Recently I have heard many of you publically refuse to support Trump if he’s the party’s nominee. May I remind you that Trump was pressured into signing a pledge to support the party, even if he wasn’t the eventual nominee? This pledge was perceived so crucial; it was the topic of the first question asked at the first GOP debate. Its continued emphasis was disingenuously justified on the need to ensure party unity. It’s interesting now that none of your favored candidates are leading, party unity is suddenly less important. Apparently many of you arrogant bottom feeding hypocrites believe both that an unenforceable piece of paper prevents Trump from running as a third party, and that Republican voters are helpless sheep who ultimately have no choice but to vote for whatever candidate is imposed upon us at a convention. Both presumptions are fatally flawed.
As of this date, Marco Rubio has won only one state, Minnesota. Kasich cannot even win a single state thus far. Both candidates continued existence in this race can only be understood as being part of a strategy to deny an ever increasing number of delegates from going to Trump or Cruz, in hopes of forcing a brokered convention. After all, if you truly believed Trump was a menace to the country, you’d unite around Cruz, the only current viable alternative. But anyone with an IQ above twelve knows there’ll be icicles in hell before you support Cruz.
It’s not the idea of a brokered convention that millions of Republican voters find detestable: it’s the knowledge that at a brokered convention, Trump and Cruz would be prevented from ever having the slightest chance at obtaining the nomination. From day one, you have made clear both candidates are unacceptable regardless of the views of Republican voters. While we have had brokered conventions before, we have never had a political elite displaying such open contempt for certain candidates and Republican voters generally. If you wanted to ensure the will of the voters was represented, you’d change the rules, which you can do, so the candidate having the most delegates, whatever the number, will be the nominee.
As many of you exercise your sausage fingers smugly tweeting hashtag never Trump from your office armchairs, do you honestly think you’re the only voting block who has the ability to reject our parties nominee? Have you considered the effect of millions of Trump or Cruz supporters seeing their candidate denied the nomination, despite having more delegates than anyone else? What possible incentive would these voters have to vote for the Republican candidate in November or at any time in the future? Dislike for the Hildebeast isn’t a sufficient enough reason for people to vote for a Republican candidate. After all, if dislike for an opponent drove voter turnout, Trump and Sanders wouldn’t bring out millions of voters since poles currently indicate they are weaker general election candidates. Instead, Republican voters would vote for Rubio, someone who poles better against Hillary. Yet, so far the only thing Rubio has proven is an ability to unite people in rejection of his candidacy.
The purpose of a political party is to allow people with common political beliefs to combine resources, sharpen messaging, and ultimately choose, among a slate of candidates, someone to represent their interests. Like any democratic organization, political parties exist so long as its members believe their views are represented and their participation makes a difference. The erosion of this belief not only threatens the existence of our political party, but also the foundation of our democratic system. You can sneer and dismiss this concern as hyperbole. But millions of people having their votes overturned by politically established elite can only result in an increase in cynicism regarding the democratic process. For those of us who put country first, avoiding such an outcome is more important than losing influence we might have over our political party. Unfortunately many of you in the politically established elite have made clear that you value things in reverse.
I think it is highly likely we will have a brokered convention. As a result, let me issue a pledge of my own. If the nomination is not given to the candidate having the most delegates at the convention, I pledge that I will not vote for the Republican candidate. I’ll continue arguing for conservative principles on the air. But I will not lend my vote to a candidate who represents a rejection of the will of the Republican voters. I will not vote for a candidate whose nomination threatens to discourage millions of people from future engagement in the political process. Instead, I’ll write in a candidate if possible.
It is time you in the GOP establishment realize that we will no longer tolerate our votes being taken for granted. I don’t take these pledges lightly and know some will strongly disagree with my approach. As for my vote however, it’s now in your hands members of the establishment. If you make the wrong choice, at least you will never have to worry about Trump’s prediction that we’ll win so often we’ll get tired of winning.