[[Now one could say “hey you should have complained at another time before you ran afoul of the rule”. That may be prudent advice. But it is still avoiding the question of whether rule A is fair.]]
The3 problem is that trump is only complaining about the rule when he loses delegates, never when he gains them- in Missouri the vote was nearly equal with cruz only a few thousand votes behind Trump- however, because of the rule- trump walked away with 70% of the delegates and cruz got only 20% or so- even though the end result of vote count was nearly identical- The voters that brought cruz to within a few thousand votes of trump had their votes essentially taken from them when hte state awarded trump 70%- they could have just stayed home and not vote ,and the results would have been the same- their votes didn’t count- Trump doesn’t mention the rule then- only when he loses delegates in places like Colorado because he didn’t have a ground game to woo the delegates like Ted did-
[[Again this may be a less charitable expression of good advice, but it is still avoiding the question of whether the rule A is fair. ]]
Was it fair when When Ted lost 50% of the delegaTEs in missouri because of the rule? Ted didn’t complain about losing them- He knew the rules and played by them and accepted that that is how the game is played- He did his best in Missouri, and it didn’t pay off- ok on to hte next state- Donald loses delegates in Lousinna and complains about ‘stolen delegate’- He loses in Colorado- apparently not knowing he needed to woo them- and complains about stolen delegates- (and there was some discrepancy about a ballot misprint that screwed up the delegate stuff, as well as some trump applications begin denied because they didn’t pay their $5 fee or something like that-)
[[This however does not make the rule fair and beyond reproach by people making a moral argument that the rule is unjust.]]
Nope it doesn’t but how long have these state delegate rules been inplace? A very long time now- all candidates have had to go by them- and never has there been such whining about it until this election except for Al Gore and ilk-
It’ the system we have- Donald should have been man enough to realize it, and smart enough to work with the rules, and worked later to change them IF he doesn’t feel they are fair- But to constantly charge Ted by saying ‘Lying Ted is stealing delegates from me” during the campaign that he CHOSE to enter is whining- plain and simple- I’ve worked at several places where their rules weren’t very fair to everyone- yet they were the rules- i had two choices- bitch moan and complain about them and quit- or live with them and keep my job- No amount of complaining was going to change them-
[[It is very close to using the principle of “its not the people who vote, but those that count the votes”]]
Hmmm- sounds just like Missouri where donald came away the victor of the spoils and didn’t complain one bit-
Winner-take-all can be seen as unfair or seen as fair. Arguments can reasonable be made both ways. It is similar to how many states do the electoral college. The idea of winner-take-all is the state is trying to increase its importance to the candidates. The idea of doing it proportional is to allow the side without a majority to have at least some influence.
Neither alternative is as clearly dishonest and wrong as assigning an unfaithful delegate against the will of the voters.
I can certainly understand that a Cruz supporter wants to change the subject and look for an angle to get around directly saying this is moral or right. I appreciate the awkward situation, and it doesn't mean they are bad people.