Stealing an election
Are runoff elections inherently unfair or dishonest? Not all elections have them but here in Texas at least I know I’ve been through a few runoff elections including for Mayor of Dallas — when Tom Leppert won in 2007 — and again when Ted Cruz won his Senate seat. In 2011 we had a pretty crowded field packed with a lot of really good candidates, among those was Ted Cruz and David Dewhurst. During the primary voting Dewhurst had the plurality of votes edging out Cruz and the rest of the field by many points. Because he didn’t have a clear majority though, Texas throws the primary race into a runoff with the top two candidates. When Cruz faced Dewhurst one-on-one he took the race easily with a 14-point spread. I remember this election clearly because, although I have followed and been into politics for a long time, this was the first time I’ve actively been involved in trying to get a particular candidate elected — on the side of Cruz.
That’s right, I was a Cruz guy as he ran for Senate here in Texas because I didn’t want to hand the seat over to another politician that would get to Washington and go back on conservative promises he made. I still like Cruz and support him for the same reasons I did back in 2011. I support Cruz as a Senator because I really think that’s where he fits well and can make the biggest difference. Rubio on the other hand I’ve also always supported, and still support. I backed Rubio for President because his talents uniquely qualify him for that job and he’s just as conservative as anyone else. Of course, now that Rubio has dropped out — I’ve already cast my vote in the primary — I’m backing Cruz over Trump.
This brings me back to the original question about runoff elections. At this point, my vote is lost. I have no further say even though the race has changed dramatically but we don’t have runoff elections for Presidential candidates. Or do we?
Everyone has been paying close attention to the brokered/contested convention rules and processes during this cycle. It has been clear to a lot of people, for a while now, that this could come right down to the convention. The more these rules and processes are talked about the more angry and divided people seem to become. I’ve heard many, even in conservative circles, scream that if the election is “stolen” from Trump that it would be unfair or wrong but let’s look at the process. If Trump doesn’t get the majority of the votes, from the delegates, during the convention then we, in essence, go into a runoff. One difference here is that it doesn’t necessarily have to come down to the top two delegate holders, although it probably would, and of course it’s the delegates themselves that cast the ballots instead of the race being thrown back to the people in each state.
To me, this sounds like a completely reasonable way to handle the circumstance because if it was thrown back to me, a Rubio diehard, and it was down to only Trump vs Cruz — I’d choose Cruz in a heartbeat. Trump may be upset about that, and his voters rightfully so, but there’s nothing inherently unfair or dishonest about it. If there is, then should we get rid of the runoff rule and just have elections decided by a plurality vs a majority?
