BREAKING: Trump Gets Shocking Messages From Sanders Camp, This Is a Game Changer

[Lando Lincoln]

Absolutely true. Also, as Sink noted, spokeswoman Katrina Pierson is a whacko with a history of wild statements. I wouldn't believe a word from her mouth.

Finally, With the continuing trump stumbles today, I think to myself, If in the mind of trump supporters there is no line in the sand that should trump cross it they stop supporting him then his support is truly cultist. For example, his sexual comments and storied past, would cause most people to say this is too much, making passes at married women (even with the husbands in the house), jumping in the bed of a beauty pageant contestant to wait for her (against her wishes), the sexist comments and jokes, the weird comments about dating his own daughter, bringing up the size of his manhood during a nationally televised debate. With a democrat every single GOP supporter here would have said that makes them unacceptable as an elected official. But now it doesn't matter? For the highest office in the land?

One could do this same exercise with the many troubling issues of the unstable trump (the leftist attacks of Bush lied and people died) and say has he not yet crossed the line in the sand and I will not support him.

Well reasoned and expressed, cuky!

[LottieDah]

Like all of the PUMA's who were going to vote McCain in 2008. They made a lot of noise on the internet, and amounted to nothing on election day.

If Trump is the nominee, he gets slaughtered (probably by design). Bernie's socialist malcontents aren't going to do a thing to change that.

I remember those PUMA's.  They got what they wanted.  Obamacare and legalized gay marriage. 

[libertybele]

So far, just today, he has: 1) condemned the NC bathroom bill; 2) called for a change in the GOP platform on abortion; 3) called for higher taxes on the "rich"; 4) indicated support for a "pathway to citizenship (amnesty).

There's nothing subtle about it. Today was a sudden and dramatic lurch to the left, at precisely the moment that he believes he has the nomination secured.

And of course, his sycophants are defending him as a brilliant, pragmatic strategerist.

I'm just wondering if he's not going out of his way to force the GOP to deny him the nomination at the convention. He's in this to deliver the presidency to Clinton, that much should be obvious. The only way to make sure that happens is if he runs third party and splits the opposition vote. He needs the GOP to deny him if he's going to guarantee the democrats the White House.

Yes without a shadow of a doubt he is in this to deliver the presidency to Clinton, that has been obvious really since he stated if he wasn't treated fairly he'd run 3rd party.  Why his supporters don't get it or see it is concerning.  Cruz is out there trying to prevent this from happening and then we have establishment Kasich in for the block making sure Trump hands it over to Hillary.

[Bill Cipher]

How are the unhappy Sanders supporters different from the anti-Trumps who've stated they will vote for Hillary if Trump is the Republican nominee?

We don't vote for lying liberals so we aren't voting for Clinton just like we're not voting for Trump, either.  We will vote third party for president or we won't vote for president at all.  And no, that isn't the same thing as voting for Clinton; that's a false, specious argument.  It's exactly the same as that old sophomoric "philosophy" chestnut:  suppose a murderer with a machine gun is holding 10 innocent children and one old geezer hostage. The murderer hands you a pistol and says "I'll give you a choice: you shoot the geezer in the head, right behind the ear, and I'll let all of the children go.  Otherwise, I'm going to riddle all 11 of them with bullets from my machine gun."  This guy has a very long track record and has not once lied in 20 years, so you know he's telling the truth.  Here's the chestnut: if you don't shoot the geezer like he told you to, aren't you a murderer of all the children, and the geezer, because you could have spared the children's lives just by shooting the geezer, who was going to die anyways?

Only a liberal would think you a murderer if you refused to shoot the geezer.  Just so, only a liberal would say you voted for Clinton because you refused to vote for Trump. 

[DCPatriot]

We don't vote for lying liberals so we aren't voting for Clinton just like we're not voting for Trump, either.  We will vote third party for president or we won't vote for president at all.  And no, that isn't the same thing as voting for Clinton; that's a false, specious argument.  It's exactly the same as that old sophomoric "philosophy" chestnut:  suppose a murderer with a machine gun is holding 10 innocent children and one old geezer hostage. The murderer hands you a pistol and says "I'll give you a choice: you shoot the geezer in the head, right behind the ear, and I'll let all of the children go.  Otherwise, I'm going to riddle all 11 of them with bullets from my machine gun."  This guy has a very long track record and has not once lied in 20 years, so you know he's telling the truth.  Here's the chestnut: if you don't shoot the geezer like he told you to, aren't you a murderer of all the children, and the geezer, because you could have spared the children's lives just by shooting the geezer, who was going to die anyways?

Only a liberal would think you a murderer if you refused to shoot the geezer.  Just so, only a liberal would say you voted for Clinton because you refused to vote for Trump.

Complete BULLSH*T!     

[Jazzhead]

Jazzhead here, has repeatedly said he would vote for Hillary.

The last time I stated this, he got all agitated, then said it again.

My intent is to vote to defeat Trumpism.   I'll do whatever it takes.   That's not a vote "for" Clinton, who I despise.  It would be a vote AGAINST the small-minded misogynist xenophobic identitarianism of Trump and his supporters.   

It will all boil down to whether my vote, in Pennsylvania, will matter.  If it doesn't, I'll vote Libertarian.  If it does, I'll do what I have to do.   Trump is existentially dangerous in a way that even Clinton is not. 

I am almost alone on this board in supporting John Kasich.   Trumpsters like yourself who bust my chops are either dishonest or ignorant - you know damn well (or should) that the absolute best chance Clinton has to become President is if her opponent is Donald Trump.  And that the best way to prevent her from becoming President is to nominate John Kasich.   

[Jazzhead]

Complete BULLSH*T!     

You and folks like you are enabling Clinton; your support for Trump is punching her ticket to the White House.

And I know you're not stupid.  So you should be ashamed of yourself.     

[libertybele]

My intent is to vote to defeat Trumpism.   I'll do whatever it takes.   That's not a vote "for" Clinton, who I despise.  It would be a vote AGAINST the small-minded misogynist xenophobic identitarianism of Trump and his supporters.   

It will all boil down to whether my vote, in Pennsylvania, will matter.  If it doesn't, I'll vote Libertarian.  If it does, I'll do what I have to do.   Trump is existentially dangerous in a way that even Clinton is not. 

I am almost alone on this board in supporting John Kasich.   Trumpsters like yourself who bust my chops are either dishonest or ignorant - you know damn well (or should) that the absolute best chance Clinton has to become President is if her opponent is Donald Trump.  And that the best way to prevent her from becoming President is to nominate John Kasich.   

Jazz  ... I'm really trying to understand your logic here.  Kasich only has 148 delegates.  He needs to have taken the majority in 8 states (highly unlikely) in order to qualify to be considered at the convention.  He has NO way to the 1237 delegates.  He does not qualify to be considered at the convention.  So...Why is he still in?  Secondly, how do you not see that he is doing nothing more than helping Trump??

Kasich may be the greatest candidate since the beginning of the history of this country and may be the best candidate to beat Hillary, but a) he cannot get the 1237  b) he does not have an 8 state majority.  He won't be the nominee.

The absolute best thing Kasich can do for this country is to help Cruz prevent Trump from getting the 1237 and going to convention.  Instead he hangs in there in hopes that they will change the rules just for him?  Perhaps he's been promised something?  Perhaps Trump has paid him to stay in??  Come on.  At some point in time reality needs to set in.   With losing every primary/caucus with the exception of Ohio, where do you think he's getting his money to sustain his campaign?

[Jazzhead]

Jazz  ... I'm really trying to understand your logic here.

I want to vote for someone I sincerely admire and support, not just vote against a candidate I despise.   Back when there were 15 GOP candidates,  I was a Kasich guy,  and I still am.   At some point, the delegates need to consider electability - and the polls show Kasich is our best shot. 

   With losing every primary/caucus with the exception of Ohio, where do you think he's getting his money to sustain his campaign?

Well, for one thing, from folks like me.  I gave him another 25 bucks this Monday.  I'm no mogul,  but I stick with the man who I believe in.   

[HAPPY2BME]

Sanders Supporters Saying They Will Support Trump over Hillary

 Trump Gets Shocking Messages From Sanders Camp, This Is a Game Changer

In a stunning interview with Breitbart yesterday, Trump campaign spokeswoman Katrina Pierson said that she’s been receiving messages from Sen. Bernie Sanders’ camp that the Vermont socialist’s supporters would come over to Trump if he wins the nomination.

Pierson’s remarks were part of her argument that Trump was the only candidate who could beat Hillary Clinton in the general election.
“I’ve got Sanders people sending me messages — it’s surreal — saying that if they steal the nomination from Bernie they’re voting for Trump,” Pierson said. “So he is definitely the only candidate that can beat Hillary Clinton in the fall.”

Pierson, meanwhile, said that Cruz simply wasn’t strong anywhere that the Republicans needed.

“When we get to the general election, we have to look at the map,” Pierson said.

“Cruz hasn’t won a single state that would change anything,” she continued. “Trump has won Florida. He’s going to win New York. Moving forward, we’re going to be in other states where Mr. Trump is going to do really well. And in some of these cases, Ted Cruz is running third.”

“So this idea that Donald Trump would be the ‘weaker’ of the two regarding the vetting process because everyone’s going to go through that — I have to remind you that Donald Trump knows Hillary Clinton better than any other candidate, so I can guarantee you there’s going to be a very serious vetting process going against her as well,” she continued.

“Which is why he always says: ‘I haven’t even started on her yet.’ So I’m very confident that Donald Trump is definitely going to be the strongest candidate. I wouldn’t have supported him if I thought differently.”

She also said that Trump had been able to bring new voters into the process.

“The fact that he’s been able to win as many votes as he has and be ahead in the delegate count as he is today, goes to show me that he is strong and he can carry the base. And not to mention his position with regards to trade, and jobs, and the global bank system. We’re going to bring in even (more) new voters, more voters from the independent side, from the Democrat side,” she said.

That’s a pretty bold statement — the idea that Trump could take Sanders supporters. But given how Trump’s campaign has already appealed to so many groups of unlikely voters, what’s one more?

http://conservativetribune.com/trump-shocking-messages-sanders/