[nathanbedford]

I said, "The truth of this rule is confirmed by the fact that Trump supporters never complain about the rules which "unfairly" advantage them by awarding them more delegates than their percentage would warrant."

The only reasonable interpretation of that is that we were talking in that context about voters en masse.

In reply you said,

And which 'vote' is that? The ones where normal voters actually were allowed to vote en masse

We are clearly talking about mass voting in which Trump was getting delegates in fact more delegates than their percentage of Trump of voters voting in mass would warrant.

At this point I simply acknowledged the possibility that Trump voters we were talking about could be "normal." I now know that is as questionable about Trump supporters in this forum who are clearly are even less normal in their reasoning powers.

I come to the judgment about you for the purely gratuitous and unwarranted remarks at the foot of your reply:

Get real.

You’re the fraud.

At least you had the good grace to refrain from ending your fatuous reply with "LOL."

[Gaffer]

After the fact reasoning and more digs trying to equate delegates awarded by open voting (however each state apportions them by actual votes) and those “rule changes” that take the general voter population out of the formula. Circumlocution isn’t your strong point.