Posted on 04/15/2016 7:07:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yea its a real nailbiter. LOL!
Trumpists keep saying this...but it simply isn't true.
So long as Trump is short of 1237, Cruz (and the field) aren't "done".
Cruz keeps dropping in the polls...the voters are turning against him. He can only make deals with some delegates. He will not win the nomination..totally impossible now but raises the question of why is he doing this?
He started out ok..great conservative senator but then went on to be Ron/Rand Paul weird as he adopted their followers...now he is waaay out there and folks just dont trust him. he couldnt even get over 50% in his home state.
Math doesnt look good for Cruz....its over.
The Wisconsin Democrats had to carry crLuzer over the finish line last week, because Hillary's "campaign" is on life support.
The Wisconsin numbers were just plain amusing. :)
My favorite part was Trump winning social conservative Rick Santorum's counties going away - while "social conservative" Cruz was winning social squish Romney's counties.
Not TOO obvious... LOL! :)
“The rules currently require a candidate to secure a petition featuring the signature of a majority of the delegates from eight states in order to be nominated ..” So, it is not enough that a candidate win a majority of delegates in a state. The candidate must also get these delegates to sign a petition. Maybe another one of those rules Trump will complain about or forget to do.
RE: Cruz keeps dropping in the polls...the voters are turning against him.
My issue is not with the polls but with how people want to see what they want to see in them. When the poll show that Trump has a 67% UN-favorability, his supporters call this poll BUNK even when more than one poll from other sources corroborates the most recent one.
So, if Cruz is dropping in the polls, and we should believe the polls, why should we not believe the polls when it shows a 67% disapproval?
Is it because we only want to believe what CONFIRMS what we already wish the results to be?
RE: ... raises the question of why is he doing this?
The answer is simple -— Because he wants to be the Republican nominee.
The more important question is this — Is he working within the publicly stated rules to become the Republican nominee? Are the rules spelled out clearly? Did he violate any of them with what he’s doing ? were these rules already in place long before the 2016 elections?
If he passes all the above test, I fail to see why people would call it cheating.
“So long as Trump is short of 1237, Cruz (and the field) aren’t “done”.”
“He will not win the nomination..totally impossible now but raises the question of why is he doing this?”
See Okie’s statement above. (Although I’m not sure who the “field” are, unless s/he’s so desperate that s/he thinks that at a Cleveland 3-ring circus the RNC is going to put a laurel wreath on the brow of Cruz, Rubio or another loser.)
You see it in counteless thread comments. Even Cruz’s supporters now recognize, and apparently ratify his role as—I’ve been using the word “spoiler” but it is no longer strong enough, so ... Cruz’s role assigned to him by his RNC masters is not just to stop Trump but—like McCain, Romney, Bush III, Rubio—to serve as their latest “conservative ****-blocker.”
Contested convention. `Ringer’ candidate, I’m thinking Ryan, since he’s blowing the same, “Oh my goodness, why, I could never ... “ coy smoke he blew when the Wisconsin Mini-me replaced Ohio’s Dr. Evil.
So there goes the WH and Senate, and McConnell, Ryan, Priebus & Co. keep their hoity-toity jobs; ominously, the stage is set for Obama’s CWII.
But the important thing is that Cruz’s overweening ambition is played-out to the bitter end, even if he has a snowball’s chance of winning.
RE: Math doesnt look good for Cruz....its over.
“It ain’t over till it’s over” — Yogi Berra
The proposal, which will top the agenda during a meeting of the Rules panel at the RNC’s annual spring meeting in Hollywood Beach, Fla., would fundamentally alter how the convention is conducted, further empowering the delegates to determine the course of the proceedings.
It amounts to not just a changing of the rules but of the rulebook itself, with far-reaching implications, potentially impacting whether party insiders will be able to draft a so-called “white knight” — someone currently not running who would play the role of savior at a deadlocked convention.
The proposal is the brainchild of Solomon Yue, an RNC officer and Rules Committee member from Oregon. It would replace the system used at Republican national conventions for decades, which mimic those used by the U.S. House of Representatives, with Robert’s Rules of Order, a design that’s often used to oversee civic and organizational meetings.
Some see the idea as a recipe for utter chaos, and one that could open the door to mischief-making. With thousands of delegates on hand, it’s easy to imagine a scenario where objections pile up, jamming up floor proceedings and turning the convention into a train wreck — all before the eyes of a national audience.
RNC officials say Yue's plan is almost certain to be tabled until closer to the convention. But it will spark a months-long debate just as the scrutiny into the party’s internal workings is intensifying.
The state delegation selection is run by the establishment in each state. They design it so they can be in control. Thats all you need to know.
The establishment should not even hold a primary because it tricks people into thinking they really have a choice in the selection of the candidates. Then when the voters find out they have been deceived, its not pretty. That is what is happening right now.
RE: The state delegation selection is run by the establishment in each state. They design it so they can be in control. Thats all you need to know.
It has ALWAYS been like this since the time of Lincoln. If you believe that it is unfair, then I suggest you either:
1) Go to a third party whose delegate selection process is more to your liking
or
2) Talk to the Republican Party of your state and suggest to them that they follow a delegate selection process that you believe is FAIRER than what they already have now.
Until then, this is what we have and if someone plays by these rules, rules which have already been spelled out in advanced, it is what it is. Just don’t call it cheating.
Personally, I don’t think that the winner take all states like Florida and Ohio are entirely fair either ( counties that went for a certain candidate are now forced to relinquish the candidate they favor because overall statewide, their candidate did not win the state ). But hey, rules are rules and Trump gets all of Florida and Kasich gets all of Ohio regardless of counties that went for Rubio or Cruz.
It has been estimated that Trump has won about 37% of the popular vote but has taken 42% of delegates. It seems that this system favors HIM.
Ken Cuccinelli got his slate of delegates in my state. Someone like me can’t go up against him. Dont be ridiculous! Its fixed!
RE: Ken Cuccinelli got his slate of delegates in my state. Someone like me can’t go up against him. Dont be ridiculous! Its fixed!
If it’s fixed, then it looks like it’s:
1) Fixed before the primary elections began.
2) Fixed in favor of Trump. He got all of Florida but did not win all of the counties. He got 42% of delegates while winning just 37% of the popular votes.
Why was there no complaint about the rules BEFORE the primaries and why all the complaints only now?
It’s like complaining about the rules of a game only after it is played and the rule book was written.
The main thing is that when a candidate wins delegates in a primary those delegates should be his/hers permanently and not be subject to manipulation by the party. Its disenfranchising the will of the people. Ted Cruz will not have any respect if he wins this way.
Ted Cruz has lost 11 big percentage points in the latest Fox News poll. This is the reason.
So, are we back to contending that Trump should be awarded a “W” on the basis of a plurality?
>>If he passes all the above test, I fail to see why people would call it cheating.<<
People call it cheating because Trump calls it cheating, pure and simple. That doesn’t mean it’s cheating; it just means that some people will blindly follow their leader without question. In Trump’s case, unfortunately, it’s a whole lot of people.
The day is likely to come when Trump calls for violence of some form (other than the low-level violence he’s already overtly advocated, like punching out a protester) and you will be asking why, given the facts of the matter, people would resort to violence. Same answer: Dear Leader called for it.
Ironically, most of the people who would make threats in Trump’s name would recoil from the sort of violence that Obama has fomented over the past year or two. Yet the police force in Cleveland is no doubt just as worried about what Trump will say over the next few months as they are about what our President will say.
Populism leads to no good end. Hopefully GOP voters in the states still to vote will come to realize this and put an early end to Trumpism, although right now all it is is hope.
RE: Ted Cruz has lost 11 big percentage points in the latest Fox News poll. This is the reason
If Cruz loses the nomination and the rules that were clearly spelled out IN ADVANCE were followed, even as a Cruz supporter, I will concede that he did not win enough delegates within the rules to clinch the nomination.
I just wish that Trump supporters will abide by the same mindset and not keep shouting the ‘C’ word (i.e. CHEATING) if Trump does not become the nominee by the same rules that were spelled out in advance.
Cheat! Cheat! Cheat! Voters being disenfranchised by rules designed and created by the establishment for the sole purpose of manipulating the votes.
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.