Monroe wrote:
A social justice warrior from one of the most racist, discriminatory, and jingoistic countries on the planet. Isn't it funny how no Democrats called Trump a racist (he's been a national figure for decades) until he ran for President?

A delegate to the Republican National Convention filed a class action lawsuit in federal court late last week, ?challenging a state law that binds delegates to support the primary winner at the nominating convention.? Around the same time, a group called ?Delegates Unbound? launched a new television commercial, intended to rally support for Republican convention delegates to vote their conscience when they meet next month in Cleveland.

The point of this is plainly obvious: there are more than a few Republican delegates who still hope to deny Donald Trump the party?s presidential nomination, and they?re looking for any possible, last-gasp, Hail-Mary solutions in the hopes of preventing the inevitable.

Trump and the Republican National Committee are taking the possibility seriously, ?moving quickly and aggressively to head off the fledgling effort to stage a revolt,? but let?s not miss the funny part of all of this: Republican officials aren?t the only ones worried about Trump getting derailed by a convention coup.

Politico published a piece last week with an off-hand observation thrown in: Democratic donors and Hillary Clinton?s allies ?are no longer convinced that Donald Trump is sure to be the GOP nominee.? A day later, Politico fleshed this out further.

Hillary Clinton?s top fundraisers are encountering an unexpected obstacle a month out from the party conventions: big money donors suddenly reluctant to give for fear of running Donald Trump out of the race before he locks up the nomination.

?They?re worried about giving money to attack Trump before the convention,? said longtime Clinton ally James Carville, who has been raising money for the campaign in New York?. There?s no evidence that Trump is considering dropping his presidential bid, and it?s unlikely Republicans will dump him as the party nominee. But Clinton?s well-heeled supporters are nevertheless worried by the prospect of running against anyone other than him.

An unnamed Clinton donor added, ?That?s all anyone?s worried about.?

Let?s not brush past this too quickly. Dems are not only aware of the GOP chatter about a convention coup, they?re actively worried about it. As these Democrats see it, Trump is a weak general-election candidate who?s likely to lose, so the fear is the Republican revolt will succeed and the GOP will nominate someone more competitive.

In fact, apparently some Democratic donors are holding onto their money, fearful that the Clinton campaign will spend it, build an even larger lead in the polls, and make it that much more likely that Trump will get the boot.

For the record, I still think the prospect of a convention coup is unlikely. But that doesn?t change these amazing circumstances: the only folks more worried than Trump about an intra-party revolt at the Republican convention are the Democrats eager to take on Trump in the fall.

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I'm always amused when someone from one of the most racist countries on earth opines on the US.

That's BS. You can be from Congo and criticize human right abuse by other countries. I'm a lot more critical of Japan in many issues. I can still call racists such as you as a racist!

The way Monroe is thinking is eerie similar to Trump's attack on Indiana judge. Because he is of Mexican heritage, he can't do his job. Similarly, he Monroe is saying because Atsushi is from Japan, he can't call him a racist. That is, according to Paul Ryan, "Text book definition of racism."

Trying to pivot. Pathetic. You are a truly worst kind of racist.

A social justice warrior from one of the most racist, discriminatory, and jingoistic countries on the planet. Isn't it funny how no Democrats called Trump a racist (he's been a national figure for decades) until he ran for President?

TheBigGuy wrote:
Oh? you are back Pebbles? Suppose you are here to apologize to the JC Gay Community for trying to turn the Orlando Muslim Terrorist into a depressed sick confused Gay person who ruthlessly slaughtered his own people, just like Obama wanted you fools to believe.

TheBigGuy wrote:
So as a loyal progressive, you sold out the Gay and Spanish communities to protect the Muslim Killer. Not a tough choice usually, except this time the victims were not at a Christmas party but at a Gay nightclub. So for political expediency, the Gay community was sacrificed on the altar of political correctness in order to maintain the blatant liberal LIE which denies that there is a global Muslim jihad in progress against the west and non-Muslim cultures.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Then you declare some sort of strange twisted victory against Trump because Wall Street / Goldman Sachs types who have officially controlled the treasury and financial policy since Bill Clinton are now supporting Hillary. Those are exactly the corrupt types of people that Trump supporters are glad to see go. Apparently your principles are as selective as your outrage is with the truth.

TheBigGuy wrote:
How long will we have to wait for ?principled? democrats stand up and challenge Hillary and her Wall Street / Muslim donors to her campaign and the Clinton Foundation.
Liz Warren? Will love the photos of her as VP sitting next to the paid in full Goldman Sachs Treasury Seat in the Clinton Cabinet.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Paulsen types know they have no control over Trump and why try to buy him when Hillary is signed sealed and delivered. Let me ask, who are you going to blame when one morning you find your 401k, pension or social security gone because of Wall Street. The Racist Republicans and The Tea Party! Racist! DRINK!!!!!

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I'm always amused when someone from one of the most racist countries on earth opines on the US.

That's BS. You can be from Congo and criticize human right abuse by other countries. I'm a lot more critical of Japan in many issues. I can still call racists such as you as a racist!

The way Monroe is thinking is eerie similar to Trump's attack on Indiana judge. Because he is of Mexican heritage, he can't do his job. Similarly, he Monroe is saying because Atsushi is from Japan, he can't call him a racist. That is, according to Paul Ryan, "Text book definition of racism."

Trump was right on that. When a Latina Supreme Court judge embraces identity group politics with her 'wise Latina' comments, should we not think the same of a judge with Mexican heritage-who's an open supporter of radical, illegal alien supporting group La Raza?

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I'm always amused when someone from one of the most racist countries on earth opines on the US.

That's BS. You can be from Congo and criticize human right abuse by other countries. I'm a lot more critical of Japan in many issues. I can still call racists such as you as a racist!

The way Monroe is thinking is eerie similar to Trump's attack on Indiana judge. Because he is of Mexican heritage, he can't do his job. Similarly, he Monroe is saying because Atsushi is from Japan, he can't call him a racist. That is, according to Paul Ryan, "Text book definition of racism."

Trying to pivot. Pathetic. You are a truly worst kind of racist.

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I'm always amused when someone from one of the most racist countries on earth opines on the US.

That's BS. You can be from Congo and criticize human right abuse by other countries. I'm a lot more critical of Japan in many issues. I can still call racists such as you as a racist!

The way Monroe is thinking is eerie similar to Trump's attack on Indiana judge. Because he is of Mexican heritage, he can't do his job. Similarly, he Monroe is saying because Atsushi is from Japan, he can't call him a racist. That is, according to Paul Ryan, "Text book definition of racism."

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
I'm always amused when someone from one of the most racist countries on earth opines on the US.

That's BS. You can be from Congo and criticize human right abuse by other countries. I'm a lot more critical of Japan in many issues. I can still call racists such as you as a racist!

The way Monroe is thinking is eerie similar to Trump's attack on Indiana judge. Because he is of Mexican heritage, he can't do his job. Similarly, he Monroe is saying because Atsushi is from Japan, he can't call him a racist. That is, according to Paul Ryan, "Text book definition of racism."

Monroe wrote:
I'm always amused when someone from one of the most racist countries on earth opines on the US.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:


http://www.breitbart.com/2016-preside ... tform-reason-endorsement/


I do not know how anybody in their right mind could support Hillary Clinton. Trump is not the best. According to the DNC scare tactics, he will round up millions of illegals. Never happen, because it is impossible to do. But securing the borders first, stopping illegals from breaking US laws can be achievable. And then you deal with the internal issues. The Clinton Bush Obama years and the connections to Wall Street are sucking the life out of the country. We know the devil we are dealing with... and beating HRC at the polls is the only way to make a loud clear statement to the Goldman Sachs types.

Breitbart? Seriously? Was Stormfront unavailable when you were looking for justification in supporting a man spouting racist rhetoric?

Honestly, this thread is great in the fact that it exposed a few more of the racists on the website and gives us a glimpse into their scared little lives.

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Racist! Drink!

I sometimes fail to understand humor in English, but this sounds like the best thing racists can be doing now.

Drink! the next time Atsushi's Japan admits a single refugee Muslim into its country!

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Racist! Drink!

I sometimes fail to understand humor in English, but this sounds like the best thing racists can be doing now.

Monroe wrote:
Racist! Drink!

TheBigGuy wrote:


http://www.breitbart.com/2016-preside ... tform-reason-endorsement/


I do not know how anybody in their right mind could support Hillary Clinton. Trump is not the best. According to the DNC scare tactics, he will round up millions of illegals. Never happen, because it is impossible to do. But securing the borders first, stopping illegals from breaking US laws can be achievable. And then you deal with the internal issues. The Clinton Bush Obama years and the connections to Wall Street are sucking the life out of the country. We know the devil we are dealing with... and beating HRC at the polls is the only way to make a loud clear statement to the Goldman Sachs types.

During his trip to Scotland, reporters asked Donald Trump to respond to former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson?s endorsement of Hillary Clinton. ?Don?t know anything about him,? the Republican candidate responded.

As BuzzFeed noted, we know that?s not true. During the economic crash in late 2008 ,Trump singled out Paulson for praise. ?I would give him an A,? Trump told CNN, lauding the Treasury Secretary?s response to the crisis. Trump added at the time, ?[T]he fact is, [Paulson] came into a mess. He didn?t create the mess. And he is helping us get out of the mess.?

The admiration is clearly not mutual. Paulson wrote a piece for the Washington Post, published over the weekend, in which the veteran of the Bush/Cheney administration wrote, ?Enough is enough. It?s time to put country before party and say it together: Never Trump.?

The piece reads like a stinging indictment, trashing Trump?s business acumen, dishonesty, divisiveness, and temperament.

Simply put, a Trump presidency is unthinkable.

As a Republican looking ahead to November, there are many strong conservative leaders in statehouses across the United States and in Congress, whose candidacies I am actively supporting. They have a big job to do to reinvent and revitalize the Republican Party. They can do so by responding to the fears and frustrations of the American people and uniting them behind some common aspirations, while staying constant to the principles that have made our country great.

When it comes to the presidency, I will not vote for Donald Trump. I will not cast a write-in vote. I?ll be voting for Hillary Clinton, with the hope that she can bring Americans together to do the things necessary to strengthen our economy, our environment and our place in the world. To my Republican friends: I know I?m not alone.

As striking as this is, let?s not forget the degree to which Paulson?s announcement is correct: he isn?t alone. A separate Washington Post piece added:

Paulson?s backing, which he announced in a Washington Post op-ed, follows that of Richard Armitage, a former deputy secretary of state under Bush and assistant secretary of defense under Bush?s father and Ronald Reagan. Armitage told Politico last week that he would also back Clinton over Trump.

At the time, he was believed to be the highest-ranking former Bush official to cross over; that designation now belongs to Paulson. Other former Bush officials and top GOP foreign policy minds of the era, including Max Boot and Robert Kagan, previously made the same call. Even more have said they won?t back Trump but have stopped short of endorsing Clinton.

It?s true that these officials are largely unknown to most Americans, many of whom probably don?t recall Paulson?s tenure, and are unfamiliar with figures like Armitage and Kagan.

But there?s a larger truth that?s nevertheless helping shape our understanding of the 2016 campaign: for many leading Republicans, putting party over country simply isn?t an option right now. Voters don?t have to remember Paulson specifically to recognize the significance of this trend.

Henry M. Paulson Jr., the former Treasury secretary under President George W. Bush, just became the second top Bush administration official in two weeks to cross the aisle and endorse Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump.

Paulson's backing, which he announced in a Washington Post op-ed, follows that of Richard Armitage, a former deputy secretary of state under Bush and assistant secretary of defense under Bush's father and Ronald Reagan. Armitage told Politico last week that he would also back Clinton over Trump.

At the time, he was believed to be the highest-ranking former Bush official to cross over; that designation now belongs to Paulson. Other former Bush officials and top GOP foreign policy minds of the era, including Max Boot and Robert Kagan, previously made the same call. Even more have said they won't back Trump but have stopped short of endorsing Clinton.

Here's the crux of Paulson's decision:

Republicans stand at a crossroads. With Donald Trump as the presumptive presidential nominee, we are witnessing a populist hijacking of one of the United States? great political parties. The GOP, in putting Trump at the top of the ticket, is endorsing a brand of populism rooted in ignorance, prejudice, fear and isolationism. This troubles me deeply as a Republican, but it troubles me even more as an American. Enough is enough. It?s time to put country before party and say it together: Never Trump.

Paulson moves on to eviscerate Trump's business acumen, in detail, and then questions whether he has what it takes to actually be president. He doesn't dwell on why he'll back Clinton, except to say that he wants to do whatever it takes to stop Trump.

When it comes to the presidency, I will not vote for Donald Trump. I will not cast a write-in vote. I?ll be voting for Hillary Clinton, with the hope that she can bring Americans together to do the things necessary to strengthen our economy, our environment and our place in the world. To my Republican friends: I know I?m not alone.

The lack of support from Bush world, of course, extends to the family itself. The two former presidents Bush have declined to endorse Trump, and Jeb Bush, who clashed repeatedly with Trump in the Republican primary, has said he won't vote for either Trump or Clinton.

Atsushi wrote:
http://www.salon.com/2016/06/24/celeb ... ter&utm_medium=socialflow

Celebrities on Twitter react to stunning #Brexit vote with gallows humor ? and actual despair

"We had a headache, so we shot our foot off. Now we can't walk, and we still have the headache."

If UK does fantastic for the next few months, that's good for Team Trump. Currently it does not appear so.

http://www.dailydot.com/politics/cons ... ces-of-brexit-vote/?tw=dd

7 horrible consequences of the Brexit vote that we already know will happen

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
[quote]

The best part about all of this is the "remain" crowd called the leavers racists, bigots, and said they were xenophobic for wanting to stop the flood of Muslim "refugees" and "migrants" pouring into the country. The same traitorous arguments that we see here.

And the British people flat out rejected this crap and took back control over their borders and their country. They are aware that a country's citizens should have control over who is allowed to immigrate to the country, that admittance is not some kind of human right, and that bad immigrants should be kept out. They very well may have saved the future of their country.

They have set a shining example for America to follow.

the uk already had control over its borders...plus, norway and switzerland are not in the eu but they still had to take in immigrants

They did not have control over their borders.

A huge reason this happened is because the EU proposed "reforms" to the EU asylum rules. They set a quota of Muslim "migrants" that each EU country must accept, and said they will charge a penalty of $300,000 for each "migrant" underneath the quota that was accepted. This amounted to fines in the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars if a country refused to accept any more Muslim "refugees."

Read this:


EU to fine countries 'hundreds of millions of pounds' for refusing to take refugees

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/ ... hat-refuse-refugee-quota/

It is absolute "progressive" madness, and I'm very happy the British people did the right thing.

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefin ... endence-in-wake-of-brexit

Scottish leader to seek vote for independence in wake of Brexit vote

What a mess!

A mess? Because people voted for their freedom. The mess was when Obama/Clinton choose the Muslim Brotherhood after Egypt Spring threw out Mubarak. The mess was when Obama/Jarrett ignored calls for help from the Iranian people when they wanted to get rid of the Mullahs. You might remember the photo of young woman killed by the paramilitary govt. sniper. The Brits did not want to surrender their sovereignty to a EU bureaucrat in Brussels. Open borders works only when people obey the law... it's wrong when people illegally enter a country and then try to take it over immorally using the host's goodwill to take control of that country.

The best part about all of this is the "remain" crowd called the leavers racists, bigots, and said they were xenophobic for wanting to stop the flood of Muslim "refugees" and "migrants" pouring into the country. The same traitorous arguments that we see here.

And the British people flat out rejected this crap and took back control over their borders and their country. They are aware that a country's citizens should have control over who is allowed to immigrate to the country, that admittance is not some kind of human right, and that bad immigrants should be kept out. They very well may have saved the future of their country.

They have set a shining example for America to follow.

the uk already had control over its borders...plus, norway and switzerland are not in the eu but they still had to take in immigrants

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefin ... endence-in-wake-of-brexit

Scottish leader to seek vote for independence in wake of Brexit vote

What a mess!

A mess? Because people voted for their freedom. The mess was when Obama/Clinton choose the Muslim Brotherhood after Egypt Spring threw out Mubarak. The mess was when Obama/Jarrett ignored calls for help from the Iranian people when they wanted to get rid of the Mullahs. You might remember the photo of young woman killed by the paramilitary govt. sniper. The Brits did not want to surrender their sovereignty to a EU bureaucrat in Brussels. Open borders works only when people obey the law... it's wrong when people illegally enter a country and then try to take it over immorally using the host's goodwill to take control of that country.

The best part about all of this is the "remain" crowd called the leavers racists, bigots, and said they were xenophobic for wanting to stop the flood of Muslim "refugees" and "migrants" pouring into the country. The same traitorous arguments that we see here.

And the British people flat out rejected this crap and took back control over their borders and their country. They are aware that a country's citizens should have control over who is allowed to immigrate to the country, that admittance is not some kind of human right, and that bad immigrants should be kept out. They very well may have saved the future of their country.

They have set a shining example for America to follow.

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefin ... endence-in-wake-of-brexit

Scottish leader to seek vote for independence in wake of Brexit vote

What a mess!

A mess? Because people voted for their freedom. The mess was when Obama/Clinton choose the Muslim Brotherhood after Egypt Spring threw out Mubarak. The mess was when Obama/Jarrett ignored calls for help from the Iranian people when they wanted to get rid of the Mullahs. You might remember the photo of young woman killed by the paramilitary govt. sniper. The Brits did not want to surrender their sovereignty to a EU bureaucrat in Brussels. Open borders works only when people obey the law... it's wrong when people illegally enter a country and then try to take it over immorally using the host's goodwill to take control of that country.

Atsushi wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefin ... endence-in-wake-of-brexit

Scottish leader to seek vote for independence in wake of Brexit vote

What a mess!

Atsushi wrote:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefin ... endence-in-wake-of-brexit

Scottish leader to seek vote for independence in wake of Brexit vote

What a mess!