Trump gets obliterated by Cruz forces in Georgia's District Conventions

[Volrath50]

So to be clear, in Georgia, Cruz is basically electing ninja delegates, right? Delegates who are bound to vote for Trump on the first ballot, but will switch to Cruz on the second ballot?

If Cruz wins this way, basically by overturning the actual election results through sneaky backroom dealings, there will be riots in Cleveland and his GE election campaign will have serious legitimacy concerns - not to mention the paranoia around Democrats who remember 2000 and will try to portray Cruz as planning to steal the election, like he did the nomination.

[Volrath50]

When people rely on "It's technically within the rules!" to justify something, you know it's wrong, they know it's wrong, any are only relying on it being technically allowed to justify it.

As much as I dislike Trump, this is wrong when the clear intent of the primaries is to have a democratic exercise. It's one think to woo uncommitted delegates, it's another to hijack the process and replace delegates voted on by people with double-agent, ninja delegates, with no true loyalty to who they are pledged to represent.

[Volrath50]

The system is rigged. This will cause a popular outrage among the Trump supporters and only help Trump win the required 1237 delegates the regular way and win on the first ballot.

If the system is rigged it's in Trump's favor. He's getting a higher percentage of free media than he does with the vote, and he gets a higher percentage of delegates than votes. The latter has helped him more than it has other candidates.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/despite-complaints-delegate-system-has-given-trump-22-percent-bonus-n553801

Regardless, what makes a more compelling, easier to understand narrative?

"Trump is getting a disproportionately high number of delegates! He should be winning, but not by this much!"

-or-

"Ted Cruz is trying to steal the nomination! He's sweeping delegates in states where they cancelled the election, and getting his own delegates elected as Trump delegates in order to override the will of voters!"

Regardless of anything, I think the second narrative will dominate. For most people, getting the most votes means you win, regardless of the actual "rules." Just think how many Democrats are still angry about 2000, even after several post-election recounts have shown Gore's recount strategy still would have had Bush win.

[Volrath50]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The will of the voters was quite clear. Cruz + Rubio > Trump.

Even if you choose to interpret the results that way, that's not the way most people see elections. Most elections in the US are done on a First-Past-the-Post basis, it's what people are familiar with.

If Trump finishes with far more votes and delegates than Cruz, he will have a far stronger narrative going into the convention, and almost certainly have greater public sympathy for his case. I think Cruz will look like he is trying to overturn the will of the voters based on sneaky backroom deals.

Also be aware, I'm not arguing over what is actually happening, or the ethics/morality/legitimacy of it, only how I believe it will be interpreted by voters; two very different things.