Hell yes. I'm proud of Oklahoma. We refused to give it to Trump (Cruz is no prize, but still...). And we also told Hillary to fuck off, giving Bernie the win.

I think we're the only state that has done that. At least today anyways...

Cruz is worse than Trump... Also he is hated by everyone...Republicans included... His own family even... He will not be President...

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/ ... jerk-hated

Right now it may look like GOP Power Structure in Washington and in Newsrooms won.
They think a brokered convention is coming, this means it is entirely possible that none of the Republican candidates get chosen to run and instead the candidate of their choosing runs in the election against Hillary.

So it may look possible that Trump may win more delegates but not enough to shut down a brokered convention.
If you hate Trump have NO fear, the next 2 weeks will be an all out war against him and maybe Cruz paid for by Rich Super Pac's and the Media. I think they will be all out support for Rubio despite his poor showings, they can control him.

Watch and see the nastiness coming, it won't be Trump doing it.

Thursday Debate will be an ugly circus (a Gang Bang in front and beside him) but Trump will play this one smart or it's over.
Media will need those Trump sound bites if he does not pause and think before speaking, Megan Kelly will wish she never showed up (watch display of media bias in all it's glory). Pay attention to what Trump says every day, watch others completely spin the opposite.

Next Florida gets won by Trump Huge, everything changes.

Fascism is about an inspired and seemingly strong leader who promises moral renewal, new glory and revenge. It is about the replacement of rational debate with sensual experience. This is why the lies, half-truths and fabrications by Trump have no impact on his followers.

Fascist movements build their base not from the politically active but the politically inactive, the “losers” who feel, often correctly, they have no voice or role to play in the political establishment. The sociologist Émile Durkheim warned that the disenfranchisement of a class of people from the structures of society produced a state of “anomie”—a “condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals.” Those trapped in this “anomie,” he wrote, are easy prey to propaganda and emotionally driven mass movements. Hannah Arendt, echoing Durkheim, noted that “the chief characteristic of the mass man is not brutality and backwardness, but his isolation and lack of normal social relationships.”

In fascism the politically disempowered and disengaged, ignored and reviled by the establishment, discover a voice and a sense of empowerment.

As Arendt noted, the fascist and communist movements in Europe in the 1930s “… recruited their members from this mass of apparently indifferent people whom all other parties had given up as too apathetic or too stupid for their attention. The result was that the majority of their membership consisted of people who had never before appeared on the political scene. This permitted the introduction of entirely new methods into political propaganda, and indifference to the arguments of political opponents; these movements not only placed themselves outside and against the party system as a whole, they found a membership that had never been reached, never been ‘spoiled’ by the party system. Therefore they did not need to refute opposing arguments and consistently preferred methods which ended in death rather than persuasion, which spelled terror rather than conviction. They presented disagreements as invariably originating in deep natural, social, or psychological sources beyond the control of the individual and therefore beyond the control of reason. This would have been a shortcoming only if they had sincerely entered into competition with either parties; it was not if they were sure of dealing with people who had reason to be equally hostile to all parties.”

My comments lately (some of my much earlier comments are dumb) are my way of predicting the process as I see it moving forward since this is the first election I have followed since Day 1 and I am engaged (probably addicted as well).

I am not pushing anyone in Trumps direction, I am simply vocalizing what i think.
I will keep my predictions and thoughts to myself.
I like Trump and telling you guys what I think (like it or not) has not turned out well.
My fault so I will stop posting what I think about the election, the process and the players.
It's a no win game, we see things differently which is fine.

You Won .. congrats but Trump will still be your president, you better fight harder then beating axbaby if you don't want that to happen.

I will keep my predictions and thoughts to myself.

The poor and the lower half of the middle class are not universally racist, sexist bigots. What we are witnessing with Donald Trump is the rising of a demagogue who speaks to the anger of a segment of the population that has gone without representation in this country for several decades. To what degree he actually believes half of what he says is at this point difficult to say (and will be until if and when he might be elected, sort of like what we got with Obama) but this much is true: he is playing his chosen audience like a Stradivarius. That this is at the expense of the neoliberal agenda is obvious but it also represents the unruly flock of Tea Party chickens coming home to roost: the Republican Party was quite successful in waking up a dormant part of the electorate, that same part Hedges so precisely defines in this article. That they now are incapable of controlling them underscores the price of political hubris.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party has lied itself into moribundity. For several decades it has proclaimed itself the protectors of the working classes while in actuality it has functioned as the very tame lapdog of the elite. It has reneged on enough of its campaign promises that the very people it needs to be elected no longer believe it, and rightly so. We live in a country with both of our major political parties to the right of center. The main apparent difference is that the Republicans have been more honest than the Democrats in what their goals are. However, like the Democrats, they have been less than forthcoming to those responsible for their electability and now are paying the price. The Democrats have an opportunity to wake up, to learn from both their and their opponents' mistakes, to speak truthfully to the millions of Americans they have alienated by their lies and inactions, to return to the fight for economic and social justice, to work forcefully to save the environment before it collapses, to step away from international militarism and the arising of the Great American Police State, and all the other issues which are of critical importance to the majority of the electorate.

The first step, the hardest step, would be to tell the oligarchs to eff off. It will be a step not taken. Either the Democratic Party needs to be returned to the millions on the left, forcefully if necessary, or the people need to found a new political movement that reflects their will and their values.

Good link mr Puff. Found this in the comment section:

The ineffectiveness of the Republican establishment – or indeed the absence of a true establishment - has been a major part of this contest. As a recent investigation by the New York Times found, ‘The party has been gripped by a nearly incapacitating leadership vacuum and a paralytic sense of indecision and despair’.

From the start, the Republican leadership underestimated Trump – because they overestimated the strength of their own candidates, and the popularity of their own messages. They assumed that, if they found Trump beyond the pale, then certainly their party’s voters must feel the same. They couldn’t imagine that a populist, anti-establishment campaign – a campaign against them – could succeed. Time and again, the party elites have proved to be out of touch.

I will keep my predictions and thoughts to myself.