Delegates....a rigged system?

[cereal_killer]

Should American's (registered voters) be denied their vote be it via caucus or straight vote primary? Yes or no?

As long as Parties are able to make up rules each year it's not democratic. Congress should set the rules for both Parties, and should fund the election.

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Another example of how our primary system is rigged.

Trump had won the 7th districts vote, but the Cruz slimeballs wanted to steal the delegate slots with fraudulent Trump delegates.

Trump Supporters Walk Out of Georgia Delegate Fight After Party Picks Cruz Supporter...'Uproar in the Hall' - Breitbart

A Cruz-Rubio alliance at the district convention in Buford, Georgia helped to knock Trump supporters out of the district’s national delegation altogether. Cruz supporters implied that Trump’s people would “embarrass” the district at the convention in Cleveland. Then things got heated.

“This morning, I attended Georgia 7th Congressional District GOP convention as a delegate and a Donald Trump supporter. We were there to elect the 3 delegates and 3 alternates to the national convention,” Ronnie Kurtz told Breitbart News. “Per the primary results, two slots were for Trump, and one was for Rubio.
Ted Cruz finished third in the primary and had no delegates allotted to him…Nonetheless, the hall was stacked with Cruz delegates.”....

So on the next ballot it came time to replace one or all of those delegates with new people. The Cruz supporters managed to knock out Dooley, the one Trump supporter. Kurtz described what happened:

When it came time for nominations from the floor, the Cruz bloc, which I believe had the numbers to install whoever they wanted, did not challenge the Rubio delegate. Only the true Trump supporter, Debbie Dooley, was challenged. Two Cruz supporters argued in favor of their alternative delegate, a Mr. David Hancock, on the premise that he had ‘been in the party from the beginning’ and ‘wouldn’t embarrass us at the convention.’ The convention was given no time to ask questions of the candidates on the basis that ‘the nominating committee has already interviewed them for you’. The Cruz people succeeded in voting in their delegate over Trump’s Debbie Dooley.

So, completely ignoring the state GOP bylaws that state that Trump should have gotten two of those delegates, the Cruz people elected two people who were fake Trump delegates, which is fraud, no matter how universal the practice may be.

We need national standards for primaries and all delegate allotment based on the results of the primaries with a uniform and reasonable method.

Maybe we can get Trump to stop whining like a little *****. "Unfair!"

I can see Trump being at a Yankees game and screaming that 'stealing a base' is unfair.

What is up with your constant whines? What is your excuse?

I'd like to know where he gets off saying the delegates have been "bought"? Does he have any evidence of Cruz and his campaign "buying" votes with anything other than showing up, paying attention to them, and making them feel like their support actually mattered, something Donny Boy can't be bothered to do? If I were a delegate, I'd be suing Trump for slander and defamation of character.

The truth is, Trump resents the whole idea that he should "lower" himself to doing anything other than having a big flashy rally with some vague slogans and buzzwords and lots of cheering for him. He finds the idea of treating other people as important to be degrading. The nerve of them, thinking he should actually have to communicate with them and convince them to support him, instead of understanding that they should feel honored to be gifted with the opportunity to support him.

Yeah, it's more than a little ironic that Trump's making an argument that Wyoming's delegates should belong to them, when Wyoming is home to the tea party, small govt (even from the dems), where even the dems are armed, and libertarians. BUT, the system is rigged when delegates are not tied to what the actual vote was in a primary or caucus. Colorado's gop party had a valid point that if all your delegates were tied to a candidate early on, and the candidate dropped out, your state is screwed as far as being part of the nomination process. But the answer to that could be accomplished if the natl gop would amend their rules to release all delegates if a candidate drops out or suspends his/her campaign.

Perhaps, but the RNC is trying to respect the prerogative of the state parties to make decisions according to their individual needs and priorities. And it makes the party potentially more responsive to the rank-and-file, since it's much easier to gain influence in the state party and thus over decisions than it is to gain that same level of influence in the national party.

Really, it's the same concept as state governments versus the federal government.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Oh, so the party is the people's representative. Glad we got that settled.

Nope, sorry, didn't say that. I said the people who run the party are members of "The People", too. It's THEIR party. They put out the time and effort and money to build it. The government does not need to be barging in and telling them what to do with it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Should American's (registered voters) be denied their vote be it via caucus or straight vote primary? Yes or no?

As long as Parties are able to make up rules each year it's not democratic. Congress should set the rules for both Parties, and should fund the election.

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

No, dumbass, YOU WANT TO BELIEVE that's what I said and think, and assiduously avoid ever hearing what I'm ACTUALLY saying so that you can keep saying, "Oh, see, you don't want people to vote."

You wish to keep flailing around in your emotionally satisfying tantrum so you can justify making demands for things you haven't put any effort into.

 

[cereal_killer]

As long as Parties are able to make up rules each year it's not democratic. Congress should set the rules for both Parties, and should fund the election.

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

No, dumbass, YOU WANT TO BELIEVE that's what I said and think, and assiduously avoid ever hearing what I'm ACTUALLY saying so that you can keep saying, "Oh, see, you don't want people to vote."

You wish to keep flailing around in your emotionally satisfying tantrum so you can justify making demands for things you haven't put any effort into.

Ha! Don't back peddle Cecil LIE

 

[Cecilie1200]

Okay, I am going to personally address this question and discuss it, but I've been really busy for most of this afternoon and evening, and I'm honestly too tired to put that together. So I will come back tomorrow and pursue this. Meanwhile, I will provide this:

A National Primary Wouldn't Work - US News

A single national primary day is a bad idea, but having national standards for primaries and every state having a primary long with other states of the same region and staggering those dates with a different regional order each election that is a great idea. I think it was CandyCorn that first posted it on another thread, though I'm sure she got the idea from somewhere else.

I would add to this that there be no contributions or ads favoring a candidate legal by any for-profit corporations. Get the corporate money out of the system and most of this will right itself.

Again, NOT the government's business what private organizations do, nor should it be. The very idea that you're suggesting the federal government needs to extend its overreach and overcontrol into even more is repugnant.

But you refuse to acknowledge the cozy relationship the parties have with government. They are private but what they do is control public policy to a very large degree.

No, we don't need more of the same, we need to get the big money, unions and corporations, out of politics as much as possible. and it would be a good start to change the laws to allow the people to pick the delegates, instead of party insiders.

Yes, well, they've done a very effective job of wielding their First Amendment right to assemble and petition the government. And then? It would be a good idea to change the laws to entitle you to the profits of their work, without you having to put any effort out yourself? Is that it?

Are there any other fellow citizens who've worked harder and been more successful you feel you should have the right to usurp, comrade?

 

[BluesLegend]

The people are attempting to uproot a corrupt GOP party establishment that arrogantly feels they are entitled to say who will be elected president. Naturally the GOP establishment are shitting themselves.

 

[Cecilie1200]

the candidates do not represent they government. they represent the parties. the parties used to just appoint candidates and people had zero say.

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

No, dumbass, YOU WANT TO BELIEVE that's what I said and think, and assiduously avoid ever hearing what I'm ACTUALLY saying so that you can keep saying, "Oh, see, you don't want people to vote."

You wish to keep flailing around in your emotionally satisfying tantrum so you can justify making demands for things you haven't put any effort into.

Ha! Don't back peddle Cecil LIE

I haven't backpedaled anything (and learn the ******* difference between "pedal" and "peddle", halfwit). Again, there's a huge difference between what I've said and you've ignored, and what you've determined you're going to hear no matter WHAT my words are.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Okay, I am going to personally address this question and discuss it, but I've been really busy for most of this afternoon and evening, and I'm honestly too tired to put that together. So I will come back tomorrow and pursue this. Meanwhile, I will provide this:

A National Primary Wouldn't Work - US News

A single national primary day is a bad idea, but having national standards for primaries and every state having a primary long with other states of the same region and staggering those dates with a different regional order each election that is a great idea. I think it was CandyCorn that first posted it on another thread, though I'm sure she got the idea from somewhere else.

I would add to this that there be no contributions or ads favoring a candidate legal by any for-profit corporations. Get the corporate money out of the system and most of this will right itself.

Again, NOT the government's business what private organizations do, nor should it be. The very idea that you're suggesting the federal government needs to extend its overreach and overcontrol into even more is repugnant.

But you refuse to acknowledge the cozy relationship the parties have with government. They are private but what they do is control public policy to a very large degree.

No, we don't need more of the same, we need to get the big money, unions and corporations, out of politics as much as possible. and it would be a good start to change the laws to allow the people to pick the delegates, instead of party insiders.

Limiting government by expanding it's powers to regulate private organizations. Now there's an idea that's every bit as crazy as it sounds ...

And we've seen what money does to politics. It isn't shrinking government. At all.

The solution is not to limit people's right to spend their own money on political participation. The solution is to make politicians less valuable in general.

 

[BluesLegend]

The GOP establishment is a great example of do as I say not as I do. If there were a single corporation wielding the kind of monopoly power the GOP holds government would demand that it be broken up.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Of course the process is rigged. The sad thing is, EVERY candidate knew that going in, so to cry foul now just looks like sour grapes. Bernie KNEW that Hillary was picked by the party and that he had no true fair shot. Same with Trump. The difference being that Trump actually has a shot at beating the establishment while Bernie doesn't.

True. No one hid anything from Donny Boy. He had the same access to the rules and procedures as the rest of the candidates did, and they've been applied to him the same way they have been to the rest of the candidates. He just doesn't want to put out the effort and money to make them work for him.

 

[cereal_killer]

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

No, dumbass, YOU WANT TO BELIEVE that's what I said and think, and assiduously avoid ever hearing what I'm ACTUALLY saying so that you can keep saying, "Oh, see, you don't want people to vote."

You wish to keep flailing around in your emotionally satisfying tantrum so you can justify making demands for things you haven't put any effort into.

Ha! Don't back peddle Cecil LIE

I haven't backpedaled anything (and learn the ******* difference between "pedal" and "peddle", halfwit). Again, there's a huge difference between what I've said and you've ignored, and what you've determined you're going to hear no matter WHAT my words are.

Oh yes you have and you're burning up massive amounts of calories in the process. Keep up the lie Cecil LIE

 

[Cecilie1200]

The GOP establishment is a great example of do as I say not as I do. If there were a single corporation wielding the kind of monopoly power the GOP holds government would demand that it be broken up.

It's not usually the GOP advocating government intereference in businesses.

 

[kaz]

I think it's pretty disproportionately left and you'd admit that if you were honest. So think about it, the party that you hate, who fucked you and your family, the people who continue to strongly support that policy, they are thanking you for continually agreeing with them. Remind me to not worry about you getting pissed at me ...

OK I am starting to understand that you are a paranoid schizophrenic. You obviously cannot help yourself.

My complaints with the current and recent(2-3 decades) direction taken by the GOP what with the fundamental christian over reaching and the systematic ass kissing of so called U S corporations which are in fact multi nationals has drawn some actual libs to thank some of my posts. They probably do so misunderstanding me the same way you do thinking any crumb they come across is a trail to a goldmine.

Many of my posts are/have been generally about the need to support American manufacturers and the survival of American business and American jobs. For the last couple of decades I have been involved with machining so I have a particular hard on against out sourcing and the destruction of U S manufacturing businesses and jobs. Having been a farm boy I have been very much against 3M and their destruction of family farming by patenting and prosecuting accidental cross planting. It is deplorable as it is intended to force compliance to buy their seed product. I get thanks from many sources for many reasons. Stop trying to bully me into accepting your accusations as true. Just keep it between yourself and your psychiatrist.

You're not contradicting me yet again. Democrats fucked you. Then the SC said the Florida SC had to follow their own laws. Then you said, WTF, I'm a socialist! Give me my way! I'm going to endlessly support the people I hate who sole my family's legacy by supporting the people who support the policy that did that!

Wow, you are a Republican ...

It is clear that you have no idea how crazy your posts are. "WTF, I'm a socialist Give me my way! I'm going to endlessly support the people I hate who sole my family's legacy by supporting the people who support the policy that did that! " ???

I don't "endlessly" support anyone or any thing. I take things as they come and as they are. I used to support Dubya and his dad. Then as their actions were proven to be nearly the end of ours and the world's financial system and the wars and the talking to god and on and on I had to be realistic and reject what I once thought to be honorable and good for America.

Now DON"T go off the deep end. That does NOT mean I had to run over to the dems and sign up. It just means as my faith applied to the Bush's I felt betrayed. Since I have NEVER voted democratic they are not so much of a problem.. I just say no. I certainly don't take the GOP for granted anymore. My general trust in them has vanished. If they want my vote they need to be transparent and telling the truth and stop talking crazy like the Donald. Otherwise I won't waste my time voting.

For me to vote for Trump he would have to publicly admit his thoughts on the huge wall are nonsense. Congress will not pay for this wall no matter how the Donald attempts to sell it. Getting Mexico to pay for the wall in advance is about as likely as something not likely at all. But THAT is the only way this super wall would ever be financed. Remember Elliot Ahbrams telling us that Iraqi oil would pay for the invasion? Fool me once...yada yada yada

Another position from you, another agreement with the Democrats. And the wall is way cheaper than not building it. The people thanking you tell you what you are, and you sure aren't getting thanks from Republicans

Again with the obsession. I have made it clear and for good reason that cannot be argued why I hate the dems and how I came to be a republican in the footsteps of my dad and his dad before him.

How is it that you have decided that any kind of republican other than the one in your imagination deserves no voice?

Is it supposed to bother me that a handful of progressives agree with a few of the views I bring to USMB? You must think the republican mind weak that they can only parrot what the leadership offers as opinion. What has this mindset achieved for our nation? This mindless rudeness and name calling is supposed to enlist co-operation in dealing with the nation's business?

You talk about the "hand waiving". Just what in hell do you think the GOP leadership is doing? God, gays and guns and nothing else is NOTHING else but hand waiving. Hey! Look at me! I hate gays! My god has all the answers! Obama will take away your guns! Really? I still have mine... probably a presidential oversight.

I think what you represent is the intolerance of the GOP even distant from the party you are here to sell it's worst attributes. Highly amusing.

LOL, no, Republicans don't agree with Democrats on every issue discussed, not real ones. And virtually all your thanks are by leftist Democrats, not just a "handful." Libertarians sure aren't thanking you just like Republicans aren't. You're a leftist. Why does that bother you when it by far describes the majority of your views?

And again, the people who still demand the inheritance policies that fucked your family are thanking you all over the place, that doesn't bother you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

No, dumbass, YOU WANT TO BELIEVE that's what I said and think, and assiduously avoid ever hearing what I'm ACTUALLY saying so that you can keep saying, "Oh, see, you don't want people to vote."

You wish to keep flailing around in your emotionally satisfying tantrum so you can justify making demands for things you haven't put any effort into.

Ha! Don't back peddle Cecil LIE

I haven't backpedaled anything (and learn the ******* difference between "pedal" and "peddle", halfwit). Again, there's a huge difference between what I've said and you've ignored, and what you've determined you're going to hear no matter WHAT my words are.

Oh yes you have and you're burning up massive amounts of calories in the process. Keep up the lie Cecil LIE

Like I said, you will hear what you want to hear, no matter what I actually say. Believe whatever you like, because there's a hard limit on the effort I will expend on someone addicted to and proud of their own ignorance and dishonesty, and you just exceeded it. Wallow happily in the manure pile that is being you. No more pearls before lying swine.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Much of the parties' delegate system is designed to mimic or resemble the electoral college.

You know, that silly system that conservatives generally adore.

 

[HUGGY]

The people have a Constitutional right to vote for their representatives in government. Anything impeding that right should be illegal, whether it's a Superdelegate system, or making people jump through hoops to be able to vote, or limiting the number of places to vote.

Sorry, but the people DO get to vote for their representatives in government. How people are presented to campaign to BE that representative is something else entirely, and does not need government interference.

Synthaholic I've been around the block with Cecilie1200. She doesn't believe Americans have any right to vote for their representatives in Government if the parties don't deem it necessary. thanatos144 echo's this sentiment as well.

They wish to keep the system where the parties select the nominee not the American people. If you wish to attack this system where hundred of thousands of voters are being disenfranchised then you are a whiner. In other words take a good ass reaming and shut up, these are the rules.

No, dumbass, YOU WANT TO BELIEVE that's what I said and think, and assiduously avoid ever hearing what I'm ACTUALLY saying so that you can keep saying, "Oh, see, you don't want people to vote."

You wish to keep flailing around in your emotionally satisfying tantrum so you can justify making demands for things you haven't put any effort into.

Ha! Don't back peddle Cecil LIE

I haven't backpedaled anything (and learn the ******* difference between "pedal" and "peddle", halfwit). Again, there's a huge difference between what I've said and you've ignored, and what you've determined you're going to hear no matter WHAT my words are.

"back peddling" is what they used to call it when the truck driver sold items out the back door of a truck and reported the loss as a theft.

 

[kaz]

So if I can "prove" that they could have saved the Ambassador, then we can investigate it? Seriously? It's highly relevant if for political reasons they didn't try, which certainly appears to have been the case. In the end, it appears to have been managed horribly, but there don't seem to have been any crimes committed, other than the Administration covering it up ...

"So if I can "prove" that they could have saved the Ambassador, then we can investigate it?"

You REALLY do have problems with basic understanding of the English language don't you. No! What I meant for you to understand is that you should go ahead and investigate it to your heart's content. When and if you find something worth the general public knowing then by all means report it. If your enthusiasm for this "mission" is just speculation please try to stay out from under people's feet. Your "tin foil hat" is not some special entitlement to bring everyone's/anyone's life to a grinding halt. There have already been several congressional hearings on the matter. Not enough? I am more than satisfied that enough energy and resources have been consumed on this matter.

You say "no" then confirm what I said ...

I say "no" because you got it backwards. You do that a lot.

No, you keep repeating that if we can prove it was murder, then we can investigate it, after we prove it was a crime.

What about the lamest controversy ever, "yellowcake." That one never made sense even if you believed everything the Democrats said. Just a few.

- Bush said THE BRITISH reported it, a claim they stood by. What "lie" was there in the first place?

- Why would the Bush administration send anyone to investigate Bush's statement? Why would they send anyone to investigate a claim where they didn't know what it was based on?

- And if they did, why would they send a partisan Democrat?

- How can you disprove a claim you don't know what it was based on?

- How were lives endangered by a woman who told people in the media (e.g., DEMOCRAT Tim Russert) she worked for the CIA?

WTF? The whole thing was just flat out lame, it didn't even make sense. Was that a waste of money too? Or did we need to nail the SOB W to the wall for lying us into a war?

"No, you keep repeating that if we can prove it was murder, then we can investigate it, after we prove it was a crime."

The congressional committees have already determined that there was no crime. That is unless you believe that the GOP was hiding something. How many investigations were there anyway? I lost count a long time ago.

I clearly did not suggest that WE call for another investigation. I clearly said YOU can go on investigating until you are blue in the face. When/if you come with something incriminating murder/bad taste in pants suits ..whatever please bring it forward. I'm sure Paul Ryan is waiting on the edge of his chair in anticipation.

Now! Can you turn your attention to the OP? Or is that too difficult?

I found the RNC chair's statements on Meet The Press enlightening to say the least and maybe a tad to restrained. He should have just told the Donald to shut the **** up.

Trump is STILL whining about the rules. Can you imagine a Trump arguing with other countries over "the rules" in negotiations with our friends and enemies?

I see the media pundits visibly shaking their heads attempting to take Trump seriously. What Donald? You don't know the rules? And you want to be president?

Now Cruz will be jostled from his perch over the lying about what he did or didn't hear Swanson say(at the top of his lungs) at the gay hate conference Cruz attended. Rules or no rules we have some seriously flawed candidates. Will anyone be left standing by the time the convention rolls around?

Fortunately there is such a thing as a contested convention because it appears they will need some type of orderly way to reboot the presidential candidate selection.

LOL, I can see Cryin Donald calling Putin, you're not fair, whaaa

 

[bendog]

Another example of how our primary system is rigged.

Trump had won the 7th districts vote, but the Cruz slimeballs wanted to steal the delegate slots with fraudulent Trump delegates.

Trump Supporters Walk Out of Georgia Delegate Fight After Party Picks Cruz Supporter...'Uproar in the Hall' - Breitbart

A Cruz-Rubio alliance at the district convention in Buford, Georgia helped to knock Trump supporters out of the district’s national delegation altogether. Cruz supporters implied that Trump’s people would “embarrass” the district at the convention in Cleveland. Then things got heated.

“This morning, I attended Georgia 7th Congressional District GOP convention as a delegate and a Donald Trump supporter. We were there to elect the 3 delegates and 3 alternates to the national convention,” Ronnie Kurtz told Breitbart News. “Per the primary results, two slots were for Trump, and one was for Rubio.
Ted Cruz finished third in the primary and had no delegates allotted to him…Nonetheless, the hall was stacked with Cruz delegates.”....

So on the next ballot it came time to replace one or all of those delegates with new people. The Cruz supporters managed to knock out Dooley, the one Trump supporter. Kurtz described what happened:

When it came time for nominations from the floor, the Cruz bloc, which I believe had the numbers to install whoever they wanted, did not challenge the Rubio delegate. Only the true Trump supporter, Debbie Dooley, was challenged. Two Cruz supporters argued in favor of their alternative delegate, a Mr. David Hancock, on the premise that he had ‘been in the party from the beginning’ and ‘wouldn’t embarrass us at the convention.’ The convention was given no time to ask questions of the candidates on the basis that ‘the nominating committee has already interviewed them for you’. The Cruz people succeeded in voting in their delegate over Trump’s Debbie Dooley.

So, completely ignoring the state GOP bylaws that state that Trump should have gotten two of those delegates, the Cruz people elected two people who were fake Trump delegates, which is fraud, no matter how universal the practice may be.

We need national standards for primaries and all delegate allotment based on the results of the primaries with a uniform and reasonable method.

Maybe we can get Trump to stop whining like a little *****. "Unfair!"

I can see Trump being at a Yankees game and screaming that 'stealing a base' is unfair.

What is up with your constant whines? What is your excuse?

I'd like to know where he gets off saying the delegates have been "bought"? Does he have any evidence of Cruz and his campaign "buying" votes with anything other than showing up, paying attention to them, and making them feel like their support actually mattered, something Donny Boy can't be bothered to do? If I were a delegate, I'd be suing Trump for slander and defamation of character.

The truth is, Trump resents the whole idea that he should "lower" himself to doing anything other than having a big flashy rally with some vague slogans and buzzwords and lots of cheering for him. He finds the idea of treating other people as important to be degrading. The nerve of them, thinking he should actually have to communicate with them and convince them to support him, instead of understanding that they should feel honored to be gifted with the opportunity to support him.

Yeah, it's more than a little ironic that Trump's making an argument that Wyoming's delegates should belong to them, when Wyoming is home to the tea party, small govt (even from the dems), where even the dems are armed, and libertarians. BUT, the system is rigged when delegates are not tied to what the actual vote was in a primary or caucus. Colorado's gop party had a valid point that if all your delegates were tied to a candidate early on, and the candidate dropped out, your state is screwed as far as being part of the nomination process. But the answer to that could be accomplished if the natl gop would amend their rules to release all delegates if a candidate drops out or suspends his/her campaign.

Perhaps, but the RNC is trying to respect the prerogative of the state parties to make decisions according to their individual needs and priorities. And it makes the party potentially more responsive to the rank-and-file, since it's much easier to gain influence in the state party and thus over decisions than it is to gain that same level of influence in the national party.

Really, it's the same concept as state governments versus the federal government.

Well, the state parties really answer to the elite. But, I think overall, the natl party has to have a system whereby anyone who gets 50%plus one of the vote is the nominee, no exceptions. But, if there's just a plurality, then any candidate can try to lobby the delegates of anyone who dropped out or suspended to get there votes. There's no way Trump will ever be able to sway enough delegates to his side to win the nomination, and at this point his campaign is more about delegitimizing the process and his celebrity status than anything else. But, be that as it may, it's impossible to defend the nomination process as being fair, even though SC showed he benefited as well from delegate allocation based on something other than one person one vote.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"So if I can "prove" that they could have saved the Ambassador, then we can investigate it?"

You REALLY do have problems with basic understanding of the English language don't you. No! What I meant for you to understand is that you should go ahead and investigate it to your heart's content. When and if you find something worth the general public knowing then by all means report it. If your enthusiasm for this "mission" is just speculation please try to stay out from under people's feet. Your "tin foil hat" is not some special entitlement to bring everyone's/anyone's life to a grinding halt. There have already been several congressional hearings on the matter. Not enough? I am more than satisfied that enough energy and resources have been consumed on this matter.

You say "no" then confirm what I said ...

I say "no" because you got it backwards. You do that a lot.

No, you keep repeating that if we can prove it was murder, then we can investigate it, after we prove it was a crime.

What about the lamest controversy ever, "yellowcake." That one never made sense even if you believed everything the Democrats said. Just a few.

- Bush said THE BRITISH reported it, a claim they stood by. What "lie" was there in the first place?

- Why would the Bush administration send anyone to investigate Bush's statement? Why would they send anyone to investigate a claim where they didn't know what it was based on?

- And if they did, why would they send a partisan Democrat?

- How can you disprove a claim you don't know what it was based on?

- How were lives endangered by a woman who told people in the media (e.g., DEMOCRAT Tim Russert) she worked for the CIA?

WTF? The whole thing was just flat out lame, it didn't even make sense. Was that a waste of money too? Or did we need to nail the SOB W to the wall for lying us into a war?

"No, you keep repeating that if we can prove it was murder, then we can investigate it, after we prove it was a crime."

The congressional committees have already determined that there was no crime. That is unless you believe that the GOP was hiding something. How many investigations were there anyway? I lost count a long time ago.

I clearly did not suggest that WE call for another investigation. I clearly said YOU can go on investigating until you are blue in the face. When/if you come with something incriminating murder/bad taste in pants suits ..whatever please bring it forward. I'm sure Paul Ryan is waiting on the edge of his chair in anticipation.

Now! Can you turn your attention to the OP? Or is that too difficult?

I found the RNC chair's statements on Meet The Press enlightening to say the least and maybe a tad to restrained. He should have just told the Donald to shut the **** up.

Trump is STILL whining about the rules. Can you imagine a Trump arguing with other countries over "the rules" in negotiations with our friends and enemies?

I see the media pundits visibly shaking their heads attempting to take Trump seriously. What Donald? You don't know the rules? And you want to be president?

Now Cruz will be jostled from his perch over the lying about what he did or didn't hear Swanson say(at the top of his lungs) at the gay hate conference Cruz attended. Rules or no rules we have some seriously flawed candidates. Will anyone be left standing by the time the convention rolls around?

Fortunately there is such a thing as a contested convention because it appears they will need some type of orderly way to reboot the presidential candidate selection.

LOL, I can see Cryin Donald calling Putin, you're not fair, whaaa

I can see a lot of world leaders hanging up on him when he starts sputtering enraged insults and telling them they're fat, ugly losers.