Sunday, April 17, 2016

They Missed the Point

The pundits—all of them—say Donald Trump can't win in November, but they can't say why. Not really. When asked, they say “He's rude, crude, and loud, and insults everybody.” But have you heard what Cruz says about HIM? And in what words? And every other candidate likewise? In Colorado, they held an election—er, uh, no, they didn't. Not a single vote was cast, for ANYBODY. If he can't win, that's the reason. The deck is truly stacked against him, by his own party! Or any other candidate the Republican “establishment” doesn't want. They PICKED Cruz, and he “won.” Right. He was FORCED upon us by them. I like Cruz, and I like Trump. I wouldn't mind if EITHER of them got the nomination. The pundits were WRONG—every time. They kept saying “He's gonna fizzle, any time, now.” But he hasn't. Not even with his own party trying their best to stop him. Now the Republican establishment are saying, “We need a fresh face.” That's code for, “We want to CHOOSE who is going to be our nominee--US--not the voters.

Cruz says Trump is “whining.” that if they don't nominate HIM, there'll be riots. But that's not what he's saying, at all. They're putting words in his mouth. He's saying only that he wants a “fair shake,” which he is not getting. If Cruz wins—honestly—okay. But the kind of crap that's been happening is an insult to our intelligence. And disenfranchising an entire state is WRONG, no matter who it benefits or bars. Rush Limbaugh is mostly right. He touts the fact that he has been “found to be right on ALMOST everything. But this is one of the times when he is WRONG. Yes, everybody (except Trump) KNEW that's what Colorado was going to do. But that doesn't make disenfranchising the whole state right. The SYSTEM is corrupt, and STACKED against the voters being able to decide. And the fact that everybody knew about it and let it happen scares the hell out of me. It's just as corrupt on the Democrat side, with their “super delegates” giving more delegates to the LOSER in many “elections” than the winner. (New York Times)

No comments: