So do you want all delegates to stand firm on their designated candidate throughout the convention ballots? Or perhaps we nominate the GOP candidate by popular vote in all states and territories?
What is your plan to “un-rig” the system?
As long as the voters doing the vote are registered Republicans, why yes. That's the way to do it.
And was probably the intent all along. A system that allows the loser to come in and wheedle a few weak sisters to vacillate and change is a sick system.
Trump has plans to un-rig the system. Trump and his sons are pounding the message to millions of dissatisfied citizens. It’s become part of the movement. That cat is out of the bag never to be put back in again. I knew it would go this way after Colorado. I knew Cruz would be killed with ammunition he handed over to Trump. What is so telling is that Cruz gloats about Colorado - not recognizing that what he was a part of there is killing him. Zero strategic thinking skills. NOT what we need as president.
Read posts 2, 3 and 9 here. http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3420112/posts
When I was in high school I attended a ‘youth convention.’ It was designed to mirror a real convention in every way. I went as a delegate for the Dem front-runner (I being a gung-ho Dem/liberal in my youth). I wasn’t a stealth delegate; I sincerely liked and supported the frontrunner—he seemed like a great person and a great candidate.
I voted for this person on the first ballot. That was the rule.
Meanwhile, however, either the candidates themselves or a chosen spokesperson made speeches. My best friend and I listened to them all. We both changed our vote on the second ballot. A young firebrand candidate stole the show, capturing our enthusiasm, loyalty and votes.
That’s the way it should be. That’s the honest way. Meaning, it would have been dishonest for me to go as a delegate for a candidate I *planned* to betray. Otoh, if a candidate can make a better case for being the second ballot winner, that’s also honest. That’s how contested conventions should legitimately be resolved.
Premeditated ackstabbing is vile and repugnant. It is an Obama/Alinsky tactic, and does not represent the values of principled conservatives. Cruz has degraded both himself and his supporters by advocating it. Shame on him.
[And don’t tell me that loyal delegates can’t be legitimately persuaded to switch. Delegates know they must select the candidate. If the first ballot falls short, they will listen to the case made by each candidate. A certain percentage will switch on each ballot until they get the job done, guaranteed.)
I guess re-electing the rigged system will solve the problem?
The current “system”, more accurately a non-system, is a travesty.
It attempts to bridge two completely incompatible concepts or frameworks for how the end result should be achieved.
First (and quite respectable) is that each major party (both private organizations composed of paid and volunteer staff) should appoint delegates and convene every four years and that said convention, using reason and debate, should freely choose the nominees most likely to serve their interests (usually winning).
Second, and kind of novel, is the idea that (some) voters should choose the nominee, either by plurality or majority voting.
The attempt to meld these two opposing concepts into a smoothly-functioning system is a failure.
The biggest problem with the primary system is that there are no consistent qualifications for voting, and, worse, the qualifications to vote are not set by the parties but by the states in which the primaries are held. A primary system is under the control of often hostile state election bureaucracies rather than under the control of the parties.
You’re right, it’s not really rigged, and Cruz isn’t stealing anything.
Trump’s strategy of calling it ‘rigged’ is working like a charm.
By the way, there is nothing in the rules that says Trump can’t win a bunch of support by saying the system is rigged.
Go Trump!