first cancellation no? He must have been told there was a grave threat. At this time, he really needed to go to Illinois. Trump cannot subject himself to being protected by the security hired by the GOPe at the debates. At his own rallies, he can control security somewhat. Not at the debates. GOPe in charge.
The set-up is in place. I so hope we're wrong.
Sirhan Sirhan. Bernie Bernie. Patsy Patsy.
Eerily similar to where Robert Kennedy was at this time a few years ago. Donor class not dissimilar to mafia in those days. Then there's Hillary, GOPe. And Obama. Trillions to lose for some jail in the cards for others. Trump has to be eliminated.
Because they can.
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.