You ask, what say I about the prospect of a splintered party in the event of a Ted Cruz nomination? I reply that if Ted Cruz goes into the convention with as few as two thirds of the delegates but emerges, like Abraham Lincoln did, with the nomination it demonstrates how much Donald Trump is viscerally detested by nonestablishment grassroot conservatives in the Republican Party and it is an indictment of the kind of campaign that Donald Trump has conducted. If the party under those circumstances is splintered, Donald Trump did it.
Such an event, so long as the present rules are maintained and the process remains limited to Trump or Cruz, will not represent a coup against the voters by the Republican establishment but the upwelling of sentiment by conservative grassroots activists. It is perfectly understandable that conservative grassroots activists will turn to the only conservative available, Ted Cruz.
When Ted Cruz contests within the rules for the nomination he is accused of splintering the party. Yet it is Donald Trump who was threatened to bolt the party not Ted Cruz. I ask you, will you support Ted Cruz if he emerges from the convention as the nominee? Why is the refusal of Trump supporters to come to the aid of the party if their man cannot win the delegates legitimate, but the desires of Cruz supporters to advance their own man illegitimate? As you know, I am pledged to support Trump if nominated and I will do so. Will you support Cruz if he is nominated?
It is misleading to extrapolate data from primaries onto the general electorate. For example, Donald Trump won big in New York which advances him toward the nomination but does not advance him 1 mm toward victory in the general election because the Democrats, having swamped Republicans in New York State better than two to one, will carry New York despite the fantasies spun by Donald Trump. Neither Trump, Kasich nor Cruz will carry New York.
As to the swing states, extrapolation is misleading. How did Romney do in the swing states after carrying them in the primaries? Donald Trump has won many of the swing states with bare pluralities. The majority of Republicans voted for other candidates. The job of Ted Cruz will be to consolidate those Republican voters, including Trump supporters who are not sore heads. The model for the Cruz campaign is not Romney but Reagan. In other words, the Cruz campaign will either succeed or fail on his ability to sell a conservative message as did Reagan. Trump is selling Trump and that is palatable to a limited demographic and repugnant to a huge portion of the electorate. As a conservative, I believe a conservative message can prevail.
I believe I have answered your questions responsibly, although no doubt unsatisfactorily. Despite your injunctions, I would like to make this remark about the character of Donald Trump: There is more to choosing a nominee for President of the United States of America than the likelihood of winning, as important as that might be. There is the question of the man's character. You and I have wrangled over the issue of Donald Trump's character for a long time and I respect you are skills in defending your guy. As you know, I am convinced that Trump is unworthy of the office because of his grotesque failings of character as demonstrated by his biography. We are entitled to consider whether a man is morally fit for the office and it is my opinion that Donald Trump is the third worst candidate for that office from the perspective of character.
I reply that if Ted Cruz goes into the convention with as few as two thirds of the delegates but emerges, like Abraham Lincoln did, with the nomination it demonstrates how much Donald Trump is viscerally detested by nonestablishment grassroot conservatives in the Republican Party and it is an indictment of the kind of campaign that Donald Trump has conducted. Absolute nonsense. Rather, the factual case would be that the GOPe, allied with the Establishment/Left/Media, and the unprincipled Cruz campaign, just barely, was able to blunt Donald Trump's march to the nomination with an unprecedented campaign of character assassination as relentless as it was immoral and slanted. Abraham Lincoln didn't have to contend with anything approaching the 24/7/365 vendetta of slander that has been directed at him.
It's amazing that he's standing at all after such suicidal behavior on the part of the party elites. That will be the only reason for Donald Trump coming up short.
And you'd just like to pretend that didn't even exist. You'd like to think that the demonization was all just part of e legitimate process. For shame.
Also, you utterly failed to explain how the party wouldn't be irreparably splintered. The reason for that is that there is no scenario in which Cruz gets the nomination that doesn't guarantee that fact.
So, in essence, you are rooting for the party to be splintered. This is the type of realization that has caused Cruz's tumble in the polls post-Wisconsin, along with the Colorado fiasco in which Donald Trump turned lemons into lemonade. If Colorado didn't cause Cruz to fade in the polls after Wisconsin, then what, may I ask, did?
As to your notes regarding the swing states, again you're in denial of reality. It should be clear to any objective observer that Ted Cruz is an incredibly weak candidate in such states.
So, so summarize, you cheer for a scenario in which Ted Cruz swipes the nomination from Donald Trump, splinters the party, destroys voter enthusiasm, and goes on to lose in a landslide in November.
Fortunately, I think you will find that the GOPe and the GOP delegate are not as bent on suicide as you suppose. That's why your scnenario (Cruz splintering the party) won't even come to pass.
The far more likely outcome would be to go "off the board" after appropriate shenanigans with the rules, and install a true insider (as opposed to the dupe Ted Cruz) in the place of both the first and second place candidates.
Basically you favor utter chaos, combined with the whimsical belief that (magically, mind you) Ted Cruz, whom the voters have soundly rejected, will somehow unify a party whose elite have done everything in thir power to thwart their own frontrunner.
In this scenario, splintering the party is the best possible outcome. Indeed it's very destruction as a force in national politics is the more likely outcome.
All this is supposed to be for the best of the country and the party.
You speak of Donald Trump's narcissism. I submit to you that Donald Trump, if the situation were reversed, would not attempt such mayhem, and thus, I submit tha tTed Cruz's ego and narcissism make Donald Trump's pale in comparison, with Cruz willing to risk everything on a gambit that, even if successful, will guarantee a Hillary victory November.
Ted Cruz is putting his ambition ahead of both the needs of the party and the country, and he will be remembered for that, should his suicidal efforts succeed.
Fortunately, at this point, it appears that Donald Trump, against all odds, will emerge victorious. He is the only person with a real chance to unite the party, because he will have been tempered by the incredible fire he has had to walk through.
To reiterate, however, you failed to explain how Ted Cruz could possibly unite the party, and your assertion about Trump being "viscerally detested" remains an illegitimate substitute for what the American People have actually witnessed over the last few months: an all out effort by an entrenched, corrupt establishment, to destroy the only man who will shake the DC Uniparty cartel to its very core, without which nothing in Washington will ever begin to change for the better.
Ted Cruz has exhibited his selfishness and lack of character repeatedly throughout his campaign, and you imagine that somehow, with extremely narrow demographic support, horrible performance in swing states, and a huge deficit in both delegates and popular vote, is somehow the candidate to unite the party.
It is to laugh, if it weren't so serious.
Inasmuch as you are not on the ground here in America, I believe that you're completely misjudging the situation, and Donald Trump securing the necessary delegates before the convention, or during it, will bear me out my assertion.
So you're in the "chaos, splintering, and President Hillary guaranteed" column, Got it...