[Hoot Gibson]

^^Ridiculous and not true. But still better than the profile in delusion that you present in your daily frothing tirades with regard to Trump. Trump changed his mind from his pro-choice stance to pro-life, and he hasn't wavered since. The Matthews interview was basically designed to give Trump's detractors an opportunity to manufacture an appearance of inconsistency and tag him with it. A band wagon you are more than eager to ride on for as long as it suits your purpose.

Trump didn't panic, and the answer he gave wasn't bad at all and neither were his pointed questions to Matthews, who is supposed to be a Catholic. Matthews pushes abortion on TV while straddling the Church fence in his private life and Trump burned him for it. Right now Cruz is speaking in categorical terms on things which require the Congress to act. IF elected, he can't do a darn thing on his own to overturn Roe. He can try and work with Congress and the SC, but that's about all. By the time Cruz gets to the Oval Office, 535 Congressmen will have so many axes to grind he'll be lucky to get anything at all accomplished. Maybe you should consider addressing a joint session of Congress to point out all of Cruz's glowing attributes. The way I hear it McConnell and Ryan aren't all that impressed and that's who he'd have to work with because it is extremely unlikely that Republicans will lose the House or the Senate this time around.

Trump doesn't dodge issues, likely he is the most forthcoming candidate I have heard since Reagan. It doesn't matter though cause Trump's leading in every remaining state primary poll.

Talk about delusional - if Trump thought he gave a good answer to Matthews' abortion question, he would not have followed up with two "clarifications" less than three hours afler giving it. You cannot seem to make your mind up about the GOP establishment and neither can Trump. One minute he is criticizing Cruz for standing up to McConnell and the rest of the GOPe, and the next minute he is calling Cruz a member of the establishment.

There is nothing forthcoming about ignorance and name calling, and those are Trump's good points. Trump has gotten along with politicians by giving them money. If that is how you want your tax money spent, then that is your choice. I have had enough of corruption in the federal government without voting for somebody who boasts about having been an active participant in that corruption.

Polls are just one more area where Trump and his supporters are not consistent. When they favor Trump, then they are all important to Trump, even when the polls are "unscientific" polls where people may vote dozens of times (e.g., hackers working for Trump). When polls show Trump trailing badly in almost every state, such as those that match Trump and Hillary, you dismiss them. Those polls show Trump heading toward a landslide loss approaching McGovern's historic numbers.

The truth is, Trump's lead in the polls has evaporated or at least shrunk in almost every case as those elections have approached. He starts out with a huge lead because of free publicity from news outlets like Fox News, and Cruz starts eating into the lead as he campaigns in the state.

Cruz made a huge mistake by his criticism of "New York values" during the Iowa campaign and I don't think his explanation will sway many voters in the New York City/Long Island part of the state. Outside of NYC, I think Cruz will win several congressional districts, but Cruz should have focused his criticism of values to Trump's lack of values and left New Yorkers out of his comments.

As for bandwagons, that is not how I travel. I supported the most conservative candidate in this race early in 2014, months before Cruz announced his intention to run, when almost nobody gave him any chance to win the nomination. Trump will call Cruz "Lyin' Ted" thousands of times during this campaign and it will not matter to me. I recognize propaganda when I hear it.

I never thought that I would see a politician who engaged in more personal attacks than Obama and the Clintons, but I was wrong. Trump will make people forget about their dirty campaigns. Eventually, Trumpism will replace McCarthyism as a synonym for dishonest smear tactics.

For somebody who doesn't dodge issues, Trump is sure doing his best to dodge a real debate with Cruz. Have you noticed how Hillary is still debating Bernie? She is a despicable candidate who should be in jail, but she is a profile in courage compared to the dodger.

[jetpilot]

You think Trump invented dirty/negative campaigns? What are you, 12? As for Hillary showing "courage" by debating Bernie, it doesn't take any "courage" to debate a communist who is as dumb as a rock.:eyeroll: You also act like you don't know Cruz has been in about 100 debates with Trump, with virtually all polls showing Trump won them all.

[Hoot Gibson]

You think Trump invented dirty/negative campaigns? What are you, 12? As for Hillary showing "courage" by debating Bernie, it doesn't take any "courage" to debate a communist who is as dumb as a rock.:eyeroll: You also act like you don't know Cruz has been in about 100 debates with Trump, with virtually all polls showing Trump won them all.

:biglmao: Ron Paul never lost an online poll either, for the same reason that Trump has not lost one. The only difference is that Ron Paul was civil and made some sense in his debates.

If Trump is not too intimidated by Hillary to debate her, or if he is finally shamed into facing Cruz man to man, then I will give you some detailed instructions that will allow you to vote for Trump dozens of times in one of Drudge's polls. If you can write a little code, then you could probably cast hundreds of votes for Trump.

Have you noticed how Trump and his supporters dismiss scientific polls that show him losing and embrace polls, even bogus online polls, which show Trump winning? Cruz was a national collegiate debate champion and a world semifinalist. At least Trump is smart enough to avoid a real debate with Cruz.

[TheRealThing]

:biglmao: Ron Paul never lost an online poll either, for the same reason that Trump has not lost one. The only difference is that Ron Paul was civil and made some sense in his debates.

If Trump is not too intimidated by Hillary to debate her, or if he is finally shamed into facing Cruz man to man, then I will give you some detailed instructions that will allow you to vote for Trump dozens of times in one of Drudge's polls. If you can write a little code, then you could probably cast hundreds of votes for Trump.

Have you noticed how Trump and his supporters dismiss scientific polls that show him losing and embrace polls, even bogus online polls, which show Trump winning? Cruz was a national collegiate debate champion and a world semifinalist. At least Trump is smart enough to avoid a real debate with Cruz.

Trump 743
New York 95
California 172
Total 1010

And that doesn't take into account any remaining Northeastern states where Trump will do well.

[Hoot Gibson]

Trump 743
New York 95
California 172
Total 1010

And that doesn't take into account any remaining Northeastern states where Trump will do well.

Nor does it take into account the delegates in those states that Cruz will win and the delegates who will drop Trump like a hot potato if he fails to win the nomination on the first ballot. Your analysis also ignores the possibility that Kasich will pick up the never Trump votes and delegates in areas where Cruz does not.

At this point, I don't believe that Trump will win half of the delegates in California. In fact, Cruz has a great shot at winning most of the delegates in California because of his strong ground organization there.

The current delegate score in Colorado is:

Cruz 21, with more to come
Trump 0
Kasich 0

Cruz will be speaking today to the Colorado Republican state convention, where he has a shot at capturing another 13 of the state's delegates (another 3 are awarded to party leaders). Trump was invited to speak but declined. That was not a smart move for somebody who hopes to win Colorado in November. Showing up would have given Trump a chance to appear courageous and to show that he is not the sore loser that we saw following his losses in Iowa and Wisconsin.

Trump is a celebrity candidate who does not play well at caucuses and conventions. He is an old dog who needs to learn some new tricks if he expects to be competitive at a contested convention. For Trump, it is 1,237 delegates on the first ballot or bust.

[TheRealThing]

Nor does it take into account the delegates in those states that Cruz will win and the delegates who will drop Trump like a hot potato if he fails to win the nomination on the first ballot. Your analysis also ignores the possibility that Kasich will pick up the never Trump votes and delegates in areas where Cruz does not.

At this point, I don't believe that Trump will win half of the delegates in California. In fact, Cruz has a great shot at winning most of the delegates in California because of his strong ground organization there.

The current delegate score in Colorado is:

Cruz 21, with more to come
Trump 0
Kasich 0

Cruz will be speaking today to the Colorado Republican state convention, where he has a shot at capturing another 13 of the state's delegates (another 3 are awarded to party leaders). Trump was invited to speak but declined. That was not a smart move for somebody who hopes to win Colorado in November. Showing up would have given Trump a chance to appear courageous and to show that he is not the sore loser that we saw following his losses in Iowa and Wisconsin.

Trump is a celebrity candidate who does not play well at caucuses and conventions. He is an old dog who needs to learn some new tricks if he expects to be competitive at a contested convention. For Trump, it is 1,237 delegates on the first ballot or bust.

^^Just pointing out the inescapably obvious.

I think you have chosen to ignore the real threat of a contested convention... Paul Ryan or somebody like him. If the establishment gives Cruz any support, it is meant only to deny Trump the nomination at the convention and create the chaos needed to shroud their true intentions. They, the Rove-esque puppet masters, would love to parachute in their fav in the person of Paul Ryan and in that you and they are evidently on the same page. Because Cruz might not have the oomph to win, even on an (unclear how many) number of ballots, they may feel they'd have to make up a plausible cover to look justified. I believe they think they can just run over those who support Trump, so no apologies necessary, but in Cruz's case, who even though he would have much more work to do than Trump in delegate wrangling, it seems that they think they'll need the cover.

Unlike Charlie Sykes, Erick Erickson, Rich Lowry, and the rest of the sky-is-falling #NeverTrumpsters, I chose the non-hysteria route to the Republican nomination. One guy (Trump) came out speaking the truth plainly and he is the only one to have done so since Reagan. And in so doing shaped to no small degree, the campaigns of his opponents. Of course, Trump is the only one threatening to upset the media's lucrative apple carts, so it's not hard to see why they've had so much in the way of criticism for Mr Trump. But all the character assassinating perpetrated against Trump on both sides, has been horrific. An outcome I predicted with clarity when he announced. To give honor where it is due however, Reagan was slammed mercilessly too. One of his notable predecessors JFK, was no slouch in the area of truth telling either and received his own ample share of incoming. Oh for a few of those noble politicians in our time. But there is one glaring point to all this, and though I have asked, nobody has ventured to come forth with the explanation. Where were all the clairvoyants mentioned above, and unmentioned, who are leading the present charge against Trump when Obama was rising? I don't get it. All of a sudden those who can see into the future with precise clarity woke up as the result of the strong medicine of ObamaCare, or what happened? I think they all had it wrong in Obama's case, and in in poetic irony, they're attempting to lay the criticisms applicable to the amateur hour muppets of this administration at the feet of Mr Trump, whose only vice to date, has been a strong desire to right the ship. The whole thing looks like a political reenactment of Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.

By all reports Wisconsin was an outlier, and posed a unique challenge that Trump will not see again this election season. None the less, there are 879 remaining delegates to be had on the Republican side. Cruz having amassed 520 would need to win 717 of them to reach 1237. To say that is not likely is a bit of an understatement. On the other hand Trump with 743, only needs to win 494 more to reach 1237. Taking into account the likely Trump wins in New York and California, which total 267, Trump's total without Pennsylvania or the New England area will leave him only 227 delegates short. It's just an easier path and the polls, scientific or not, show it.

[Granny Bear]

^^Just pointing out the inescapably obvious.

I think you have chosen to ignore the real threat of a contested convention... Paul Ryan or somebody like him. If the establishment gives Cruz any support, it is meant only to deny Trump the nomination at the convention and create the chaos needed to shroud their true intentions. They, the Rove-esque puppet masters, would love to parachute in their fav in the person of Paul Ryan and in that you and they are evidently on the same page. Because Cruz might not have the oomph to win, even on an (unclear how many) number of ballots, they may feel they'd have to make up a plausible cover to look justified. I believe they think they can just run over those who support Trump, so no apologies necessary, but in Cruz's case, who even though he would have much more work to do than Trump in delegate wrangling, it seems that they think they'll need the cover.

Unlike Charlie Sykes, Erick Erickson, Rich Lowry, and the rest of the sky-is-falling #NeverTrumpsters, I chose the non-hysteria route to the Republican nomination. One guy (Trump) came out speaking the truth plainly and he is the only one to have done so since Reagan. And in so doing shaped to no small degree, the campaigns of his opponents. Of course, Trump is the only one threatening to upset the media's lucrative apple carts, so it's not hard to see why they've had so much in the way of criticism for Mr Trump. But all the character assassinating perpetrated against Trump on both sides, has been horrific. An outcome I predicted with clarity when he announced. To give honor where it is due however, Reagan was slammed mercilessly too. One of his notable predecessors JFK, was no slouch in the area of truth telling either and received his own ample share of incoming. Oh for a few of those noble politicians in our time. But there is one glaring point to all this, and though I have asked, nobody has ventured to come forth with the explanation. Where were all the clairvoyants mentioned above, and unmentioned, who are leading the present charge against Trump when Obama was rising? I don't get it. All of a sudden those who can see into the future with precise clarity woke up as the result of the strong medicine of ObamaCare, or what happened? I think they all had it wrong in Obama's case, and in in poetic irony, they're attempting to lay the criticisms applicable to the amateur hour muppets of this administration at the feet of Mr Trump, whose only vice to date, has been a strong desire to right the ship. The whole thing looks like a political reenactment of Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.

By all reports Wisconsin was an outlier, and posed a unique challenge that Trump will not see again this election season. None the less, there are 879 remaining delegates to be had on the Republican side. Cruz having amassed 520 would need to win 717 of them to reach 1237. To say that is not likely is a bit of an understatement. On the other hand Trump with 743, only needs to win 494 more to reach 1237. Taking into account the likely Trump wins in New York and California, which total 267, Trump's total without Pennsylvania or the New England area will leave him only 227 delegates short. It's just an easier path and the polls, scientific or not, show it.

Perhaps one day before I die, I will be able to speak as eloquently as you, Hoot and WideRight. I can think of things, but cannot relate it in the written word.

We have no one but ourselves to blame for Trump and his political position of today. The last 8 years have been unbelievable, and Americans have sat back on their laurels and done nothing to prevent the chaos that is present day politics. The middle class has had its' back broken working to support the agendas of the upper class and/or politicians and the agendas of most of the lower class who refuse to work. And why SHOULD they work? They are rewarded with everything from free healthcare to real time support and all for doing nothing. It's beyond shameful!!!

You want to know why the candidate Donald Trump is so popular with all of his faults and issues??? Hmmmm....where can I begin? How about a $2M beer summit? That may or may not be an accurate sum, but I will accept it. After all, when the budge deficit is a few thousand trillion, what's another couple of million? Chicken feed. We can go on to allowing Obama and his administration to decimate our military, and end with Hillary watching as the Benghazi tragedy unfolds before her lying eyes. Oh, and she doesn't worry at all about being caught up in her lies...she blames a preacher making a video in Florida!!!! Yes..most of us have forgotten about THAT excuse, but I never will. And she gets away with it! SHE GETS AWAY WITH IT!!! Just exactly like she will get away with the email server controversy. She lies, she waits, she distracts, she gets away with it.

So you have a buffoon like Trump enter this race. He is plain spoken and isn't monetarily indebted to anyone. He may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but compare him to other "accepted" candidates, he's a genius. Rubio and Cruz jumped on his bandwagon, BUT Trump was the only candidate with the balls to say the things first that we were all thinking. He slashed the "sanctuary cities", then Cruz slashed them; he ridiculed the border crossings, then Rubio ridiculed them. And wonder of wonders, he is still fighting.

The media can do nothing but try and undermine him from his character to anything else they can find. This may be the first time in recent history that the Democratic National Party and the Republican National Party agree on ANYTHING. They must stop him...but how?? Nobody is funding him!! So the bottom line is, the RNP will do anything it can to keep him from getting the nomination. To hell with what the public wants or votes for...Evidently the voters don't have enough sense to vote anymore.

So, bottom line...why bother? The good ole boys' club is going to manipulate, strangulate and get elected just whomever they want.

It's not that I'm a big Trump supporter, but he sure has got a lot of people thinking.

Personally, if I was younger, I would be thinking about moving to Texas or Idaho or any other state that was considering succeeding from the USA. For the first time in my lifetime, I am ashamed of where this country is going.

[Hoot Gibson]

^^Just pointing out the inescapably obvious.

I think you have chosen to ignore the real threat of a contested convention... Paul Ryan or somebody like him. If the establishment gives Cruz any support, it is meant only to deny Trump the nomination at the convention and create the chaos needed to shroud their true intentions. They, the Rove-esque puppet masters, would love to parachute in their fav in the person of Paul Ryan and in that you and they are evidently on the same page. Because Cruz might not have the oomph to win, even on an (unclear how many) number of ballots, they may feel they'd have to make up a plausible cover to look justified. I believe they think they can just run over those who support Trump, so no apologies necessary, but in Cruz's case, who even though he would have much more work to do than Trump in delegate wrangling, it seems that they think they'll need the cover.

Unlike Charlie Sykes, Erick Erickson, Rich Lowry, and the rest of the sky-is-falling #NeverTrumpsters, I chose the non-hysteria route to the Republican nomination. One guy (Trump) came out speaking the truth plainly and he is the only one to have done so since Reagan. And in so doing shaped to no small degree, the campaigns of his opponents. Of course, Trump is the only one threatening to upset the media's lucrative apple carts, so it's not hard to see why they've had so much in the way of criticism for Mr Trump. But all the character assassinating perpetrated against Trump on both sides, has been horrific. An outcome I predicted with clarity when he announced. To give honor where it is due however, Reagan was slammed mercilessly too. One of his notable predecessors JFK, was no slouch in the area of truth telling either and received his own ample share of incoming. Oh for a few of those noble politicians in our time. But there is one glaring point to all this, and though I have asked, nobody has ventured to come forth with the explanation. Where were all the clairvoyants mentioned above, and unmentioned, who are leading the present charge against Trump when Obama was rising? I don't get it. All of a sudden those who can see into the future with precise clarity woke up as the result of the strong medicine of ObamaCare, or what happened? I think they all had it wrong in Obama's case, and in in poetic irony, they're attempting to lay the criticisms applicable to the amateur hour muppets of this administration at the feet of Mr Trump, whose only vice to date, has been a strong desire to right the ship. The whole thing looks like a political reenactment of Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.

By all reports Wisconsin was an outlier, and posed a unique challenge that Trump will not see again this election season. None the less, there are 879 remaining delegates to be had on the Republican side. Cruz having amassed 520 would need to win 717 of them to reach 1237. To say that is not likely is a bit of an understatement. On the other hand Trump with 743, only needs to win 494 more to reach 1237. Taking into account the likely Trump wins in New York and California, which total 267, Trump's total without Pennsylvania or the New England area will leave him only 227 delegates short. It's just an easier path and the polls, scientific or not, show it.

Like Trump, you do not seem to understand how the convention rules work. Trump has won 37 percent of the popular vote, which overstates his appeal when you consider the caucus and convention states that Cruz has dominated. (Most caucuses require participants to devote at least a couple of hours to cast a vote, which holds down the turnout numbers.) For most of the primaries, the conservative vote was split among several strong candidates, whose positions were more similar to Cruz's than Trump's. Trump had the liberal Democrat lane to himself and did not pick up much support as conservative candidates dropped out.

Unlike Trump, Cruz has built a real national grass roots organization that does not rely on celebrity. Even if Trump had a strong national organization equal to Cruz's, his real support among delegates, once they are no longer bound would be no more than his share of the popular vote. But the Cruz organization is far superior to Trump's because he has never really understood the political process. Cruz has dominated in states like Colorado and North Dakota, not only because of his organization, but because he has taken time to make personal requests for their votes. Trump was a no show in North Dakota and he is a no show in Colorado today. Most likely, he will get shutout in Colorado and he won a single delegate in North Dakota.

Many of Trump's delegates will vote for Cruz if Trump does not win on the first ballot. Most of the unbound delegates who will vote on the first ballot will vote for Cruz.

Because Cruz is building so much support among delegates, he will be well represented on the rules committee. The GOPe establishment would prefer somebody besides Trump or Cruz, but there will not be major rules changes before the second ballot of the convention unless Cruz and Trump approve them.

Thinking that Cruz is just being used by the GOPe to install somebody like Ryan as the nominee is just silly. Cruz will have a fair shot. If neither he nor Trump get the support of 1,237 delegates after several ballots, then somebody else will get a shot. Even if the GOPe could kick both Trump and Cruz aside, it would be a stupid move politically. If they are going to lose in a landslide, then the establishment would be better served by a scapegoat as the nominee.

I think the nomination is Cruz's to lose if there is a second ballot at the convention. There is no way that somebody as unpopular among the delegates that will be attending the convention will win once the delegates are released to vote for their personal preference.

The only thing that worries me about the convention is that Trump will bribe unbound delegates with free helicopter rides or visits to one of his resorts or strip clubs. There is little or no federal regulation over lobbying for delegate support, and money has always been Trump's political tool of choice.

If Trump fails to win on the first ballot, I think there is a good chance he will claim the fix is in and go home before the second vote is taken. Trump does not lose gracefully and if he loses one ballot, he will lose all of them.

[Hoot Gibson]

Perhaps one day before I die, I will be able to speak as eloquently as you, Hoot and WideRight. I can think of things, but cannot relate it in the written word.

We have no one but ourselves to blame for Trump and his political position of today. The last 8 years have been unbelievable, and Americans have sat back on their laurels and done nothing to prevent the chaos that is present day politics. The middle class has had its' back broken working to support the agendas of the upper class and/or politicians and the agendas of most of the lower class who refuse to work. And why SHOULD they work? They are rewarded with everything from free healthcare to real time support and all for doing nothing. It's beyond shameful!!!

You want to know why the candidate Donald Trump is so popular with all of his faults and issues??? Hmmmm....where can I begin? How about a $2M beer summit? That may or may not be an accurate sum, but I will accept it. After all, when the budge deficit is a few thousand trillion, what's another couple of million? Chicken feed. We can go on to allowing Obama and his administration to decimate our military, and end with Hillary watching as the Benghazi tragedy unfolds before her lying eyes. Oh, and she doesn't worry at all about being caught up in her lies...she blames a preacher making a video in Florida!!!! Yes..most of us have forgotten about THAT excuse, but I never will. And she gets away with it! SHE GETS AWAY WITH IT!!! Just exactly like she will get away with the email server controversy. She lies, she waits, she distracts, she gets away with it.

So you have a buffoon like Trump enter this race. He is plain spoken and isn't monetarily indebted to anyone. He may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but compare him to other "accepted" candidates, he's a genius. Rubio and Cruz jumped on his bandwagon, BUT Trump was the only candidate with the balls to say the things first that we were all thinking. He slashed the "sanctuary cities", then Cruz slashed them; he ridiculed the border crossings, then Rubio ridiculed them. And wonder of wonders, he is still fighting.

The media can do nothing but try and undermine him from his character to anything else they can find. This may be the first time in recent history that the Democratic National Party and the Republican National Party agree on ANYTHING. They must stop him...but how?? Nobody is funding him!! So the bottom line is, the RNP will do anything it can to keep him from getting the nomination. To hell with what the public wants or votes for...Evidently the voters don't have enough sense to vote anymore.

So, bottom line...why bother? The good ole boys' club is going to manipulate, strangulate and get elected just whomever they want.

It's not that I'm a big Trump supporter, but he sure has got a lot of people thinking.

Personally, if I was younger, I would be thinking about moving to Texas or Idaho or any other state that was considering succeeding from the USA. For the first time in my lifetime, I am ashamed of where this country is going.

Trump is not self funded and he never has been. Trump solicits donations on his web site and he is loaning himself millions of dollars, which will be repaid by donors if he wins the nomination. He has also refused to rule out accepting donations in the general campaign if he is the GOP nominee. Every time that he claims that he is self funding, he is lying to you.

As for political positions, you and others who think that Trump's positions are original have been snookered by Trump's lies and the estimated $2 billion in "earned media coverage" that allows Trump to repeat so many dishonest claims that many accept them as facts. For example, Cruz has consistently opposed sanctuary cities and proposed finishing the wall on our southern border in 2012. Cruz lacked the name recognition that Trump enjoyed when he began his campaign, and all most voters knew about Cruz was that he was very unpopular among his Senate colleagues. What most still do not understand is why Cruz is so unpopular with political hacks like Mitch McConnell.

The video in the link below is long, but even if you watch just the first few minutes of the video, I think you will appreciate the eloquence with which Cruz communicates the biggest existential threat to this country and to future generations, and that threat is the exploding national debt. In contrast, Trump has spoken in very vague terms about eliminating "waste, fraud, and abuse" to eliminate the budget deficit.

Cruz chastises U.S. Senate for caving on Obama budget

If you imagine that you are a Republican who voted for the budget deal with Obama watching Cruz's presentation, then you will understand why we should be celebrating the fact that Cruz is unpopular in the Senate. Most ethical members of Congress are young and serve in the House. By the time that they can afford a Senate run, most freshman Senators are already fully corrupted by Washington politics. Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are exceptions because they did not serve in the House and were elected to the Senate while still relatively young.

One last thing. Trump's businesses owes hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to the nation's biggest financial institutions. George Soros has loaned Trump $160 million. To think that Cruz owes more favors to Wall Street bankers and lobbyists than Trump is incorrect. Trump has stiffed creditors for hundreds of millions of dollars through his bankruptcy because he was able to use junk bonds as collateral. Trump may fail to honor his financial obligations, but he is not without those obligations.

[TheRealThing]

Like Trump, you do not seem to understand how the convention rules work. Trump has won 37 percent of the popular vote, which overstates his appeal when you consider the caucus and convention states that Cruz has dominated. (Most caucuses require participants to devote at least a couple of hours to cast a vote, which holds down the turnout numbers.) For most of the primaries, the conservative vote was split among several strong candidates, whose positions were more similar to Cruz's than Trump's. Trump had the liberal Democrat lane to himself and did not pick up much support as conservative candidates dropped out.

Unlike Trump, Cruz has built a real national grass roots organization that does not rely on celebrity. Even if Trump had a strong national organization equal to Cruz's, his real support among delegates, once they are no longer bound would be no more than his share of the popular vote. But the Cruz organization is far superior to Trump's because he has never really understood the political process. Cruz has dominated in states like Colorado and North Dakota, not only because of his organization, but because he has taken time to make personal requests for their votes. Trump was a no show in North Dakota and he is a no show in Colorado today. Most likely, he will get shutout in Colorado and he won a single delegate in North Dakota.

Many of Trump's delegates will vote for Cruz if Trump does not win on the first ballot. Most of the unbound delegates who will vote on the first ballot will vote for Cruz.

Because Cruz is building so much support among delegates, he will be well represented on the rules committee. The GOPe establishment would prefer somebody besides Trump or Cruz, but there will not be major rules changes before the second ballot of the convention unless Cruz and Trump approve them.

Thinking that Cruz is just being used by the GOPe to install somebody like Ryan as the nominee is just silly. Cruz will have a fair shot. If neither he nor Trump get the support of 1,237 delegates after several ballots, then somebody else will get a shot. Even if the GOPe could kick both Trump and Cruz aside, it would be a stupid move politically. If they are going to lose in a landslide, then the establishment would be better served by a scapegoat as the nominee.

I think the nomination is Cruz's to lose if there is a second ballot at the convention. There is no way that somebody as unpopular among the delegates that will be attending the convention will win once the delegates are released to vote for their personal preference.

The only thing that worries me about the convention is that Trump will bribe unbound delegates with free helicopter rides or visits to one of his resorts or strip clubs. There is little or no federal regulation over lobbying for delegate support, and money has always been Trump's political tool of choice.

If Trump fails to win on the first ballot, I think there is a good chance he will claim the fix is in and go home before the second vote is taken. Trump does not lose gracefully and if he loses one ballot, he will lose all of them.

Oh I think I have my ducks in a row just fine, thank you very much. Silliness however, would seem to have been your latent speciality all along. As your affinity for conspiratorial based nonsense continues to be amply demonstrated in many of your anti-Trump rants. Likewise, the continued assertion that a majority of Republicans share your views is just not correct either. The truth is most will accept either or if the voters perceive the convention is shenanigan free and orderly. And BTW, after the fiasco of the Romney candidacy, since when was there any doubt that a bent for the suicidal, or the politically stupid, or the terminally politically correct, not seem seem to characterize the machinations of the major players within the Republican hierarchy?


My positions on most of what I have posted about Trump are widely shared by many respectable analysts and though they may seem silly to you, I remain none the less confident in my own cognitive prowess. On March 31st, Karl Rove by way of testing the water, tried floating the idea of a "fresh face" alternative, to either Cruz or Trump emerging from the convention. Do you really expect anybody on here to buy into the ridiculous notion that he is in any way lacking where it comes to a working knowledge of convention rules? :please:

Trump has been lacking however, where it comes to running his campaign. If he'd been advised correctly he would certainly be in the driver's seat by now. His ignorance about the rules may prove to have been his Achilles Heel, we'll soon find out. The real question now is can his 'new hires' reel him in and manage him in a way which will yet get him the nomination. Where others hold back, Trump lays waste to goofiness, a trait many of his supporters like. In the Soaps, the characters are always dressed impeccably and manners ala Emily Post abound. None the less, their motives and the constant schemes frothing just beneath the façade, are worthy of Satan's own praises. Give me the plain spoken.

[TheRealThing]

Perhaps one day before I die, I will be able to speak as eloquently as you, Hoot and WideRight. I can think of things, but cannot relate it in the written word.

We have no one but ourselves to blame for Trump and his political position of today. The last 8 years have been unbelievable, and Americans have sat back on their laurels and done nothing to prevent the chaos that is present day politics. The middle class has had its' back broken working to support the agendas of the upper class and/or politicians and the agendas of most of the lower class who refuse to work. And why SHOULD they work? They are rewarded with everything from free healthcare to real time support and all for doing nothing. It's beyond shameful!!!

You want to know why the candidate Donald Trump is so popular with all of his faults and issues??? Hmmmm....where can I begin? How about a $2M beer summit? That may or may not be an accurate sum, but I will accept it. After all, when the budge deficit is a few thousand trillion, what's another couple of million? Chicken feed. We can go on to allowing Obama and his administration to decimate our military, and end with Hillary watching as the Benghazi tragedy unfolds before her lying eyes. Oh, and she doesn't worry at all about being caught up in her lies...she blames a preacher making a video in Florida!!!! Yes..most of us have forgotten about THAT excuse, but I never will. And she gets away with it! SHE GETS AWAY WITH IT!!! Just exactly like she will get away with the email server controversy. She lies, she waits, she distracts, she gets away with it.

So you have a buffoon like Trump enter this race. He is plain spoken and isn't monetarily indebted to anyone. He may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but compare him to other "accepted" candidates, he's a genius. Rubio and Cruz jumped on his bandwagon, BUT Trump was the only candidate with the balls to say the things first that we were all thinking. He slashed the "sanctuary cities", then Cruz slashed them; he ridiculed the border crossings, then Rubio ridiculed them. And wonder of wonders, he is still fighting.

The media can do nothing but try and undermine him from his character to anything else they can find. This may be the first time in recent history that the Democratic National Party and the Republican National Party agree on ANYTHING. They must stop him...but how?? Nobody is funding him!! So the bottom line is, the RNP will do anything it can to keep him from getting the nomination. To hell with what the public wants or votes for...Evidently the voters don't have enough sense to vote anymore.

So, bottom line...why bother? The good ole boys' club is going to manipulate, strangulate and get elected just whomever they want.

It's not that I'm a big Trump supporter, but he sure has got a lot of people thinking.

Personally, if I was younger, I would be thinking about moving to Texas or Idaho or any other state that was considering succeeding from the USA. For the first time in my lifetime, I am ashamed of where this country is going.

Thank you for the complement and I would add, common sense is preferable to eloquence, a trait you seem to possess. Trump is self funded.

What you are seeing are the manifestations of naïveté. The US has faced no foe in modern times that posed any kind of truly viable threat other than Russia, and they believed we would push that red button if they did. Therefore we have seen over 50 years of relative peace. So well did we right the world's wrongs in fact, two generations have risen that has no concept of threat from a would be enemy. Our President is only somewhat influenced by the same shortcoming, but still felt compelled, and feels compelled, to apologize for our actions, LOL. At any rate, many of those in the Congress and other leadership roles routinely run over the protestations and warnings of their elder statesmen, who know better having lived through the nightmare of WW2. College grads haven't the first clue and support a mushroom named Sanders for the Presidency. The American society in general blows off the importance of national security, and that's why we see unguarded borders. While at the same time we have seen the welcome sign hung out to receive Syrian Jehadis sworn to kill all infidels, we have seen our own military spat upon having returned, thankfully, alive to reunite with their families. And as you have mentioned, the now skeletonized branches of the Armed Services.

The leaders of our time, other than our President, are seriously lacking and devoid of world experience. Mr Obama on the other hand, has an upbringing outside of the United States, that affords him a different viewpoint and one that he has elaborated on extensively in his autobiographical offerings. Welcome to your fundamental transformation and the ensuing liberal vision of 21st Century thinking. :biggrin:

[Hoot Gibson]

Oh I think I have my ducks in a row just fine, thank you very much. Silliness however, would seem to have been your latent speciality all along. As your affinity for conspiratorial based nonsense continues to be amply demonstrated in many of your anti-Trump rants. Likewise, the continued assertion that a majority of Republicans share your views is just not correct either. The truth is most will accept either or if the voters perceive the convention is shenanigan free and orderly. And BTW, after the fiasco of the Romney candidacy, since when was there any doubt that a bent for the suicidal, or the politically stupid, or the terminally politically correct, not seem seem to characterize the machinations of the major players within the Republican hierarchy?


My positions on most of what I have posted about Trump are widely shared by many respectable analysts and though they may seem silly to you, I remain none the less confident in my own cognitive prowess. On March 31st, Karl Rove by way of testing the water, tried floating the idea of a "fresh face" alternative, to either Cruz or Trump emerging from the convention. Do you really expect anybody on here to buy into the ridiculous notion that he is in any way lacking where it comes to a working knowledge of convention rules? :please:

Trump has been lacking however, where it comes to running his campaign. If he'd been advised correctly he would certainly be in the driver's seat by now. His ignorance about the rules may prove to have been his Achilles Heel, we'll soon find out. The real question now is can his 'new hires' reel him in and manage him in a way which will yet get him the nomination. Where others hold back, Trump lays waste to goofiness, a trait many of his supporters like. In the Soaps, the characters are always dressed impeccably and manners ala Emily Post abound. None the less, their motives and the constant schemes frothing just beneath the façade, are worthy of Satan's own praises. Give me the plain spoken.

Trump is a clown. I will make a very plain prediction for you. If Trump does not win on the first ballot, he will lose to Cruz by a wide margin on any and all subsequent ballots. There is a good chance that Trump will not even hang around to give a concession speech if the voting goes to a second ballot.

The rules cannot be changed at the convention without the consent of the delegates and Trump's actual support is far less than the number of the pledged delegates who will be forced to vote for him on the first ballot. Very few delegates will be supporting Karl Rove, so he will be a non-factor at the convention.

In another indication of Trump's absolute failure to build an effective national campaign organization:

The Trump staff sent an email blast to Washington Trump supporters asking them to sign up for a chance to become Trump delegates at the state convention. However, instead of reaching out to the residents of Washington, the state, the email messages went to Trump supporters who reside in Washington, the District of Columbia.

And that is not even the punch line, here it is: the deadline to apply to be eligible for representing Washington, the state, had already passed before Trump staffers realized their mistake.

Cruz hand picked supporters in Washington, the state, took 41 of the delegate slots to 0 for Trump.

If Cruz controls the majority of the delegates attending the convention, I do not see how Karl Rove plans to take the nomination from him on a second ballot. Rove is as much of a clown as Trump is. Both of them are far more stupid than they suspect.

Trump has one shot to be the nominee - a first ballot win, and he has only himself and the inept staff that he hired to blame.

Do you know of any expert that predicts Trump will win if he loses the first ballot? (And by expert, I am not including Trump, Roger Stone, or Trump's own staff.)

[TheRealThing]

Trump is a clown. I will make a very plain prediction for you. If Trump does not win on the first ballot, he will lose to Cruz by a wide margin on any and all subsequent ballots. There is a good chance that Trump will not even hang around to give a concession speech if the voting goes to a second ballot.

The rules cannot be changed at the convention without the consent of the delegates and Trump's actual support is far less than the number of the pledged delegates who will be forced to vote for him on the first ballot. Very few delegates will be supporting Karl Rove, so he will be a non-factor at the convention.

In another indication of Trump's absolute failure to build an effective national campaign organization:

The Trump staff sent an email blast to Washington Trump supporters asking them to sign up for a chance to become Trump delegates at the state convention. However, instead of reaching out to the residents of Washington, the state, the email messages went to Trump supporters who reside in Washington, the District of Columbia.

And that is not even the punch line, here it is: the deadline to apply to be eligible for representing Washington, the state, had already passed before Trump staffers realized their mistake.

Cruz hand picked supporters in Washington, the state, took 41 of the delegate slots to 0 for Trump.

If Cruz controls the majority of the delegates attending the convention, I do not see how Karl Rove plans to take the nomination from him on a second ballot. Rove is as much of a clown as Trump is. Both of them are far more stupid than they suspect.

Trump has one shot to be the nominee - a first ballot win, and he has only himself and the inept staff that he hired to blame.

Do you know of any expert that predicts Trump will win if he loses the first ballot? (And by expert, I am not including Trump, Roger Stone, or Trump's own staff.)

And there in lies the duality of the real rub. First, you seem to think you can accurately predict the future, and I don't have an ounce of faith that you can. And secondly again, this all seems personal to you, but I know all I have is one vote and my opinion. Respectfully, the outtakes of which I would rather not necessarily take from you.

If I had the power and the privilege of appointing the man I think is the most viable candidate for President, it would have been Mike Huckabee. But as things turned out, my choices look to have boiled down to either Trump or Cruz and I can live with that. Rejecting the front runner on the basis distortions and or on otherwise manufactured grounds, smacks of anarchy to me. That's my opinion and when it comes time I will vote my conscience. Then one day, after time has come to an end and I stand in my lot at the end of my days, I will be called on to give an account of my life. At this point I plan to avoid the 'Hoot said' option.

In any case, I wouldn't presume to speak as to how even one unbound delegate is going to vote, much less nearly 2,500 of them.

[Hoot Gibson]

And there in lies the duality of the real rub. First, you seem to think you can accurately predict the future, and I don't have an ounce of faith that you can. And secondly again, this all seems personal to you, but I know all I have is one vote and my opinion. Respectfully, the outtakes of which I would rather not necessarily take from you.

If I had the power and the privilege of appointing the man I think is the most viable candidate for President, it would have been Mike Huckabee. But as things turned out, my choices look to have boiled down to either Trump or Cruz and I can live with that. Rejecting the front runner on the basis distortions and or on otherwise manufactured grounds, smacks of anarchy to me. That's my opinion and when it comes time I will vote my conscience. Then one day, after time has come to an end and I stand in my lot at the end of my days, I will be called on to give an account of my life. At this point I plan to avoid the 'Hoot said' option.

In any case, I wouldn't presume to speak as to how even one unbound delegate is going to vote, much less nearly 2,500 of them.

I never knew that you put so much stock in what Karl Rove has to say. nicker:

Except where I clearly stated my prediction, all I have done is explained what is actually happening at state conventions around the country. Maybe Fox News and Karl Rove are not covering how badly Trump is doing at securing the support of delegates who will be attending the GOP convention in Cleveland, but that does not mean that it is not happening.

If Trump loses the nomination, it will be because he never bothered to learn the rules and has never thought rules should apply to him.

[TheRealThing]

I never knew that you put so much stock in what Karl Rove has to say. nicker:

Except where I clearly stated my prediction, all I have done is explained what is actually happening at state conventions around the country. Maybe Fox News and Karl Rove are not covering how badly Trump is doing at securing the support of delegates who will be attending the GOP convention in Cleveland, but that does not mean that it is not happening.

If Trump loses the nomination, it will be because he never bothered to learn the rules and has never thought rules should apply to him.

The truth about Karl Rove was revealed to me when he openly began to accept or reject various candidates, for various offices, in various states. He's an example of somebody who believes they know what is best and are willing to manipulate the process by string pulling and behind the scenes machinations meant to thwart the will of the people. You know anybody like that? People who are so arrogant they would disenfranchise 10's of millions of voters because they think they somehow just know more and better than everybody else?

Rove was very recently in the national spotlight and therefore most quotable to demonstrate your flawed rebuff of my point. Circumvention of convention rules are what all the big wigs are hinting at, and many of the pundits are wincing at. You come on here and try to pronounce and pooh pooh it all away as if you're an expert on convention rules, and I ain't buying it based on what the real big name experts are all saying. Rove's statement is particularly revealing in the matter of parachuting in a "fresh face" and I used it as an example consistent with our discussion. And frankly, I can't stand the guy, but I believe him on this one.

Unless I'm certifiable, you have gone on and on with exacting precision and certainty about all the specific bad stuff that will ensue a Trump ascent to the Oval Office. I mean, have at it, I don't mind. I just pointed out that if you're right, Jeane Dixon couldn't hold a candle to you. :biggrin:

[Hoot Gibson]

The truth about Karl Rove was revealed to me when he openly began to accept or reject various candidates, for various offices, in various states. He's an example of somebody who believes they know what is best and are willing to manipulate the process by string pulling and behind the scenes machinations meant to thwart the will of the people. You know anybody like that? People who are so arrogant they would disenfranchise 10's of millions of voters because they think they somehow just know more and better than everybody else?

Rove was very recently in the national spotlight and therefore most quotable to demonstrate your flawed rebuff of my point. Circumvention of convention rules are what all the big wigs are hinting at, and many of the pundits are wincing at. You come on here and try to pronounce and pooh pooh it all away as if you're an expert on convention rules, and I ain't buying it based on what the real big name experts are all saying. Rove's statement is particularly revealing in the matter of parachuting in a "fresh face" and I used it as an example consistent with our discussion. And frankly, I can't stand the guy, but I believe him on this one.

Unless I'm certifiable, you have gone on and on with exacting precision and certainty about all the specific bad stuff that will ensue a Trump ascent to the Oval Office. I mean, have at it, I don't mind. I just pointed out that if you're right, Jeane Dixon couldn't hold a candle to you. :biggrin:

One thing that I did not see coming were all of the petty personal insults that you have hurled since becoming a Trump disciple.

[TheRealThing]

One thing that I did not see coming were all of the petty personal insults that you have hurled since becoming a Trump disciple.

You seem to think it's alright to call me and others on here cultists because you're having a bit of difficulty giving us our opinion. Therefore I suppose this would be as good a time as any to point out that I haven't been discipled.

I do have my own opinion and I'm rather comfortable with that. So, if you or anybody would care to peruse the many posts you have put up slamming Trump, you, they, will notice that everything was fine between us until I began to challenge your assertions of certain doom should we see a Trump Presidency.

What I have done is offer a different perspective. I believe, as long as rational thought and practice are the norm in the political process, the will of majority should rule. I know I did not like it when Obama was elected and I was appalled when he was reelected. And yet here we are 4 years later with the chance to start to undo, through our votes, the damage of the past 8 years. Right now the elective process guarantees the common man a voice.

There are those who would disenfranchise 10's of millions of voters because they think they know better who should, or in this case should not, be the next President. In my view there has not been a lot of honor in criticisms of Trump. The arrogance of the establishment of both parties is incredible. The people have responded by showing up at the polls to vote in record numbers. After decades of apathy, one would think the establishment would be encouraged. But no, they're talking about slapping down the voter, in vowing to #Never vote for Trump and oppose him in any way possible.

If you think my defense of the political process is a personal insult to you, that's unfortunate and errant. Now, if I called you a liar, or if I accused you of joining a cult, that would be an insult.

[Hoot Gibson]

You seem to think it's alright t?ll me and others on here cultists because you're having a bit of difficulty giving us our opinion. Therefore I suppose this would be as good a time as any to point out that I haven't been discipled.

I do have my own opinion and I'm rather comfortable with that. So, if you or anybody would care to peruse the many posts you have put up slamming Trump, you, they, will notice that everything was fine between us until I began to challenge your assertions of certain doom should we see a Trump Presidency.

What I have done is offer a different perspective. I believe, as long as rational thought and practice are the norm in the political process, the will of majority should rule. I know I did not like it when Obama was elected and I was appalled when he was reelected. And yet here we are 4 years later with the chance to start to undo, through our votes, the damage of the past 8 years. Right now the elective process guarantees the common man a voice.

There are those who would disenfranchise 10's of millions of voters because they think they know better who should, or in this case should not, be the next President. In my view there has not been a lot of honor in criticisms of Trump. The arrogance of the establishment of both parties is incredible. The people have responded by showing up at the polls to vote in record numbers. After decades of apathy, one would think the establishment would be encouraged. But no, they're talking about slapping down the voter, in vowing to #Never vote for Trump and oppose him in any way possible.

If you think my defense of the political process is a personal insult to you, that's unfortunate and errant. Now, if I called you a liar, or if I accused you of joining a cult, that would be an insult.

Disenfranchisement? Where do you think that language is coming from? You have stopped challenging anything I post with facts. It's all about emotion with you and most, but not all Trump supporters. Political parties are private organizations. You and I have no God given right to participate in selecting the nominees. Nor do we have any constitutional right to do so. The parties set the rules and if we don't like them, we are free to switch parties or to start or own parties. You and Mr. Trump may not like it, but those are the facts of the matter.

If Trump does not like the rules, which have not changed since 2012, he has the opportunity to change them. If he has been out flanked by Cruz because he did not understand the rules, then that is his own fault.

So if you want to follow Mr. Trump's approach of responding to his political setbacks with emotional outbursts and personal insults, that is your choice, but those tactics do not change the facts.

[TheRealThing]

Disenfranchisement? Where do you think that language is coming from? You have stopped challenging anything I post with facts. It's all about emotion with you and most, but not all Trump supporters. Political parties are private organizations. You and I have no God given right to participate in selecting the nominees. Nor do we have any constitutional right to do so. The parties set the rules and if we don't like them, we are free to switch parties or to start or own parties. You and Mr. Trump may not like it, but those are the facts of the matter.

If Trump does not like the rules, which have not changed since 2012, he has the opportunity to change them. If he has been out flanked by Cruz because he did not understand the rules, then that is his own fault.

So if you want to follow Mr. Trump's approach of responding to his political setbacks with emotional outbursts and personal insults, that is your choice, but those tactics do not change the facts.

So if I understand things from your perspective, everything you come up with is fact, and everything I come up with are emotional outbursts or personal insults. That about right? While you would never insult anyone I take it?

The 'rules' of this year's GOP Primary schedule, (under which the nominee is to be selected BTW) clearly set forth certain givens, one of which being the 'fact' that the vast majority of available delegates, are to be assigned to the prospective nominees by virtue of a quaint but time honored practice known as voting. Party officials and self absorbed conservative media personalities associated with the traitorous #NeverTrump movement, have indicated they would by hook or crook, deny Trump the nomination if it's the last thing they do. Now, I know a towering intellect such as yours has little patience with the dullards that frequent this forum, none the less, that represents a clear intent to disenfranchise certain voters in my book.

Mr Trump's approach is not without merit according to those I have heard commenting only this morning. In any case, I would refer you to the last paragraph in post # 40 , I have not defended Trump's lack of political prowess.

[Hoot Gibson]

So if I understand things from your perspective, everything you come up with is fact, and everything I come up with are emotional outbursts or personal insults. That about right? While you would never insult anyone I take it?

The 'rules' of this year's GOP Primary schedule, (under which the nominee is to be selected BTW) clearly set forth certain givens, one of which being the 'fact' that the vast majority of available delegates, are to be assigned to the prospective nominees by virtue of a quaint but time honored practice known as voting. Party officials and self absorbed conservative media personalities associated with the traitorous #NeverTrump movement, have indicated they would by hook or crook, deny Trump the nomination if it's the last thing they do. Now, I know a towering intellect such as yours has little patience with the dullards that frequent this forum, none the less, that represents a clear intent to disenfranchise certain voters in my book.

Mr Trump's approach is not without merit according to those I have heard commenting only this morning. In any case, I would refer you to the last paragraph in post # 40 , I have not defended Trump's lack of political prowess.

More insults, more emotion, and more opinions with nothing to back them up. If you want to take an inventory of who has consistently linked references to support his opinions, you might be surprised at how little evidence you have cited to back your opinions in the Trump threads.

Every state has its own rules on delegate selection. In rare cases, winning candidates get to choose a few of their their own delegates, but that is the exception. In most cases, delegates are selected at state conventions or other meetings of party activists. That is where the Cruz campaign has run circles around Trump. If Trump loses the nomination, it will be because he failed to recognize the importance of a strong national ground organization. Had Cruz skipped state conventions and failed to organize at the state level in advance of conventions, he would be out of the running.

If neither Trump nor Cruz had worked to get their delegates seated, it would have been easy for the establishment to have filled those slots, changed the rules, and allowed Ryan to be nominated. As it is, Cruz will probably control the rules committee and will be able to block rules changed.

If Trump is unsure about being able to win 1,237 delegates before the California primary, then, if I am not mistaken, Kasich could withdraw from the race and his delegates would be committed to Trump on the first ballot because of Ohio's primary rules.

There is no conspiracy to steal anything from Trump. The rules are the same for everybody, Trump just did not bother to learn them. He relied heavily on his name recognition and free media coverage. If he wins on the first ballot, then he well look like a genius but if he loses on the second ballot, then it will be nobody's fault but his own for not preparing for the contingency of a contested convention.

[jetpilot]

More insults, more emotion, and more opinions with nothing to back them up. If you want to take an inventory of who has consistently linked references to support his opinions, you might be surprised at how little evidence you have cited to back your opinions in the Trump threads.

Every state has its own rules on delegate selection. In rare cases, winning candidates get to choose a few of their their own delegates, but that is the exception. In most cases, delegates are selected at state conventions or other meetings of party activists. That is where the Cruz campaign has run circles around Trump. If Trump loses the nomination, it will be because he failed to recognize the importance of a strong national ground organization. Had Cruz skipped state conventions and failed to organize at the state level in advance of conventions, he would be out of the running.

If neither Trump nor Cruz had worked to get their delegates seated, it would have been easy for the establishment to have filled those slots, changed the rules, and allowed Ryan to be nominated. As it is, Cruz will probably control the rules committee and will be able to block rules changed.

If Trump is unsure about being able to win 1,237 delegates before the California primary, then, if I am not mistaken, Kasich could withdraw from the race and his delegates would be committed to Trump on the first ballot because of Ohio's primary rules.

There is no conspiracy to steal anything from Trump. The rules are the same for everybody, Trump just did not bother to learn them. He relied heavily on his name recognition and free media coverage. If he wins on the first ballot, then he well look like a genius but if he loses on the second ballot, then it will be nobody's fault but his own for not preparing for the contingency of a contested convention.

I have no idea what planet you are on. Everyone seems to know there is except you. Tell it to Colorado voters. :eyeroll: The party establishment controls the nominee and not the voters. If you want to say the party establishment can do whatever it wants and it's okay that is something different. Stop having primaries and acting like voters have a voice and faking a democracy and tell voters what they are finding out - their votes don't matter. People are waking up and they don't want the process left in the hands of a few corrupt, incompetent political hacks.

[TheRealThing]

More insults, more emotion, and more opinions with nothing to back them up. If you want to take an inventory of who has consistently linked references to support his opinions, you might be surprised at how little evidence you have cited to back your opinions in the Trump threads.

Every state has its own rules on delegate selection. In rare cases, winning candidates get to choose a few of their their own delegates, but that is the exception. In most cases, delegates are selected at state conventions or other meetings of party activists. That is where the Cruz campaign has run circles around Trump. If Trump loses the nomination, it will be because he failed to recognize the importance of a strong national ground organization. Had Cruz skipped state conventions and failed to organize at the state level in advance of conventions, he would be out of the running.

If neither Trump nor Cruz had worked to get their delegates seated, it would have been easy for the establishment to have filled those slots, changed the rules, and allowed Ryan to be nominated. As it is, Cruz will probably control the rules committee and will be able to block rules changed.

If Trump is unsure about being able to win 1,237 delegates before the California primary, then, if I am not mistaken, Kasich could withdraw from the race and his delegates would be committed to Trump on the first ballot because of Ohio's primary rules.

There is no conspiracy to steal anything from Trump. The rules are the same for everybody, Trump just did not bother to learn them. He relied heavily on his name recognition and free media coverage. If he wins on the first ballot, then he well look like a genius but if he loses on the second ballot, then it will be nobody's fault but his own for not preparing for the contingency of a contested convention.

LOL, as to the bolded, we're getting closer. :biggrin: There is a coaching euphemism of which I have grown quite fond that applies to 'the one that got away,' and goes something like this; "That coach needs to learn when he has won the game." The gist of which is to suggest that a game that was for all intent and purposes won, was lost anyway due to tactical error by the coaching staff.

In the case of this particular debate, I refuse to bail you out by rehashing and reanalyzing what I consider to be tabloid level speculations. So, inventory away if you feel that you have not been less than gracious with those you have debated regarding any disagreement they may have had with your duly sourced Trump criticisms. In more succinct terms, I do not normally cite sources to refute innuendo and gossip, supporting websites and bloviators notwithstanding. I said the vast majority of delegates are awarded through the voting process and I am right. Therefore, thick though I may be, I am prepared to accept my own understanding of your very direct style of aggressive opinion sharing. If I have to agree with your contempt of Trump to avoid your bad list, I can accept that. After all, there is the teeniest of probability that you are wrong about the intentions of The Donald no matter how unlikely that may seem to you.

But, I agree too, that the #NeverTrumpsters are anything but a conspiracy. They are unashamedly oppositionist to the point of voting for Hillary or going 3rd party; which is like the story of the police officer, who being in a shootout and realizing he was down to his last bullet, decided to shoot himself. Senseless. No, those who purport prophetic clarity of a Trump Presidency are the ones I believe deserve the conspiracy theorist label, and the list of offenders is long. Heck, even Glen Beck had to deal with his conscience concerning his withering character assault on Trump.

[Hoot Gibson]

LOL, as to the bolded, we're getting closer. :biggrin: There is a coaching euphemism of which I have grown quite fond that applies to 'the one that got away,' and goes something like this; "That coach needs to learn when he has won the game." The gist of which is to suggest that a game that was for all intent and purposes won, was lost anyway due to tactical error by the coaching staff.

In the case of this particular debate, I refuse to bail you out by rehashing and reanalyzing what I consider to be tabloid level speculations. So, inventory away if you feel that you have not been less than gracious with those you have debated regarding any disagreement they may have had with your duly sourced Trump criticisms. In more succinct terms, I do not normally cite sources to refute innuendo and gossip, supporting websites and bloviators notwithstanding. I said the vast majority of delegates are awarded through the voting process and I am right. Therefore, thick though I may be, I am prepared to accept my own understanding of your very direct style of aggressive opinion sharing. If I have to agree with your contempt of Trump to avoid your bad list, I can accept that. After all, there is the teeniest of probability that you are wrong about the intentions of The Donald no matter how unlikely that may seem to you.

But, I agree too, that the #NeverTrumpsters are anything but a conspiracy. They are unashamedly oppositionist to the point of voting for Hillary or going 3rd party; which is like the story of the police officer, who being in a shootout and realizing he was down to his last bullet, decided to shoot himself. Senseless. No, those who purport prophetic clarity of a Trump Presidency are the ones I believe deserve the conspiracy theorist label, and the list of offenders is long. Heck, even Glen Beck had to deal with his conscience concerning his withering character assault on Trump.

I am not going to try to sort out and respond to the insults in your latest tirade, TRT, it just is not worth my time. Mr. Trump needs only 140 characters to insult his many targets. But practice makes perfect, and you are certainly working hard.

However, I will once again that you are absolutely wrong about the bold passage. The overwhelming number of delegates are allocated through votes. Those are delegate slots - not delegates. States have different methods of filling those slots with live human beings.

Delegates are allocated among candidates because most states require their delegates to vote for a particular candidate on the first ballot based on popular vote. The majority of "bound" delegates are free to vote for the candidate that they, the human beings who were selected to cast votes, prefer once they are "unbound."

The allocation of delegates is a different process than selecting delegates. People who have been active in Republican politics as poll workers, donors, etc. have an edge when delegates are selected. IMO, that is how it should be. Party members should be rewarded for hard work and loyalty.

Trump did not speak at the North Dakota or the Colorado conventions. Cruz showed up and personally asked the attendees for their support. The bottom line is that Trump had the same opportunity as Cruz to work at the state and local levels to get delegates selected who are more likely to support him in the event of a contested convention.

None of this is rumor or innuendo. If you are interested in the truth, you can find rules for selecting delegates online for most, if not all, states. A delegate's personal preference of candidates is rarely the determining factor in his selection as a delegate and that is nothing new.

A majority of delegates has always been required to win the nomination. Lincoln was a distant second to William Seward in 1860 but Seward failed to win a majority on the first ballot. If Seward had whined about the process or threatened to sue the Republican Party for "stealing" the nomination from him, then he probably would not have become Lincoln's Secretary of State and Alaska might still be Russian territory.

[Hoot Gibson]

I have no idea what planet you are on. Everyone seems to know there is except you. Tell it to Colorado voters. :eyeroll: The party establishment controls the nominee and not the voters. If you want to say the party establishment can do whatever it wants and it's okay that is something different. Stop having primaries and acting like voters have a voice and faking a democracy and tell voters what they are finding out - their votes don't matter. People are waking up and they don't want the process left in the hands of a few corrupt, incompetent political hacks.

Colorado did not have a primary and neither did North Dakota. Trump was invited to speak at both conventions but declined. You can't win a game if you refuse to take the field.

Most of the top U.S. presidents in history never ran in a primary election. Primaries gave us Obama and will probably give use Trump or another Clinton. I see no evidence that primaries select better presidents than a bunch of party activists in a smoke filled room. You are free to start your own political party if you don't like the current system.

[TheRealThing]

Right, there's no conspiracy to deny Trump.

But there is this pesky tweet coming out of the Colorado GOP: “We did it. #NeverTrump”


"The Colorado Republican elites handed Cruz 30 of the 37 delegates across the state. The delegates are legally bound to support the Texas Senator on the first ballot at the convention. Four other delegates gave him verbal commitments of support."

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/04/...evertrump/

I want to make sure I get my source put in there correctly. :eyeroll:

[Hoot Gibson]

Right, there's no conspiracy to deny Trump.

But there is this pesky tweet coming out of the Colorado GOP: “We did it. #NeverTrump”


"The Colorado Republican elites handed Cruz 30 of the 37 delegates across the state. The delegates are legally bound to support the Texas Senator on the first ballot at the convention. Four other delegates gave him verbal commitments of support."

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/04/...evertrump/

I want to make sure I get my source put in there correctly. :eyeroll:

Yes, you got your pro-Trump source in there. Have you picked up this week's National Enquirer yet? nicker:

Trump snubbed the convention attendees and his tiny staff managed to screw up the voting guides that they handed out to potential delegates. But it is Cruz's fault that he was shutout in Colorado. :lmao:

[64SUR]

Dam I'm learning a lot about elections :rules:

[ekyswvahsfan]

When it comes to hypocrisy Cruz should be placed at the top of the list, His beloved wife works for Goldman-Sachs. Think Goldman-Sachs bailout, think Goldman-Sachs mortgage fraud, think Goldman-Sachs friend of social liberals. Cruz has accepted favors from this firm. This is the sort of "free market conservatism" that Cruz supports. He is just another candidate of the corporate welfare crowd. Cruz has no problems cutting programs that help the little guy, but he is an exponent of special privilege for the big boys.

The much vaunted social conservatism of Cruz will vanish into thin air when his corporate masters come calling. There have already been some pretty interesting reports that he has told his corporate backers that he will put social issues on the backburner.

The major problem that social conservatives have is the opposition to their principles by the big corporations. People like Nathan Deal, Nicki Haley and the like are the buddies of the big boys. These people and those like them were the friends of Bush and Rubio- and are fast becoming Cruz's buddies. As long as social conservatives are the friends and allies of the chambers of commerce and the big corporations they will achieve nothing.

[TheRealThing]

I am not going to try to sort out and respond to the insults in your latest tirade, TRT, it just is not worth my time. Mr. Trump needs only 140 characters to insult his many targets. But practice makes perfect, and you are certainly working hard.

However, I will once again that you are absolutely wrong about the bold passage. The overwhelming number of delegates are allocated through votes. Those are delegate slots - not delegates. States have different methods of filling those slots with live human beings.

Delegates are allocated among candidates because most states require their delegates to vote for a particular candidate on the first ballot based on popular vote. The majority of "bound" delegates are free to vote for the candidate that they, the human beings who were selected to cast votes, prefer once they are "unbound."

The allocation of delegates is a different process than selecting delegates. People who have been active in Republican politics as poll workers, donors, etc. have an edge when delegates are selected. IMO, that is how it should be. Party members should be rewarded for hard work and loyalty.

Trump did not speak at the North Dakota or the Colorado conventions. Cruz showed up and personally asked the attendees for their support. The bottom line is that Trump had the same opportunity as Cruz to work at the state and local levels to get delegates selected who are more likely to support him in the event of a contested convention.

None of this is rumor or innuendo. If you are interested in the truth, you can find rules for selecting delegates online for most, if not all, states. A delegate's personal preference of candidates is rarely the determining factor in his selection as a delegate and that is nothing new.

A majority of delegates has always been required to win the nomination. Lincoln was a distant second to William Seward in 1860 but Seward failed to win a majority on the first ballot. If Seward had whined about the process or threatened to sue the Republican Party for "stealing" the nomination from him, then he probably would not have become Lincoln's Secretary of State and Alaska might still be Russian territory.

LOL, I sincerely doubt that; you have responded to every post I've ventured, even when I quoted other posters than you.

No, I'm not wrong, and we were not discussing how one becomes a delegate. We were discussing how they are to vote at the convention, a general principle of which I and everybody else on here are likely aware. I mean, how many times do I have to say they are bound on the first ballot? You know how to use the search feature, look it up.

And you could at least come up with your own material. Tirades are the stuff of your posts, as I have pointed out. You really need to quit hiding behind all the verbosity. The convention rules have been discussed on TV lately ad nauseam, making me far more familiar with them than I really care to be.

As I keep pointing out and you keep sidestepping, there are many knowledgeable people of good repute, discussing all the Trump bashing by Republican higher ups, on-air personalities and the notable list of #NeverTrumpsters and they are appalled by it. It's dirty and nothing good will come of it. There is a cliché apt for purposes of demonstration here; "What goes around, comes around." Republicans will rue the day they made their unholy alliance with the Dems to bring down Trump, who so far has been the people's choice.

[TheRealThing]

Yes, you got your pro-Trump source in there. Have you picked up this week's National Enquirer yet? nicker:

Trump snubbed the convention attendees and his tiny staff managed to screw up the voting guides that they handed out to potential delegates. But it is Cruz's fault that he was shutout in Colorado. :lmao:

Same cheesy attack, it's the source. You know, I'm really starting to get genuinely concerned about you. The tweet came from the official Colorado State GOP. But past that, nobody on here is defending Trump for not handling the Colorado delegate situation properly.