Social media posts, along with Cruz’s campaign website, reveal thatIn May of 2015, four Colorado Senate Republicans killed an initiative “to create a presidential primary in 2016,” supporters in the Colorado Republican Party were responsible for crushing an effort to give Colorado the ability to vote in a state primary.reported the Denver Post. “Under the bill, Colorado would have held a presidential primary in March that ran parallel with the state’s complicated caucus system… when it came before the Senate Appropriations Committee, four Republicans voted to kill the bill with three Democrats supporting it.”
The four Republicans who voted against the initiative were Sen. Kevin Grantham, Sen. Kent Lambert, Sen. Laura Woods, and Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg.
On Cruz’s campaign website, Sens. Woods, Grantham, and Lambert are all listed as Cruz supporters and as declared members of Cruz’s “Colorado Leadership team.”
“I am honored to have the support of so many courageous conservatives in Colorado,” Cruz said about his so-called leadership team in early April. “With our incredible team we are in a very strong position for this weekend’s assemblies in Colorado.”
Sen. Grantham is even an official Cruz delegate and Sen. Lambert is an alternate Cruz delegate.
At the time, the editors of the Denver Post seemed perplexed by Grantham’s decision not to support the primary election initiative. In a May 2015 editorial titled, “Colorado GOP flubs chance for 2016 presidential primary,” the editors write: “What? Grantham was a sponsor of the bill. If he thought the bill made enough sense to put his name on it, why wouldn’t he think it should be passed out of committee?”
The editors go on to suggest that Party leaders may have had “other agendas that remain undisclosed” for rejecting a primary election of the people. The editors write: an “opportunity to move Colorado out of its antiquated presidential caucuses has been lost through miscommunication, timidity or, perhaps, because of other agendas that remain undisclosed.” They continue, “The caucuses guarantee lackluster voter participation and the disproportionate influence of activists on both ends of the political spectrum who are not representative of the parties’ mainstream. Some romanticize the caucus system as the purest form of grass-roots democracy, but that’s only accurate if your idea of democracy involves excruciatingly low turnout — by design.”
Ted went further, claiming that a similar voterless victory in Wyoming was a "grassroots victory," either mockingly or sarcastically.
There is no constitutional restriction on parties or their rules, so technically, they can get away with it. Both parties are changing them - against the will of the people - to run the elites' favored candidates. While the country may not be pure democracy, the vote of the people is still supposed to count. Being a delegate was supposed to be an honorary position, representative of the people. Between shifting the goal posts and the use of Trojan Horse Delegates (and on the Democratic side, Supderdelegates), it just makes the case that parties should be abolished (see The Dangers of Political Parties).