What a bunch of useless blather. You said Trump is responsible for the violence perpetrated against his supporters. That idea is asinine. There is no defense for that. That’s what free speech is all about.
But hey, at least you tried with a substantive response so that’s progress.
Lets do it this way! I’ll tell you the truth as best I can, and you believe whatever you damn well please. Works for me!
I say he bears some responsibility for the results of his speech, at no time did I say he bears all of it.
We seem to have gone from:
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
To:
I disapprove of what you say, and while I might defend your right to say it, I’ll also defend those who react violently to it.
Still, what specifically is it that Trump has said that leads someone to think he has some responsibility to people reacting violently to it? And exact quotes, please. No paraphrasing like: He said all Mexicans are rapists! No doubt he has said some reprehensible things, but any that merits a violent response?
Why is this in the California primary thread?
Why do you keep saying that? I am not obliged to defend positions I do not hold. If you want to say that the indefensible actions of some people exonerate Trump, say it. I have said, and say again, that Trump bears some responsibility in this. What part of that do you disagree with?
Wonder why he even bothers with rallies in California, outside of feeding his ravenous ego. Why take any risk at all? He can spew his venom out the TV pretty much non-stop, so what has he to gain from these rallies? Hell, he could cancel them and pretend he is acting to protect people, his civic virtue. Win win for him, he plays the victim and stokes his base.
It happened in CA.
Agree. Makes no sense except the ego thing. I’m guessing the press corp chartered with covering the primary is largely based in CA this week, so “go where the cameras are”, if you’re a media whore.
In fact, it says, right on the ballot, in bold, “There are 35 candidates for Senate. You can choose only one.” (It says 35 because it includes the spot for a write-in candidate.)
Meanwhile, over the past few weeks, I have gotten a lot of mailers for the state Assembly race, the state Senate race, and the county supervisor race - but not one for President, and not one for the U.S. Senate seat. I don’t think I have seen a TV ad for President or Senator, either, and of all of the poll and robocall calls I have received, I think one was for the Senate race, but it wasn’t for any of the “big” names.
This post on the Bernie Sanders thread points to a meme that claims that the networks are going to announce right after the NJ polls close that Hillary has secured the nomination. I also just heard on CNN that there is a chance she will announce this herself in her NJ victory speech.
I’ve seen ads for Bernie and for Hillary (narrated by Morgan Freeman), but none for Trump. I’ve also seen several for state legislature and a couple for Mayor of Sacramento.
Makes sense.
I’ve gotten lost of flyers dropped at my door for Bernie; none for Hillary or Trump. My district is very conservative for NorCal-- we only went 75% for Obama. 
I’ve seen ads for Bernie and for Hillary (narrated by Morgan Freeman), but none for Trump. I’ve also seen several for state legislature and a couple for Mayor of Sacramento.
Right now, including the Virgin Islands where I think she got all of them, Clinton has 1783 delegates. Let’s say she gets all of Puerto Rico’s delegates today. That will give her 1843. NJ has 126. If she gets all of those (she won’t), she is at 1969. You need 2382 to win.
Now she does have 547 Supers (Sanders has 46 and there are 119 who haven’t said) which would put her over the top but the Supers are officially uncommitted. I think it would be a political mistake to claim victory assuming that the Supers are officially in the bag.
The super delegates made the difference in 2008. Neither Hillary nor Obama had won enough delegates from the elections and caucuses to claim the nomination, and it was closer in both delegates and votes than the current selection. Yet neither expected the “officially uncommitted” to change their minds at the last minute.
That won’t happen this year, either.
I agree that Hillary is going to take it. This is very different than 2008 though. The Hillary fans didn’t hate Obama for the most part and nearly all lined up to support him. She needs the Berniecrats to support her so she needs not to alienate them by “prematurely” claiming victory, in particular before the California polls close. She has nothing to lose by waiting a couple of hours.
Are you remembering the same 2008 as I am? Hillary supporters hated Obama and swore they would never vote for him if he stole the nomination. Then they came around, but not until after the convention and Hillary giving her support to Obama.
It was Hillary supporters who first came up with the image of Obama dressed in a straw skirt with a bone through his nose.
That would be a cite for sore eyes. Bring?
Ugh, I can’t find it right now.
Several hours ago, I was channel-surfing and saw a Billary rally on C-SPAN in the L.A. area, hosted by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Magic Johnson. The rally was in the parking lot of a Boys and Girls Club and I’d be surprised if 100 people were in attendance.
:eek: :dubious: 