pacino wrote:Jesse Ventura is deciding between Trump and Bernie. Because of course he is.

pacino wrote:Jesse Ventura is deciding between Trump and Bernie. Because of course he is.

swishnicholson wrote:With five districts reporting in Alaska, Trump has 33.6% of the vote. Cruz has 31.1%., according to the Alaska Dispatch news.

Doll Is Mine wrote:So many excuses for why Rubio isn't winning. It's John Kasich's fault and before that Jeb Bush's. We were told that Rubio would have a better chance if Jeb and Christie dropped out. They did. Rubio won one state tonight. One.

Here's the truth: Rubio has been exposed. People know he's a puppet for billionaire donors and the Republican establishment who gets fed his lines and recites them like a robot. He also can't stand his job of legislating in the Senate.

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

MoBettle wrote:So I get that people would be upset over it being decided at the convention and not at the polls but I do think it's a legitimate point that no one votes in the primaries and regardless 60+% of the people that do aren't voting for Trump.

I really don't understand the concern about a convention, at least compared to a Trump nomination. A convention will be messy and there will be hurt feelings, but the result will (probably) be something most Republicans can live with. A Trump nomination is catastrophic.

A brokered R convention would be a sensational national political education opportunity, cleansing for Rs without dooming the party-as-enterprise - kinda like a forest fire - while absolutely Presidency clinching for Ds. A Drumpf nomination would do the same for Rs as far as POTUS 2016, with no redeeming benefits for Rs or for America.

For Rs, then, Election 2016 is the Year of Eating Your Peas

traderdave wrote:
Trump is charismatic though, I have to give him that.

We’ve now seen 15 states vote in the Democratic contest, and it’s clear that Clinton’s coalition is wider than Sanders’s. Sanders has won only in relatively small states where black voters make up less than 10 percent of the population. That’s not going to work this year when black voters are likely to make up more than 20 percent of Democratic primary voters nationwide.

On Tuesday, we saw why. As she did in Nevada and South Carolina, Clinton won huge margins of black voters. Her worst performance was in Oklahoma, where 71 percent of black voters in the Democratic primary chose her. In Alabama, she won 93 percent of black voters on her way to winning 78 percent of Democrats overall. Clinton took no less than 64 percent of the overall vote in the southern states she won.

It wasn’t just just black voters, either: Clinton dominated with Hispanics in Texas. There had been some questions about how Hispanics voted in Nevada, but there was little doubt in Texas. The exit poll showed Clinton with a 42 percentage point win among Hispanics, about the margin she won in counties such as Hidalgo, where Hispanics make up 91 percent of the population. Those results bode well for Clinton in states such as Arizona, California, Florida and New Mexico.

momadance wrote:https://vine.co/v/igHPD5Ol5mU

JUburton wrote:He's a great public speaker

jerseyhoya wrote:[A great many people in this fair land are pretty dumb and "he'll shake things up" is a sufficient reason to support someone as if 'change' is an end in and of itself regardless of what aspects of the system you're trying to change and what you're trying to change them to.

drsmooth wrote:

JUburton wrote:He's a great public speaker

no. No, he manifestly is not. He speaks, in public. Anyone can do that. his slovenly appearance, indifference to preparation, revolting physical tics, pig faced pouty preening, jump-cut delivery, and overall disgusting presence makes him everything but a "great" public speaker. I have to resist throwing things at my teevee within 15 seconds of his face or merely his voice blaring into view.

His "public speaking" mannerisms remind me nothing so much as of this guy: