Yeah.  Because the HuffPo is the expert on all things about the Republican party.

They might be the worst qualified to talk about what is going on in the party they identify least with.

Springsteen refused to play a concert in North Carolina because he disagreed with a new women's safety law requiring people to use the bathroom of their biological gender.  This was in response to a Charlotte city ordinance which was written equally poorly and opened the door for men to legally use a women's restroom.

Why is it "OK" for Springsteen to refuse service because he disagreed with his customer's beliefs but not OK for Sweet Cakes by Melissa to refuse to make a cake for a homosexual wedding because they disagreed with their customer's beliefs?

A question -

Person A and Person B are to do business.  Person A is ready to do it but Person B doesn't like some characteristic about Person A.  Which of the following is correct?

1) Person B should cancel his show, refuse to service his customers and just stay home and be hailed as a liberal hero?
2) Person B should decline to bake the cake, be vilified as a demon and have their business and reputation ruined?

When is it OK for Person B to say "No, I reject servicing my customers" and when is it not OK?  Both Sweet Cakes by Melissa (Oregon baker) and Bruce Springsteen said "I don't like something about my customer(s) so I'm not servicing them".  Why is one right and one wrong?  All we're asking for is some consistency. 

Set laws aside...I'm not talking about law.  I need a Leftie to explain to me why one is right and one is wrong.  The last remaining leftie at the Pigpen couldn't do it.

So you vote for Hillary by default.

Purists like you gave us two terms of Obama.

So you count every non vote for Trump as a vote for Hillary.  You're saying that Trump is the natural loser. 

Karl Rove is the establishment of the establishment.  We are totally screwed.

Rove is the Establishment of the past.  This is 2012 coming back to haunt him.

If Cruz is the nominee Hillary is a sure bet. 

The only way I think you could believe what you say is either that you know it's a lie but you don't care OR you just aren't informed / letting your personal judgement get in the way of seeing the truth.  The Cruz / Hillary race is a tight one, pretty consistently withing a couple of points.  But the real race hasn't even started yet.  There is a lot of time before November and a lot of stuff that is going to happen between now and then.  For example, if the Justice Dept is forced to indict Hillary then she takes an even bigger tumble than she already has and Cruz probably goes ahead.  There are debates to have and questions to be answered about a lot of things. 

Cruz / Hillary is nothing like a sure bet.

But I do think the GOP and others are using him (and you) to keep Trump from getting the nomination and sending it to a brokered convention. 

It's a primary.  Just because Trump is ahead by 230 delegates does not mean that he has won and everyone else should drop out.  And if he eventually loses, it doesn't mean others stole it, it means he got beat.  Of COURSE Senator Cruz is trying to keep Mr. Trump from winning, that is what he SHOULD be doing.  I'm personally very pleased that Trump seems to be helping him so well. 

If he can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.  Judging from his behavior over the last week and especially last night, he can't handle the campaign.  Is this how he will handle the job?

Last thought - if Cruz and Kasich would both put on their big boy pants and announce a Cruz / Kasich ticket today, it would be nearly a tie in the delegate count and they would have a very positive message to send about how they approach inclusion in their campaign.

The fall of the United States comes about because of a failure of the law, it is a moral failure.  The country is a Republic, a country ruled by law.  When everyone quits caring about the legal part in favor of what is good for them personally, then the law is gone and the Republic is gone.  We are nearly there.