As ardent readers of mine should know by now, I like Donald Trump about as much as I like the thought of being sprayed in the face by a skunk after being forced to listen to George W. Bush talk for an hour. In saying that, however, I do think the man should receive the Republican nomination if he winds up with the most delegates, regardless if he reaches the magical 1,237 or not.
When standing back and looking at the bigger picture, one has to admit this country is funny. While we like to hail ourselves as a democracy, even bombing other countries and stripping them of their leaders in order to help spread this way of life, we're actually a republic like our pledge of allegiance states, and have been slowly on the verge of becoming an oligarchy. In the general election, it's hypothetically possible for the winner to lose the popular vote. Don't believe me? Just ask Al Gore. Now, with Donald Trump atop the Republican field in delegates, the GOP establishment is trying to find a way to give the nomination to someone else, even if Trump continues to lead in delegates heading to the convention. Every vote counts, eh? Do as we say, not as we do, I suppose...
To this point in the race, Donald Trump has won 20 states. The next closest to him is Ted Cruz with 10 (state) victories. As of right now, Trump leads Cruz by 238 delegates (755 to 517). Looking ahead, Trump is likely to win the following states: New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, California, and New Jersey. He also has a decent chance at winning: Indiana, Oregon, and possibly Washington. That would give him between 28 and 31 state victories, compared to Cruz's 14 to 17. According to my numbers, Trump will likely head to the convention with roughly a 500-delegate lead over the Texas senator. Given these likelihoods, and the fact polling shows Republican voters believe their party's delegate-leader should be rewarded with the nomination at the RNC, how in the world can the GOP establishment make a convincing argument that someone else should be their nominee? If this happens, how can they look their voters in the eyes leading up to the general election and sincerely tell them, "While your votes didn't matter to us in the primaries, they do now. Trust us this time..."? How can they look their voters in the eyes and say, "This candidate, who won 17 fewer states than the frontrunner, earned this nomination more!"? I can understand why the GOP establishment would be unhappy with Donald Trump as their nominee, but with the good comes the bad in giving people the freedom to voice their opinions, and with that, their votes on election day. While I voted for Bernie Sanders in the Ohio Primary, the fact remains Hillary Clinton leads the race, has won more states, won more votes, and will likely keep those leads in tact heading to the party's convention. If she maintains these leads, she should receive the party's nomination, plain and simple. As flabbergasted as I am to say it, the same goes for Donald Trump. I can't stand the guy, but if he wins the most votes, the most states, and the most delegates, he should (unfortunately) be the Republican Party's nominee. The GOP establishment can try all they want to wiggle themselves out of this mess, but if they do, they'll be hard-pressed to find their voters trusting them at their words, "Every vote counts," because obviously, they would have already proven otherwise.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/march_2016/51_in_gop_say_candidate_who_enters_convention_with_most_delegates_should_be_nominee
Comments
Post a Comment