Posted on 04/19/2016 5:16:27 AM PDT by markomalley
When it’s suggested that Trump try to keep his pledged delegates loyal to him, he’s “encouraging violence.”}
That's how Cruz supporters ‘think’. Hypocrisy is the norm.
I have no problem with protesting........but threatening people, for not falling in line with their agenda, is what the socialists/communists do........you know, the people who are the true antithesis of a free Republic?
"the enemy?"..........."traitors?"........."act of war?"
Something isn't right with the Trump train........as evidenced with a comment recently on FR from a person who said they were willing to kill or die for Trump.
Trump needs to get ahead of this by publicly disassociating himself from anyone promoting this type of garbage.
How anyone would think that scaring little kids, teens, or spouses in their own homes is a proper avenue for protest is contrary to just about everything that conservatives believe in terms of security of our loved ones.
It’s totally misguided. Anyone who would practice such a thing should be ashamed of themselves. We hated it in leftists. We should hate it in anyone.
Trump needs to get ahead of this by publicly disassociating himself from anyone promoting this type of garbage.
Kind of like how Cruz ‘disassociated’ himself from Glenn Beck and his implications of ‘Nazism’ within the Trump ranks...?
How anyone would think that scaring little kids, teens, or spouses in their own homes is a proper avenue for protest
the inclusion of the last paragraph in the posted document causes me to think there is some chicanery afoot here..
I don’t care what state or branch of conservatism a person might be from.....BUT, conservatives do NOT target little kids in their own homes.
Ever.
When you realize that you have LOST, you bring out the Hitler/Nazi labels.
How Pathetic? Immature, ignorant, childish.
The situation has changed. Cruz’s ground game has folks signing up to be Trump delegates when their plan is to vote for Cruz second ballot if he gets that far. A person should not say they’re a Trump delegate if they at the onset have another candidate they prefer.
Never know who's watching this language on FR and taking names do we?
Right. So did Trump denounce Stone when he said:
If you’re from Pennsylvania, we’ll tell you who the culprits are. We urge you to visit their hotel and find them.
Did Cruz denounce his superpac giving $500,000 to Carly’s superpac? No. Even though the FEC is investigating that.
Did Cruz denounce his superpac sending out a campaign ad with nude pictures of Melania along with derogatory prose? No.
Trump doesn’t need to denounce the actions of his superpac, either, since by law, they’re not coordinating, as we heard from Cruz supporters over and over and over again about Cruz’s superpac’s unsavory actions.
You can try the moral equivalence argument but it only means that you have no sense of proportion. Thanks for clearing up exactly who you are and what you stand for.
Step #1. Be negligent, spend as little “self-funding” money as possible, ignore precinct caucuses & don’t help supporters either to run to be a precinct representative or to know which person to vote for.
Step #2. Whine, cry, bellyache and complain that the Registered Republicans who actually show up at the precincts to vote, vote for Ted Cruz supporters in the majority to represent the precincts.
Step #3. When Cruz delegates win the votes to be a state’s delegates to the national convention, whine and complain that the delegates were “stolen from Trump” or “appointed by the GOPe” despite actually becoming delegates as a result of winning the most votes.
Step #4. When you realize you’ve FAILED to obtain the votes to be the Republican nominee, have your supporters begin to make plans for MOB RULE and for CAMPAIGNS OF THREATS & INTIMIDATION should delegates not vote the way you want.
Step #5. Should #4 failed to get Trump the nomination, VOTE A STRAIGHT ‘RAT TICKET.
Since the GOP is so big on loyalty pledges anywise, they ought to have no problem with this, right?
Impressive, we all hated the loyalty oath thing before, but since now it's supposed to be for Trump, it's just another thing that's no longer distasteful?
Standards double much?
The Supreme Court would never hear the case - the party has almost absolute autonomy with regard to how they select their nominee. The only prohibitions are, if there is a vote of some kind, you can't exclude someone from voting based on race, color, creed or sex.
Really, I shouldn’t need a tag for people to figure out I’m being sarcastic.
Not normally, no. But considering how FR has become during this election cycle, yes, yes you do!
Facts? You’re using facts?
Waste of time, but then you’re already well aware of that fact.
Stone has been banned from CNN and MSNBC?
Well, I suspect both Hannity and Charles Hurt at the DrudgeReport will more than make up for it.
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.