aTomsLife

In my experience, they only come in handy when buying milk.

You don't get it.

For weeks now protesters have been surrounded by Trump mobs egged up to violence by their psychopathic leader.

Trump baited this whole thing.

He has a background in doing shows for uneducated white morons ... you know fake wrestling stuff.

He's milking this.

The Chicago thing was a total bait.

It works for him up to a point. The majority aren't going to buy this lying circus garbage.

Why do you even care about the election? You're clearly already the president of your own world.

Current federal law (H.R. 347) does not allow for protesting of any type in an area under protection by the Secret Service.

When the federal law on trespass was quietly amended—it is a crime, punishable by up to a year in prison, to "knowingly impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions" in locations guarded by the Secret Service, including places where individuals under Secret Service protection are temporarily located—the revised statute made it "easier for the government to criminalize protest.

Bill H.R. 347

Don't blame me. I've been baited into voting for Trump.

Trump baited this. Wake up before it's too late.

This reminds me EXACTLY of people who blame a rape victim for the bikini she was wearing. I thought society had progressed beyond blaming crime victims, and had figured out that the perps are the ones to blame.

What a shame that a bunch of thugs who deny people the freedom of speech can be given a pass because someone doesn't like the speech.

Cheers.

Trump baited this, you know, by citing national crime statistics. http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/08/08/illegal-alien-crime-accounts-for-over-30-of-murders-in-some-states/

If you don't see how this is a problem, you must not have realized, he's a man who also happens to be white, AKA a white man. For the sake of "progress" that must preclude him from telling the truth. And now, thanks to his errant ways, shit's gone and hit the fan.

All those on the Left, outraged by his inflammatory remarks, intend to demonstrate just how wrong he was by, well, apparently getting violent themselves.

Conservatives everywhere will rally round the flag and Trump will win the nomination. Tonight pretty much solidified that.

I've always known I'd vote for him if Hillary got the nomination, but was leaning Bernie on the off chance the old guy pulled it off. But after this nonsense, I'm voting Trump regardless. For me, this election just became about a lot more than fair trade and Citizens United.

I look forward to the day when I can cast my vote in answer to the outright thuggery and intimidation tactics we witnessed from the Left tonight. Everything they've been accusing Trump of, they themselves are shown guilty of.

Wish I could say I was surprised...

About the only way things could have worked out better for Trump tonight would have been for Mitt Romney, Megyn Kelly, and Ted Cruz to have issued statements supporting the George Soros funded communist mob. Oh, wait. Cruz and Kelly actually did come out and say something supporting them. Lyin' Ted just drove the final nail his coffin.

Agreed, though I think it's posts like this one that will have the biggest impact:

https://twitter.com/RUthIess187/status/708482144943734784

Conservatives everywhere will rally round the flag and Trump will win the nomination. Tonight pretty much solidified that.

I've always known I'd vote for him if Hillary got the nomination, but was leaning Bernie on the off chance the old guy pulled it off. But after this nonsense, I'm voting Trump regardless. For me, this election just became about a lot more than fair trade and Citizens United.

I look forward to the day when I can cast my vote in answer to the outright thuggery and intimidation tactics we witnessed from the Left tonight. Everything they've been accusing Trump of, they themselves are shown guilty of.

Wish I could say I was surprised...

I am not confident Bernie can win, or even get the nomination,

But I think he has had a huge influence on our future already.

Through Bernie, millions of Americans have finally expressed their dissatisfaction with a government that is in the pocket of the large corporations and whose concern is the welfare of those corporations and not the American people.

Now that it is out in the open, this idea will gain more and more support in the future, especially if the politicians don't wake up and change their behavior.

If the country survives the next President ( no matter who he or she may be) in four or eight years the movement to take back the government will me much stronger and likely to succeed

It is remarkable what Bernie has been able to achieve with the corporate media working against him.

But the old socialist, Jewish guy has taken it to the people without the corporate media by making very good use of, guess what?, the social media!

I think this trend will also continue to grow in the future as well and bias "news" and 15 second soundbites on ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX and the rest will not have nearly as much influence as they have in the past.especially with the younger voters.

And that is another thing we should thank Bernie for.

My thoughts exactly, only this is how I've come to see Trump's candidacy as well.

For me, a Trump vs. Sanders election would be a victory for the American people, the likes of which we haven't known in decades. Both men are shifting the national conversation to focus on the obscene impact "free trade" and Citizens United have had on our republic. If we fix these two things, so much more progress comes as a result, because Americans secure in their livelihoods and confident about their children's future will prove far more gracious toward one another politically. In other words, compromise will be valued again over the staunch obstructionism we've been witnessing.

It may sound pollyannaish or cliche to some, but Americans have stood united in the past, and I believe we're still capable of that.

I will only ask you not to put so much weight into what Trump is saying now, when he i campaigning and telling people what they want to hear.

Please look into Trumps history of his dealings with China and then form your own opinion.

Trump now claims " China, and other countries, and Mexico ( as he said it) have stolen our jobs and factories"

The jobs and factories were not stolen.

They were intentionally sent there by American corporate billionaires, so they can increase their wealth by taking advantage of the Asian workers who work for slave wages under slave like conditions.

The point is, jobs are being stolen. That's irrefutable. And while, yes, primarily it's America's multinational corporations that are "stealing" them away from Americans--exporting them in order to skirt our environmental and labor laws--where I'm from, willingly accepting stolen goods is also a crime. So in that sense, countries like China and Mexico are guilty too.

That you believe he's only telling me what I want to hear...well, in 2008 I fell for Obama hook, line and sinker, so I grant you, my credibility is lacking in these things. Nonetheless, I'm willing to take another chance at believing someone, whether it be Trump or Bernie, I'd be happy (though Bernie's remark the other day about whites not knowing poverty was a major blow to my faith in him).

I sounds like you are paying attention and trying to figure this mess out.

.That's good. Too many people don't think and just react.

For what it's worth, Bernie addressed that comment today and , in my opinion, clarified it.

You can probably find it on Youtube and form your own opinion.

I do think he is the only one for the people and not the big corporations, and that's why the corporate media doesn't give him any attention unless they are forced to.

Good luck.

I appreciate the kind words. I take them where I can get 'em on this site...

Will be sure to look for Bernie's explanation, but honestly, he's got a steep road to climb with me after that. Those kinds of comments have been Obama's default the last few years, and Bernie should've known better than to have gone there in the first place. He's way too seasoned a man to stoop so low. Not least because, such remarks do far more harm than good, as well as obfuscate the primary issue, which is jobs, jobs, jobs.

So much tension in the U.S would subside, racial and otherwise, if people just had stable, well paying jobs--not only for themselves, but in knowing they'll exist for their kids as well.

trump is just dreaming, If some believes like Mexico will pay for a wall proposed by a fascist murrican guy discriminating Mexicans, you guys have to be naive or dreaming like Trump!

it is totally internal affair of Mexico, who the f is trump dictating things to other countries?

and on top, i am sure he does not believe what he is saying but just to get some votes from some ignorant Murricans.

They don't have to pay directly to have paid. If they refuse and, in order to finance construction, tariffs are imposed on products imported from Mexico, they've still paid, because the resulting loss in revenue will force businesses to move back to the U.S., equaling a transfer of wealth which, in time, will pay for the wall a number of times over.

They pay one way or another, see?

By all means, though, keep up the name calling, it does wonders for his poll numbers.

Uninformed is another trait of Trump supporters...just act on your knee jerk emotions and biases.

Voters numbering in the millions are open to, or already fully supportive of a Trump presidency due to his focus on so-called free trade.

Emotions aside, yes I am biased, and proudly so, on behalf of the American worker who's been shafted time and again since NAFTA was signed. The real question at this point is what emotions and biases are those opposing Trump's trade platform acting on? Any insights you wish to share?

I will only ask you not to put so much weight into what Trump is saying now, when he i campaigning and telling people what they want to hear.

Please look into Trumps history of his dealings with China and then form your own opinion.

Trump now claims " China, and other countries, and Mexico ( as he said it) have stolen our jobs and factories"

The jobs and factories were not stolen.

They were intentionally sent there by American corporate billionaires, so they can increase their wealth by taking advantage of the Asian workers who work for slave wages under slave like conditions.

The point is, jobs are being stolen. That's irrefutable. And while, yes, primarily it's America's multinational corporations that are "stealing" them away from Americans--exporting them in order to skirt our environmental and labor laws--where I'm from, willingly accepting stolen goods is also a crime. So in that sense, countries like China and Mexico are guilty too.

That you believe he's only telling me what I want to hear...well, in 2008 I fell for Obama hook, line and sinker, so I grant you, my credibility is lacking in these things. Nonetheless, I'm willing to take another chance at believing someone, whether it be Trump or Bernie, I'd be happy (though Bernie's remark the other day about whites not knowing poverty was a major blow to my faith in him).

Another interesting read on Trumps economics

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/03/would_trumps_trade_policy_really_cause_a_recession.html

Although not true that Trump was the only candidate to be against TPP... Bernie also against TPP as well

Exactly!

We're already in a trade war, and anyone living overseas, much less in Thailand, should know that already (as well as know we're getting our rears whipped). American products are heavily taxed in overseas markets, while the opposite is almost always the case back home. Enough is enough.

All Bernie and Trump are looking to do is even the playing field. How any American could be against that, boggles the mind.

Uninformed is another trait of Trump supporters...just act on your knee jerk emotions and biases.

Voters numbering in the millions are open to, or already fully supportive of a Trump presidency due to his focus on so-called free trade.

Emotions aside, yes I am biased, and proudly so, on behalf of the American worker who's been shafted time and again since NAFTA was signed. The real question at this point is what emotions and biases are those opposing Trump's trade platform acting on? Any insights you wish to share?

Good. No one should consider such things in the first place, much less say them out loud, and I appreciate Trump's willingness to acknowledge he was wrong.

And whoever said Sanders polled higher than Trump, how in the world did you come up with that? hahahahahah

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/

CNN March 2 article:

Clinton 52% Trump 44%

Sanders 55% Trump 43%

To quote from that article:

"Sanders -- who enjoys the most positive favorable rating of any presidential candidate in the field, according to the poll -- tops all three Republicans by wide margins: 57% to 40% against Cruz, 55% to 43% against Trump, and 53% to 45% against Rubio. Sanders fares better than Clinton in each match-up among men, younger voters and independents."

Huh? If Sanders was polling so high, why isnt he winning? Think the poll could be wrong.

I glanced at the article to look for how the data was collected, but didn't see anything. If it was simply a random sample of people throughout the fifty states, then the result is pretty much meaningless, since the U.S. doesn't elect its presidents based on popular vote. And unless they poll at least 3,000 people in each state and from there figure out the electoral count for each candidate, just about any 'national' poll will yield questionable results.

Edit: it was right there at the bottom of the screen: The CNN/ORC Poll was conducted by telephone February 24-27 among a random national sample of 1,001 adults. Results among the sample of 920 registered voters have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

It's as I thought. Not nearly enough people were polled.

There's no pertinent relevance to an association between Trump and Mussolini--even if Trump and his supporters agree with the quote's message.

For those who might disagree, consider that John Lennon sang "All You Need is Love," and then a year later abandoned his first wife and son. The musical integrity of the song remained and remains still. So if I say I agree with the song's message, that doesn't mean I also support adultery and absentee fathers. To argue as much is to commit the ad hominem known as an association fallacy.

An awful trite song. And an awful trite comparison between Lennon and Mussolini.

If you think I compared Lennon to Mussolini, then you don't understand how analogies work. All I did was show another example of an association fallacy; that agreeing with what someone says doesn't automatically align one with that person's values in total.

I'd never heard of John Oliver, but this dude is pretty funny....

Yeah, there were some good one-liners, sure; but ultimately it's just a long comedy skit with little substance. Here's a little behind the scenes about what Oliver was doing, as explained by Stephen Colbert:

Odd, I found Oliver's monologue to include far more substance than Colbert's brief personal statements of his feelings and thoughts. Oliver brought out specifics inconsistencies in Trumps claims, and even outright, how shall we say, untruths. The Oliver piece included specifics on the Trump brand, Trump's business acumen, and other details on many of Trump's campaign claims and the inconsistencies therein. Perhaps you find comedy and substance to be mutually exclusive and that would be a shame.

No, of course comedy and substance aren't mutually exclusive. But the clip of Colbert wasn't him just airing his personal feelings and beliefs. He said in plain English that his show was designed to demonize one side while appealing to other side's emotions (the Right and Left, respectively--though I'm sure everyone already knew that). Oliver's show is a spitting image of The Colbert Report in that regard.

I'd never heard of John Oliver, but this dude is pretty funny....

Yeah, there were some good one-liners, sure; but ultimately it's just a long comedy skit with little substance. Here's a little behind the scenes about what Oliver was doing, as explained by Stephen Colbert:

It's going to be Trump vs the witch in November. Next topic please . . .

It is indeed looking like that's the case. If I can't have Sanders then Trump will get my vote, as he's the only other candidate taking a stand against "free trade," which is of course a product of lobbying, as well as our campaign finance laws run amok--another issue Trump speaks truthfully about.

Interesting that you choose a candidate from each side. I like your open-mindedness. My first pick would be for Trump because of his anti Washington stance and a breath of fresh air.

However, what does worry me about Trump is the way he childishly goads Cruz and Rubio, but isn't very good at it. He comes across as inept at winning an intelligent debate.

Cruz talks a lot without actually saying much, so Rubio at the moment seems a good shout. Not sure though if he has the backbone to run a country.

Correct me if I am wrong, but would history show that Republican govts have a better record of military? IE) looking after the safety of the States and it's allies?

I'm English so many might ask what all this has got to do with me. But unfortunately, the western world follows America. So it impacts on many in the world.

If I had my way, I would have certain nations as friends as it would be foolhardy to alienate everyone, but I sure as s**t hope Britain leaves the EU. I want ALL the troops brought home and look after MY country and do the job the police are totally inept at. Let other countries kill each other, after all, they are living 500 years behind the West so why should we be worried? They can eliminate themselves without our help!!

But I digress. I do not know enough about Bernie, but maybe he could be a breath of fresh air similar to Trump, but maybe a more sensible option?

Being English, I would lean towards a Republican govt but please please please . . . NOT Clinton. Been there, done that more than enough times. Vote Clinton and either stand still or go backwards as a nation

Regards

Thanks, though I don't see it as choosing a candidate from each side because Sanders and Trump both are staunchly anti-establishment. Their D / R designations are mostly just window dressing, which is why neither man is treated well by the mainstream media (as the press has long become part and parcel of the ruling oligarchy).

I share your concern regarding Trump's tendency to bloviate, except that his rhetoric should also been seen as an equal and opposite reaction to political correctness--and from my vantage point, that good outweighs any bad by far.

A growing number of Americans are realizing they've been disenfranchised by the two-party system; that in fact, the two parties are really one, beyond a few divisive social issues. Whether as a result of the far-Right's Christian fundamentalists or the Left's so-called social justice warriors, politicians wield political correctness to perpetuate an Us vs. Them mentality, provoking Americans to hate each other, all the while doing the bidding of their corporate overlords in the form of things like "free trade" and ceaseless wars.

What I like, then, about both Sanders and Trump is that each in his own way makes a priority of the issue most impacting the country: money in politics and the need to get it under control.

Which brings me to answer your question: at this point, if the Republicans have a better record running the military--and I'm not saying they do, given Iraq--it's definitely an instance of the lesser of two evils. As far as I'm concerned, no establishment candidate should be trusted, not while their campaigns are paid for in part by multinational defense contractors, for whom war equals profit.

It's going to be Trump vs the witch in November. Next topic please . . .

It is indeed looking like that's the case. If I can't have Sanders then Trump will get my vote, as he's the only other candidate taking a stand against "free trade," which is of course a product of lobbying, as well as our campaign finance laws run amok--another issue Trump speaks truthfully about.

There's no pertinent relevance to an association between Trump and Mussolini--even if Trump and his supporters agree with the quote's message.

For those who might disagree, consider that John Lennon sang "All You Need is Love," and then a year later abandoned his first wife and son. The musical integrity of the song remained and remains still. So if I say I agree with the song's message, that doesn't mean I also support adultery and absentee fathers. To argue as much is to commit the ad hominem known as an association fallacy.

USA has'nt got a leader. It doesn't matter a stuff who becomes president. It's time the people of that country woke up to the fact that they are considered by all other western countries as one of the dumbest, racial and uneducated in the world and keep thinking that they deserve everything from their government. Many years ago one of their greatest presidents said "Ask not what the country can do for you but what you can do for the country". They are slipping back to the dark ages and the only thing making them the power they are is the military.

There are always crap comments on here like above. For once why don't you tell us what western countries you consider are not dumb? Racial ( huh)? And uneducated? Please tell us all. I dare you. The USA is high up on the list of educated countries and it has a huge population of 325 million.

When one of the most educated states like Massachusetts votes on Tuesday you will see Donald Trump with huge numbers. I don't see why some think he is dangerous. All politicians spew out BS AND NEVER follow through. You can't become a billionaire and not follow through most of the time. So what if he seems arrogant. We have had smooth talkin Obama do nothing for eight years. Where's Oprah's big fat mouth and butt now. She has finally shut up. She probably will vote for Trump too.

Sorry.

USA is rated #15 in the world for education.

The United States remains the top country for taking in immigrants.

While there are a lot of success stories--particularly among Asian immigrants--millions of American students are first generation and aren't native English speakers. Many millions more are second generation Americans, but have parents who aren't proficient enough in English to help them with their homework. That makes the #15 ranking a tad superficial in my opinion.

Source: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states

Immigrants accounted for 13 percent of the total 316 million U.S. residents; adding the U.S.-born children (of all ages) of immigrants means that approximately 80 million people, or one-quarter of the overall U.S. population, is either of the first or second generation.

To bring this on topic: Though I've been leaning Sanders, I do like Trump's call to end common core and basically scrap the Dept. of Education at the national level. There are just too many different demographics at play to take such a broad, ham-fisted approach to education in a country of 319 million people.

I did the Annapurna Circuit last year and it was one of the greatest experiences of my life; was in Pokhara when three days later the earthquake hit, so I'm especially sorry to hear more bad news coming from what is truly a beautiful country to visit.

RIP to the deceased. What a way to go...

Cruz: "If we get this wrong, if we nominate the wrong candidate, the Second Amendment, life, marriage, religious liberty, every one of those hangs in the balance."

Demagoguery at its finest from Cruz, when what he really means is evangelicals should worry about actually having to abide by the rule of separation of church and state.

"If any of us needed a reminder of just how important it is to take back the United States Senate and hold onto the White House, just look at the Supreme Court," Clinton said.

Some words stringed together without actually saying anything. Typical Clinton soundbite.

"Bernie Sanders, who is challenging Clinton for the Democratic nomination, has raised opposition to Citizens United as a requirement for any Supreme Court nominees."

Someone actually raising a valid concern on behalf of the American people.

Hilary Clinton is a plutocrat / limousine liberal of the worst order. I don't care what kind of lip service she pays to everyday folks, her past actions speak for themselves. I would never vote for her. Ever.

And I'm not the only Independent to feel this way:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/26/independents-like-hillary-clinton-less-than-in-2008/

Bernie will be lucky to survive his first term at 74 years of age.

The stress of the job will put him in a early grave.

And if he makes it for a second term he will be 82 in his last year of presidency.

Im not against the old but America needs someone younger.

You're not wrong, but choosing the right VP would do much to quell any fears concerning the above. Elizabeth Warren comes to mind.