This dumb ass country loves to be entertained which is why they love Trump. In no other 1st world country could this inflammatory baffoon exist.
Yeah, I probably should have clarified that part a bit. I guess a better way to put it is that he will say whatever is on his mind, no dog whistles needed.
I hear you, but there is enough "crazy" to go around....Marine Le Pen of France comes readily to mind... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-sinclair/french-regional-elections_b_8811138.html
Agreed! I don't have a need for sugar coating, but this guy is at the other extreme where he's totally lacking in tact.
It doesn't. At all. That's one of the many reasons he'd be a completely horrible president if he were elected. Plus people talk about how "good" he is at business but he's a trust fund baby through and though. He's where he is now because he took his daddy's fortune and basically managed to not fuck up too much. He's used to bullying, blustering, and bullshitting his way through life and while that may work to an extent in the board room, it's a whole lot less effective if the guy sitting across from you has access to nuclear weapons.
Is there ANYTHING the people can do about this? I am disgusted to my very core. The Democratic National Committee can kiss my ass. FUCK OFF DNC. FUCK OFF. http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/10/h...-hampshire-delegates-than-sanders-after-loss/
This is very similar to the electoral college, all of our personal votes in the presidential election does not mean the candidate will be elected even if the candidates wins the most votes, that power resides with the electoral college, and they have NO obligation to follow the popular vote. "What does this mean in practice? It means, as everyone learned or was reminded in 2000, that the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide does not necessarily become president. There is no national election for president, only separate state elections. For a candidate to become president, he or she must win enough state elections to garner a majority of electoral votes. presidential campaigns, therefore, focus on winning states, not on winning a national majority. It also means that — at least in theory — electors can thwart the popular will and vote for a candidate not supported by the voters of their state. In practice, however, electors are pledged to cast their votes in accordance with the popular vote, and "faithless electors" who go against the popular vote are extremely rare. Had there been a faithless elector in 2000, however, Al Gore might have become president! (See the historical perspective below for more about this.)" http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/lessons/davidwalbert7232004-02/electoralcollege.html
Which means by your logic we could expect Clinton to go against Rubio or Kasich since the superdelegates have their minds made up on particular candidates. At least its fairly likely Trump will fade by the Summer since the Republican establishment doesn't want him to be the nominee.
WHY Did Hillary Clinton Once Call African American Kids "Super-Predators"? Anyone voting for Hillary? [YOUTUBE]0rM156wa780[/YOUTUBE]
I am, if she wins the primary. I'll gladly take her over any Republican, no question. I don't follow YTT as much as I used to but they're pretty much on point. Do I agree with Hillary Clinton on everything? Not at all. But I disagree with the Republican candidates even more so, and I'd rather have 50-60% of what I want than nothing at all.
I never did understand why so many black folks support the Clintons. To me, their true colors were cleary evident with the race baiting they used against Obama in 2008. The only way I would support Hillary, is if she wins the nomination and is running against Trump or Cruz.
This is an interesting article I posted on Facebook about this very topic: http://www.theroot.com/articles/pol...k_america_so_why_are_we_still_voting_for.html
The author of your article is the same woman who wrote the article the video above is based on. She brings up some interesting facts in both.