In the Georgia District Conventions, Trump Got Exactly What the Electorate Wanted

Yesterday, representing Hall County, my lovely wife Michelle was a delegate for the 9th district GOP convention in Georgia. While there, she voted on multiple resolutions and voted to select the delegates and the alternates to the national convention. Three delegates were chosen, along with three alternates.

Tellingly, Michelle reported to me that while voting on the delegates, some of the voters would shout out "We need to know who they are for!" An officer leading the proceedings declared that the candidates were not required to reveal who they were "for." However--as I suppose is usually the case--there was enough information being spread around the convention to deduce which GOP candidate for U.S. President each delegate was supporting (some were literally wearing their support on their sleeve).

The 9th congressional district of Georgia is one of the most conservative districts in the country. Unsurprisingly, Ted Cruz had the most support at yesterday's meeting in Dillard, Georgia. Evidently, this was the case across all of the district conventions in Georgia. Yesterday, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) reported that Donald Trump got "outmaneuvered by Ted Cruz forces in Georgia." Of course, this sent the Trump supporters into a tizzy.

Today, the AJC reports that Trump supporters "stormed out of a Georgia GOP convention." After being denied delegate positions, showing a grainy photo of a man snatching the U.S. flag, the article notes that Trump supporters "bolted the 7th district GOP convention." The Trump propaganda machine took such information and (again) began shouting that Trump had been "cheated."

The Trump apologists at Breitbart reported on an "Uproar In The Hall." Of course, Drudge--another rabid Trump apologist--prominently placed a link to the Breitbart piece at the top of his page. As Rush Limbaugh noted on the selection of Cruz delegates in Colorado, this is not Ted Cruz "cheating," this is Ted Cruz "winning."

As I posted on the AJC and Breitbart yesterday, Trump did not win a majority of the vote in GA (39%), he won a plurality. A significant majority voted for someone else (Cruz and Rubio totaled 48% together), thus Trump's struggle to get supportive delegates is no surprise. Trump will get his promised delegates on the first ballot at the convention, but if he doesn't get 1,237, the delegates can vote as they like.

There's nothing nefarious going on here. There's certainly no "fraud." Of the 20 counties represented in the Georgia 9th district (see a the vote by each Georgia county here), Trump won a majority of the vote in only two of those counties (Fannin: 53%, Gilmer: 52%). Thus, 90% of the counties in the Georgia 9th preferred another candidate to Mr. Trump. When given a choice of only Trump or Cruz (which they did not have in the primary), it is clear that most voters in these counties prefer Cruz. Thus, it is perfectly legitimate for these districts to send delegates to the national convention that represent such an outcome.

What's more, this is true across Georgia. Trump rarely won a majority of the vote in any Georgia county. This is how the process works when the field is narrowed to the three GOP candidates that we now have, and when no candidate looks likely to secure 1,237. All that the Georgia district conventions did yesterday was again reveal the disorganization and weakness of Trump's national GOP campaign.

Copyright 2016, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Matt Drudge Pimps Anti-Cruz Propaganda

On his site today, prominently displayed in red headlines, and including an exclamation point, Matt Drudge has this:

Notice the right-hand column that deceptively reads "Video: Pastor Calls for Execution of Gays -- Then Introduces Ted Cruz at Conference!" 

If you only click on the link, you will easily see that the pastor shown, Kevin Swanson, in no way "calls for the execution of gays." When discussing homosexuals, Pastor Swanson references Romans 1:32 which says that those who engage in such things are "worthy of death" (or "deserve to die" in the English Standard translation). As is typical when reading such Scripture, the verses prior help give the proper context. Here's Romans 1:18-32:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. 

Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. 

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. 

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

As any unbiased reader can see, those who "deserve to die" are those who practice any type of "ungodliness and unrighteousness." Of course, this is all of humanity since "all have sinned." And as even the most elementary observers of Christianity knows, this is why Jesus had to die for our sins. The "wages of sin" is death. Christ died so that we might live.

So thus, what we are really talking about here is sin, and that includes homosexuality. Unsurprisingly, the left and its apologists want nothing to do with calling homosexuality a "sin." We do not usually find Matt Drudge on the same side as modern liberals in such issues. However, sadly, this is the case here.

What's more, the event to which Drudge is referring is over 4 months old. It seems that Drudge, much like his cohorts at Breitbart, are so in the tank for Donald Trump that they will do and say almost anything to ensure that Trump is the GOP nominee. Mr. Trump is perhaps the most biblically ignorant hedonistic man (or woman) ever to run for the office of U.S. President. As I have often noted the last several months, Donald Trump has not proven himself trustworthy when it comes to matters important to conservatives. When it comes to marriage and sexuality (or immigration, abortion, national defense, the economy, and so on), this is certainly the case.

This is nothing more than a sad attempt to paint Ted Cruz as a religious extremist too out-of-touch for the American people. This is standard operating procedure for the left, but Mr. Drudge should know better.

Copyright 2016, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Should Cruz/Rubio Go Third Party? (Updated)

Many conservatives (and republicans alike) feared that a Trump candidacy for the GOP nomination for U.S. President would lead to a third party run. What was once feared may now give rise to hope. A third-party run may now be the best option for American conservatives. (I'm far from alone that this may be a real viable option for U.S. conservatives.)

With Trump looking more and more like the GOP nominee, and with Christian conservatives like myself aghast at the option of Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton for U.S. President, a Ted Cruz/Marco Rubio ticket sounds very appealing. It would not matter to me which one was at the top of the ticket.

A Cruz/Rubio ticket would have severe political ramifications. First of all, with Cruz/Rubio taking on both Trump and Clinton, we would likely see no candidate receive the necessary 270 electoral votes to become U.S. President. Thus, for the first time since the Presidential election of 1824, the U.S. House of Representatives would choose our President.

In 1824, despite finishing behind Andrew Jackson in both electoral votes and popular vote, John Quincy Adams became the sixth President of the United States. With the Democratic-Republican Party--then the only national political organization in the U.S.--unable to choose a single candidate, four separate candidates for U.S. President emerged.

With 131 electoral votes necessary to win, Jackson won 41% of the popular vote and 99 electoral votes. Adams won 31% of the popular vote and 84 electoral votes. Henry Clay from Kentucky won 13% of the popular vote and 37 electoral votes, and for William H. Crawford from Georgia it was 11% of the popular vote and 41 electoral votes.

Although it had no impact on the results of the election, this was the first U.S. Presidential election where the popular vote was counted. However, at this time, not every state selected their Presidential electors by popular vote. Some states still had their legislators choose their Presidential electors.

As one would expect (as most of us have witnessed in our time (Bush v. Gore)), Jackson and his supporters were very bitter at the outcome. The Jackson faction would become the Democrat Party. (Like Rush Limbaugh, I don't use the other moniker for the modern political party dominated by today's perverse liberalism.) The Adams/Clay faction would become the Whig Party. The Whig Party would fall apart over the issue of slavery and the anti-slavery Republican Party would rise in its place and become the chief opposition to the Democrat Party.

As slavery divided the U.S. in the 19th century, the modern moral issues facing America today have created a split in the U.S. unseen since the early to mid-1800s. Given the importance placed on today's moral issues--especially when it comes to issues important to the family, such as abortion and marriage--many Christian conservatives simply see no way they can support Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. (As I have pointed out, led by their liberal "values," I don't think either can be trusted on ANY issue.) This creates a very interesting opportunity for a Cruz/Rubio candidacy.

If there's a three-way race and the Republican controlled U.S. House must choose our President, I believe that Cruz/Rubio would be the choice. If this happens, several fascinating questions must be considered. First of all, what happens to the Republican Party? Also, would we see it replaced by a "Conservative Party?" Would we see the rise of other political parties?

Of course, this is all academic. Much is still to be decided. However, as we get closer and closer to actually choosing a GOP candidate, this scenario should be weighed.

Update:

Just a few minutes after posting my piece, I saw this by Rick Moran at PJ Media. He reports on a Politico piece that gives details of a memo prepared by a Florida research firm hired by big-money GOP donors. The memo reveals that significant factions within the GOP are looking to funding a run by a third-party candidate. No candidate is name, but it is clear that this scenario is gaining significant traction.

Copyright 2016, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com