Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Clowns don't win
Trump’s last-minute organizing effort did not go well. The leaflet his campaign handed out listed a slate of 26 delegates. But in many cases the numbers indicating their ballot position — more than 600 delegates are running for 13 slots — were off, meaning that Trump’s team was mistakenly directing votes toward other candidates’ delegates.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/donald-trump-colorado-south-carolina-delegates-221762#ixzz45WxNDx2o
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
But somehow trump campaign incompetence means the system is unfair.
He knew the rules. Heck, he blasted Santorum for not doing these things in 2012. But he couldn't even get his guys there in time to get the delegates listed, their numbers out accurately, and didn't bother to show up. Why the heck would they vote for someone with such contempt for them that they don't bother showing up
Hey, you want to be your own prating horse's ass, you go with that.
Meanwhile, prove it.
Watch the people flock from the party.
Blah blah "We're so POWERFUL!"
Still waiting on you to prove this alleged "fiduciary duty" you claim, which is hilarious on the face of it to anyone who knows what "fiduciary" actually means.
You said it, Chuckles. Now substantiate it, or admit you were talking out your ass.
Lol, you are such an ignoramus.
fi·du·ci·ar·y
(fĭ-do͞o′shē-ĕr′ē, -shə-rē, -dyo͞o′-, fī-)
adj.
1.
a. Of or relating to a duty of acting in good faith with regard to the interests of another: a company's fiduciaryresponsibility to investors.
b. Of or being a trustee or trusteeship.
c. Held in trust.
2. Of or consisting of fiat money.
3. Of, relating to, or being a system of marking in the field of view of an optical instrument that is used as a referencepoint or measuring scale.
Again, Gatsby got it exactly right and you just cant process it in your quarter amp brain of yours, lol.
I didn't ask you what "fiduciary" means, fucknut. I didn't ask YOU anything at all. I asked Gatsby to prove HIS statement that the GOP has a "fiduciary duty" to him.
Again, telling me the definition of "fiduciary" in no way proves that he's "exactly right" about claiming that there is such a duty. The fact that YOU can't process the difference between defining the word and proving that it applies just demonstrates your need to yammer mindlessly about your hero, whether you have something worth saying or not.
IT is basic civics that the parties and the government have a basic duty to have legit elections/votes for the public whether it is a cuacus or primary and to not simply toss out the results and do whatever the hell they want to.
Damn, I was giving you credit for not being THAT stupid, but I guess I was wrong.
That has nothing to do with Fascism and there was no "abolition of choice". There WAS a choice made in Colorado, just not by the rank & file GOP sheeple.Fascists abolish choice. That is exactly what happened; and then fascists like you make lame rationalizations and accusations.
As I understand it, Colorado normally has a caucus, but their state GOP is in complete disarray and disorganization right now - which to some extent is demonstrated by the kerfuffle over the convention ballots. There was a movement to switch from a caucus to a primary, but they apparently couldn't get their shit together enough to make the switch, and so they were left with doing it this way, instead.
In a normal primary season, it probably wouldn't have been much more than a blip on the radar of the news cycle. Under normal circumstances, there would already have been a clear candidate-designee by now.
My understanding is that everyone knew how Colorado was going to happen nine months ago. NINE MONTHS. There were no surprises here for the candidates. The surprises were all for the public, in the realm of how careless and incompetent Trump and his campaign staff are.
No surprise. A bit odd in that people could vote for people running to be unbound delegates. My former state Wyoming works the same way. In a weird way, they function sort of like super-delegates. If no one has the clear majority for a first ballot win, they can bargain to bring a state something in exchange for first ballot delegates. In this case, knowing that Trump would be a general election disaster, Cruz doen't have to give them much.Clowns don't win
Trump’s last-minute organizing effort did not go well. The leaflet his campaign handed out listed a slate of 26 delegates. But in many cases the numbers indicating their ballot position — more than 600 delegates are running for 13 slots — were off, meaning that Trump’s team was mistakenly directing votes toward other candidates’ delegates.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/donald-trump-colorado-south-carolina-delegates-221762#ixzz45WxNDx2o
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
But somehow trump campaign incompetence means the system is unfair.
He knew the rules. Heck, he blasted Santorum for not doing these things in 2012. But he couldn't even get his guys there in time to get the delegates listed, their numbers out accurately, and didn't bother to show up. Why the heck would they vote for someone with such contempt for them that they don't bother showing up
My understanding is that everyone knew how Colorado was going to happen nine months ago. NINE MONTHS. There were no surprises here for the candidates. The surprises were all for the public, in the realm of how careless and incompetent Trump and his campaign staff are.
Not letting them have their say isn't equivalent to them being denied rights. You keep trying to massage my words into something you can attack. The purpose should be to select a representative, not to have a representative selected for us. But it isn't, it's a corrupt system.If the party is doing the pickins then no, they aren't letting the voters have their say. I never said I have the right to demand they do what I want, you're medicine ain't cutting it. And yes, political parties are very much a part of government. I can't believe you think otherwise.The candidates are running for President, that's true. But so what? Until such time as they actually BECOME President, they have no obligation to you whatsoever, any more than I would if I just took it into my head to put myself forward as a candidate. Running for a election is nothing more or less than simply offering voters the option of hiring them for the job. And running for nomination of a political party is nothing more than basically asking a group of private citizens to become that job applicant's references for that job. There's no obligation on the part of that group of private citizens to support one applicant over another, or to ask your opinion over which one they should support, or why. The fact that they're a large group of people, with a lot of money and influence, doesn't change their lack of obligation to you.
Again, there's a difference between "I don't like their motives and intentions" and "I have a right to demand that they do what I want". Sorry you don't see that.
No, political parties are not part of the government. They're private entities, clubbing together to influence the government as per their First Amendment rights.
To say "not letting the voters have their say" is to imply that the voters have some right to a say at all, which is still not true, and never going to be, no matter how many times you try to claim it is.
Bottom line: you, and Trump, made no effort to find out how things actually worked, instead relying on some vague notion of how you THOUGHT they worked and your ability to kick your little feet and wave your tiny hands and scream and hold your breath until Mommy gave you your way.
Didn't work. Sucks to be you.
Political parties are not part of the government. They're organizations of private citizens attempting to influence the government to their benefit. Look it up. The Internet is good for more than just porn and watching Trump videos.
Here, I'll even help. It'll be my good deed for the month. You're welcome.
"A political party is a group of voters organized to support certain public policies. The aim of a political party is to elect officials who will try to carry out the party's policies."
The Origins and Functions of Political Parties | Scholastic.com
Political party, a group of persons organized to acquire and exercise political power.
political party
No, it's basic civics that political parties DON'T have governmental duties to the public, because they aren't government entities. You have failed this basic civics test.
They are obligated only to set clear rules, and then adhere to them. They have no obligation to make those rules what you want them to be.
Provong my point that you are a moron once again.I, on the other hand, was giving you no credit for not being stupid, and I was exactly right.
That has nothing to do with Fascism and there was no "abolition of choice". There WAS a choice made in Colorado, just not by the rank & file GOP sheeple.Fascists abolish choice. That is exactly what happened; and then fascists like you make lame rationalizations and accusations.
As I understand it, Colorado normally has a caucus, but their state GOP is in complete disarray and disorganization right now - which to some extent is demonstrated by the kerfuffle over the convention ballots. There was a movement to switch from a caucus to a primary, but they apparently couldn't get their shit together enough to make the switch, and so they were left with doing it this way, instead.
In a normal primary season, it probably wouldn't have been much more than a blip on the radar of the news cycle. Under normal circumstances, there would already have been a clear candidate-designee by now.
Colorado GOP Deletes #NeverTrump Tweet After Ted Cruz Sweeps Delegates - Breitbart
A person posted “We did it. #NeverTrump” from the Colorado GOP’s Twitter account minutes after
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) swept 34 Colorado delegates on Saturday.
Yeah, a really fair process and the whores will still bend over to BJ the Establishment from now till the cows wander home.
Were you there? The State gop put the system in place last August. Anyone paying attention was informed. And yeah, it was to hinder insurgent candidates.My understanding is that everyone knew how Colorado was going to happen nine months ago. NINE MONTHS. There were no surprises here for the candidates. The surprises were all for the public, in the realm of how careless and incompetent Trump and his campaign staff are.
Bullshit, as people regularly involved in the political process there had not been informed and those who did know and did attend were simply stripped off the ballot.
Did you bring your knee pads?
No surprise. A bit odd in that people could vote for people running to be unbound delegates. My former state Wyoming works the same way. In a weird way, they function sort of like super-delegates. If no one has the clear majority for a first ballot win, they can bargain to bring a state something in exchange for first ballot delegates. In this case, knowing that Trump would be a general election disaster, Cruz doen't have to give them much.
My understanding is that everyone knew how Colorado was going to happen nine months ago. NINE MONTHS. There were no surprises here for the candidates. The surprises were all for the public, in the realm of how careless and incompetent Trump and his campaign staff are.
Bullshit, as people regularly involved in the political process there had not been informed and those who did know and did attend were simply stripped off the ballot.
Did you bring your knee pads?
That has nothing to do with Fascism and there was no "abolition of choice". There WAS a choice made in Colorado, just not by the rank & file GOP sheeple.Fascists abolish choice. That is exactly what happened; and then fascists like you make lame rationalizations and accusations.
As I understand it, Colorado normally has a caucus, but their state GOP is in complete disarray and disorganization right now - which to some extent is demonstrated by the kerfuffle over the convention ballots. There was a movement to switch from a caucus to a primary, but they apparently couldn't get their shit together enough to make the switch, and so they were left with doing it this way, instead.
In a normal primary season, it probably wouldn't have been much more than a blip on the radar of the news cycle. Under normal circumstances, there would already have been a clear candidate-designee by now.
Colorado GOP Deletes #NeverTrump Tweet After Ted Cruz Sweeps Delegates - Breitbart
A person posted “We did it. #NeverTrump” from the Colorado GOP’s Twitter account minutes after
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) swept 34 Colorado delegates on Saturday.
Yeah, a really fair process and the whores will still bend over to BJ the Establishment from now till the cows wander home.
Oh, wow, someone hacked their Twitter account. That really proves . . . something. Whatever.
My understanding is that everyone knew how Colorado was going to happen nine months ago. NINE MONTHS. There were no surprises here for the candidates. The surprises were all for the public, in the realm of how careless and incompetent Trump and his campaign staff are.
Bullshit, as people regularly involved in the political process there had not been informed and those who did know and did attend were simply stripped off the ballot.
Did you bring your knee pads?
Actually, the information was readily available. No one was hiding anything. There's a difference between "They kept it from me" and "I was too lazy to get informed, and no one bothered to spoonfeed me".
I dislike Cruz. Nearly as much as I dislike Trump. But, you're simply wrong Jim. Colorado's party cancelled their usual caucus's last August. And it did so to prevent a guy like Santorum running an insurgency campaign and winning. But they did it LAST AUGUST. Trump came in at the last minute. If he wanted to win this thing, he should have had COLORADO people in COLORADO working the rules last fall.No surprise. A bit odd in that people could vote for people running to be unbound delegates. My former state Wyoming works the same way. In a weird way, they function sort of like super-delegates. If no one has the clear majority for a first ballot win, they can bargain to bring a state something in exchange for first ballot delegates. In this case, knowing that Trump would be a general election disaster, Cruz doen't have to give them much.
So that is why you obviously want Cruz to win, so that the weakest candidate will be nominated by the GOP?
roflmao
Not letting them have their say isn't equivalent to them being denied rights. You keep trying to massage my words into something you can attack. The purpose should be to select a representative, not to have a representative selected for us. But it isn't, it's a corrupt system.If the party is doing the pickins then no, they aren't letting the voters have their say. I never said I have the right to demand they do what I want, you're medicine ain't cutting it. And yes, political parties are very much a part of government. I can't believe you think otherwise.The candidates are running for President, that's true. But so what? Until such time as they actually BECOME President, they have no obligation to you whatsoever, any more than I would if I just took it into my head to put myself forward as a candidate. Running for a election is nothing more or less than simply offering voters the option of hiring them for the job. And running for nomination of a political party is nothing more than basically asking a group of private citizens to become that job applicant's references for that job. There's no obligation on the part of that group of private citizens to support one applicant over another, or to ask your opinion over which one they should support, or why. The fact that they're a large group of people, with a lot of money and influence, doesn't change their lack of obligation to you.
Again, there's a difference between "I don't like their motives and intentions" and "I have a right to demand that they do what I want". Sorry you don't see that.
No, political parties are not part of the government. They're private entities, clubbing together to influence the government as per their First Amendment rights.
To say "not letting the voters have their say" is to imply that the voters have some right to a say at all, which is still not true, and never going to be, no matter how many times you try to claim it is.
Bottom line: you, and Trump, made no effort to find out how things actually worked, instead relying on some vague notion of how you THOUGHT they worked and your ability to kick your little feet and wave your tiny hands and scream and hold your breath until Mommy gave you your way.
Didn't work. Sucks to be you.
Political parties are not part of the government. They're organizations of private citizens attempting to influence the government to their benefit. Look it up. The Internet is good for more than just porn and watching Trump videos.
Here, I'll even help. It'll be my good deed for the month. You're welcome.
"A political party is a group of voters organized to support certain public policies. The aim of a political party is to elect officials who will try to carry out the party's policies."
The Origins and Functions of Political Parties | Scholastic.com
Political party, a group of persons organized to acquire and exercise political power.
political party
Political party, a group of persons organized to acquire and exercise political power.
Sorta shot yourself in the foot there.
I dislike Cruz. Nearly as much as I dislike Trump. But, you're simply wrong Jim. Colorado's party cancelled their usual caucus's last August. And it did so to prevent a guy like Santorum running an insurgency campaign and winning. But they did it LAST AUGUST. Trump came in at the last minute. If he wanted to win this thing, he should have had COLORADO people in COLORADO working the rules last fall.
Were you there? The State gop put the system in place last August. Anyone paying attention was informed. And yeah, it was to hinder insurgent candidates.My understanding is that everyone knew how Colorado was going to happen nine months ago. NINE MONTHS. There were no surprises here for the candidates. The surprises were all for the public, in the realm of how careless and incompetent Trump and his campaign staff are.
Bullshit, as people regularly involved in the political process there had not been informed and those who did know and did attend were simply stripped off the ballot.
Did you bring your knee pads?
Colorado Republicans cancel presidential vote at 2016 caucus
No, it's basic civics that political parties DON'T have governmental duties to the public, because they aren't government entities. You have failed this basic civics test.
Lol, so if the GOP wanted to exclude blacks or women, the government has nothing to say about it? Of course there are basic guidelines of fairness involved here, Twinkle Toes and the GOP failed completely because it is run by Nazi bastards Like Prescot Bush and his family.
And yes, ANY public entity that has membership and people PAY their hard earned cash to be involved like state convention delegates have to do, I know because I have done it. Such institutions have a fiduciary responsibility to not defraud its membership as the Colorado GOP did here with this NAzi balloting process where the party Establishment simply defrauded its Trump supporters.
And you are OK with that, and probably Jim Crow, the Tuskeegee experiments and Nazi Death Camps too. What a disgusting piece of filth you are.
They are obligated only to set clear rules, and then adhere to them. They have no obligation to make those rules what you want them to be.
Lol, nor anyone else that doesnt support the party establishment. The party has an obligation to be fair and they have not been fair with Trump supporters.
Are you truly that stupid? Wait, never mind.
Provong my point that you are a moron once again.I, on the other hand, was giving you no credit for not being stupid, and I was exactly right.
