More Republicans endorsed Hillary

1. 90

   IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

   Heavyweight foreign policy adviser Brent Scowcroft, who served as National Security Adviser to Presidents George H. W. Bush and Gerald Ford, and who worked in the White House of Presidents Richard Nixon and George W. Bush, said Clinton "brings truly unique experience and perspective to the White House".
   
   His endorsement was released hours after the Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump launched a broad attack on Clinton's experience, honesty and foreign policy experience in a 40-minute speech. Scowcroft directly rebutted Trump's claim that Clinton does not have the temperament to lead, citing her experience working on high-pressure issues such as Iran and Israel.
   
   "She brings deep expertise in international affairs and a sophisticated understanding of the world, which I believe are essential for the commander-in-chief," Scowcroft said.
   
   His backing follows that of another prominent Republican in national security circles. Richard Armitage, who served in the State and Defense Departments under George W. Bush and President Ronald Reagan, announced last week that he will vote for Clinton over Trump.
   
   "I believe Hillary Clinton has the wisdom and experience to lead our country at this critical time," Scowcroft said.
   
   Ouch.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Surely these men would not sell their souls for Hillary Clinton, so what is really behind this I have to wonder. Why would they side with someone just like Obama who will continue to tear this country apart at the seams and hand us over to the enemy. I guess they are all rich enough to go elsewhere, but what about the rest of us?
      I think the American people have chosen the Republican they want and these leaders better start listening. We have a mind of our own or else we would be Democrats. (Apparently that is who they are too.)

      replyreport
      1. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Just out of curiosity, how is Obama tearing this country apart at the seams and handing us over to the enemy?

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Apparently you know nothing of what is going on in this country so you are not about to believe me in one sentence. Just wake up and look around. What he has coming on us is even worse, you won't be able to shut your eyes to that.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Instead of attacking me personally, why can't you answer the question?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  It really isn't "...attacking someone personally...... " by pointing out how little they know about current events ,  Oh ........its not racist or bigotry either. It's simply stating obvious fact.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     You keep going lower and lower. Are you getting near the bottom yet?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        I'm  still sticking to my statement .

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           I wouldn't expect anything different. You are consistent if nothing else.

                           replyreport
               2. 85

                  Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  How about how Obama is right now placing refugees all around America? Not in one place where we can watch them and handle them in one swoop if there is an uprising like we are seeing around the world but scattered, infiltrating...and no one sees what is happening? Perfectly innocent I am sure.  While wanting our weapons so we cannot protect ourselves. Please. I don't want to insult you, I just want you to open your eyes.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Jackie, my eyes are wide open. I am as concerned as anyone about terrorists coming to America.
                     
                     Keep in mind that terrorists have been arriving here for a long time. More than 3,000 people died in 2001 during the 9/11 attack at the hands of 19 militants -- long before Obama was president.
                     
                     Think about the number of Italians and Sicilians who came to this country in the 1920s and 1930. Out of that total, a small number developed into the Mafia.
                     
                     Should we reject all refugees and immigrants because of the possibility that a small number will be terrorists?
                     
                     Far more people have died at the hands of Christian "terrorists" like Adam Lanza since 9/11 than at the hands of Muslim terrorists.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        Adam Lanza was not a Christian terrorist.
                        
                        A terrorist who identifies themselves and their cause can be identified as such. A guy who randomly kills willy nilly, with no explanation, no manifesto, is just a crazy guy.

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           I understand your point. I was trying to say that he was both a Christian and a terrorist. I probably should have written it differently.

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                              Yes. Probably so. It's one thing to ponder the reasons people do crazy things. If we have people doing crazy things and they make a point of letting us know why they did it; it is another thing entirely.

                              replyreport
                     2. 89

                        GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        "Far more people have died at the hands of Christian "terrorists" like Adam Lanza since 9/11 than at the hands of Muslim terrorists."
                        
                        I think there may be a couple problems with this statement.
                        
                        First the numbers, your statement fails here first;
                        
                        I found what appears to be the gist of your point in an NPR interview transcript that tallied 45 Jihadist deaths, and 48 by -"rightwing extremists," (the interviewee's term - it was a couple later sources that built articles around these numbers that changed the original description of "right-wing extremists" to "Christian terrorists" - maybe one of these was your source)."  But that is the next point. This point is about the numbers, which after Orlando now stand at 94 jihadist vs. 48 "somebodies."
                        
                        What I see as the most intentionally blatant error in your statement is the use of "Christian terrorists" to describe the attacks they listed to prove their point. Every "Christian terrorist" attack they counted was not a Christian terror attack at all.
                        
                        For instance, Dylann Roof, tops the list with 9 victims. He was a neo-nazi and white supremacist adherent and racist.  He did not claim his actions for his God. Unlike all the listed jihadist attacks that specifically attributed their actions to Allah and Islam, (which should be clarified as radical Islam).
                        
                        Wade Micheal Page was next on the list with 6 victims at a Sikh Temple attack. He too was a neo-nazi and white supremacist racist, and did not declare his attack in the name of his Christian God.
                        
                        There were many more such examples on the list, but I think the point is made. The declaration that all these extremist, (whether right-wing nutjob, neo-nazi or white supremacist), committed their crimes in the name of Christianity is easily found to be false.
                        
                        I found these discrepancies in a 20-minute Google search. You have touted your career as a journalist. Shouldn't that experience have directed you to do a similar fact-checking of your source(s) before making such an obviously biased and incorrect statement?
                        
                        
                        ps. your credibility took an even worse hit when you included Adam Lanza in your statement. He was a documented mentally unstable individual that wasn't concerned with God or Christianity in his murderous attack. Authorities declared they don't know what his motive was. Yet you included him as a "Christian terrorist" reference, (the original NPR source for the 45 vs. 48 numbers did not include Lanza's attack in their numbers). Was it because he killed a lot of people and he was white? That seems to be the determining criteria for most the the original list's included attacks.
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
                     3. 85

                        Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        What do you say about this?http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/08/03/krauthammer-not-only-did-obama-admin-pay-ransom-it-also-laundered-money

                        replyreport
                  2. 95

                     wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Putting refugees all into one locale, or even 2 or 3, virtually guarantees that they will not assimilate.  That as unrest grows within the group it will feed on itself until it blows up.

                     replyreport
            2. 93

               Adele Jeunetteposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               If you look at the number of killings that are NOT by Islamic terrorists, it dwarfs the number that are by far. I'd say you should be more worried about the guy next door with a gun.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Everyone of my neighbors has multiple guns. Nothing to be afraid of. I assume because they don't hate America and Americans. I think we have a healthy fear of terrorist attack.

                  replyreport
2. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   The GOP traditional meaning and definition is changing , There is and always has been an element of membership that so loves its power as to allow victory  to  the opposite party than to change  its ownership , Imagine powerful people who have stayed in place by non-productivity in progress , willing to sacrifice the party instead of change that dynasty .    Trump , a political outsider, beat the a$$ of the party  favorites . THIS IS between the will of the people and the will of the party .
   
   The people win - the party will either  except it or hijack the will of the people ? I think not .
   To hell with the GOP its there own fault , and its  happened before too .
   Any GOP people who endorse Hillary =   Get out of office now !

   replyreport
   1. 93

      Solarasposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You are correct.  The GOP has closed its eyes and is expectant that when they open them back up in 4 years, everything will be back to the usual course of business.  They do not want to believe that their constituents have abandoned them and their party elite.  Hillary takes the White House, then in 4 years, everyone will have forgotten about Trump and Sanders (like Ross Perot) and they can return to business as usual. 
      
      As George Will says, "Grit your teeth for 4 more years, then take the White House back."  They forget that this is not the first time a party has made itself irrelevant. Listening to them, and Paul Ryan in particular, talk about their party platform and agenda, it's as though they live on another planet.  Your voters are leaving you right now.  THAT is what Trump represents. Perhaps in 4 years, there will exist a viable candidate that appeals to both party's constituents, who rises to power. It's about time for a real visionary and leader to rise up out of the mashed potatoes and gravy of US politics.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Four more years will do us in.
         https://youtu.be/B6vsxUKryrg

         replyreport
         1. 78

            colorfuloneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            ++++++++++++++
            No love there for hard working Americans.

            replyreport
3. 61

   Live to Learnposted 7 years ago

   I can see why there would be those who, although Republican, would be opposed to Trump. He could be anything from a loose cannon to a decent president. We simply cannot tell at this point how he would be as POTUS. At the least, with Hillary you know exactly what you will get.
   
   Plus, if Trump loses then his racist, misogynistic and inappropriate beliefs and behavior patterns will bite hard into the collective Republican butt. If they believe he cannot win the election it would make sense to attempt to distance themselves from this man.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Trump is running as a republican , he had to , , his history probably says  He is an independent yet  you call him a racist among other stupid accusations ,   will it "take a bite out of the collective republican ....."  if he loses ?   Something has to do that - the GOP is useless , it also should say something about the collective extremist left !     Something that democrats don't get even yet  , Republicans  are controlling their  collective will .
      When will democrats grow enough to break away from  DNC  tradition of stupidity ?

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I'm afraid accusing him of racist statements isn't a stupid accusation. It is an accurate one.
         
         I agree that the Republican party has let us all down but Trump didn't have to run as a Republican. He could have run as an Independent. I will tell you, I'm a little concerned with the belief that it is the average Republican who is behind Donald Trump. If the average Republican is that enthralled by racist, sexist and otherwise ignorant statements then I think I will be even that much more inclined to hope for the formation of a new party. I don't have anything at all in common with the common rabble following Trump.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            And so the republican party , I'm sure , feels  the same about you . In America ,  where an mis- information plague  is thriving in our media  One has to use ones own intelligence  to make your way in the election  ! You obviously have lost that ability.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               LOL. I see why some like Trump. His boorishness is just a reflection of their own ill mannered up bringing.
               
               Don't be confused. Intelligent Republicans who want fiscal responsibility, unfettered by the low brow ideas splattered with a healthy dose of racism and misogyny are not part of this trend we are watching on the Trump bandwagon. Enjoy your ride. We won't stand for this embarrassment forever.

               replyreport
               1. 85

                  Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Who has he let die and how many millions has he taken from Muslims that want Americans dead and treat women like dirt?

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     He hasn't had the opportunity yet. Elect him, then give him time.

                     replyreport
                     1. 85

                        Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        I am sure he won't be turning his back on American soldiers and lying with every breath. Anyone who believes a word Hillary says has their head in the sand. He may be a showman and I did not care much for him all these years but right now he looks to be the only hope we have. He says what most American's think. That is when I got on his side. We cannot take another Obama...which Hillary is.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           I agree with you on Hillary. I just don't see Trump as hope. It's like we are drowning in a sea of poop (Washington politics) and we are grabbing hold of a large piece of poop in a different cesspool, thinking it will somehow save us.

                           replyreport
               2. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  As a liberal, I respect conservative ideas and policies that are reality-based and rational. Even if I don't agree with them, I can respect that they might work and could possibly be proven better than the liberal alternatives.
                  
                  Just to be clear, building a wall along the border of  Mexico and forcing Mexico to pay for it is neither rational nor reality-based,

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Since we've all heard what Mexico thinks of that idea I'd say you are right.

                     replyreport
                  2. 85

                     Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Since we can withhold high funds now going to Mexico for only God knows what reason, I think he has an ace in the hole there. They are winning every way they turn now and surely some politicians are benefiting too. I trust Trump to know what to do, sure is not working now so why trust those. We are not a bottomless pit that most Democrats seem to think we are. They get more from Americans than our citizens, ripping us off every way they turn; it is ridiculous. It has to stop.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        LOL, you do know that Donald backed off of that, saying it was just a "suggestion," don't you?

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           No he is not backing off, he will do it because he knows that is what we want. lol

                           replyreport
                  3. 0

                     promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     As a moderate-conservative, I respect any liberal who thinks that way. And yes, I agree his plan has no basis in reality or rational thinking.
                     
                     That being said, I'm frustrated that no political leader seems to have any realistic plan for dealing with illegal immigration.

                     replyreport
               3. 0

                  promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  If elected, he is unlikely to last a full term.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     I can see serious problems if he is elected since he clearly doesn't understand the limit on the powers of the office of the President.

                     replyreport
                     1. 95

                        wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        Obama was, and clearly doesn't understand that limit - even after losing the court battle.  Clinton has said she will expand his illegal activities on illegals - she doesn't seem to understand them either.
                        
                        Understanding your job duties OR limits doesn't seem to be necessary to becoming President.  Just naive voters.

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Maybe Hillary  can get "Wall Street"  to finish the Wall that they already started !  She's great at using wall street  for the Clinton  Foundation financing .

                           replyreport
                        2. 0

                           promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Do you know of any president who hasn't been blocked when trying to exceed presidential authority?
                           
                           I'm not a fan of Obama's immigration policies, but I believe all presidents have pushed the limits of what they are allowed to do.

                           replyreport
                           1. 95

                              wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                              So far Obama has not been blocked in his orders to leave the illegals alone and quit deporting them.  Nor does it seem likely in the future - he has already stated he will not change his policies regardless of what the law is.

                              replyreport
                              1. 78

                                 colorfuloneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                 Obama has always thumbed his nose at what the law says, so I don't expect him the change his lawless actions anytime.  Hillary would be more of the status quo, and worse, she's already talking executive actions.

                                 replyreport
                        3. 61

                           Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           True that.

                           replyreport
4. 78

   Kathleen Cochranposted 7 years ago

   The pendulum swings.  Republicans are experiencing what Democrats experienced in the 1980s when they were out of the White House for 12 years because they went too far to the left.  Electing a moderate progressive brought them back closer to center.  Trump is the Republicans' farthest swing.  After this experience more moderate Republican candidates will run and get elected eventually or the party will cease to exist.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Great point, Kathleen. Extremism always triggers an opposite reaction.
      
      Bernie Sanders would not have gotten this far without extremists on the right bringing out the far left. Kind of ironic.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Perhaps this helps explain my feelings about Democrats and Obama in particular and of which Hillary says she will see to it many more get in. Trying to take weapons from Americans to protect themselves while they are up to this. What more do you need to know?
         http://usherald.com/see-full-list-u-s-c … refugees/#

         replyreport
         1. 0

            promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Beyond the fact that I got hit with a virus when I went to that site, it's worth noting that its mission statement is:
            
            "Real Conservative News Online."
            
            I don't believe it's a credible source for any discussion about Democrats.

            replyreport
   2. 85

      Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      ...and maybe it should...maybe both should as corrupt as they both seem to be.

      replyreport
   3. 85

      gmwilliamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Very astute observation, I was thinking the same thing.

      replyreport
5. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   You will always notice  in forums that to call out brainwashing  leftist propaganda by the mainstream  media ; immediately  results in three basic charges-------- Racist , Bigotry  ,  or Republican ignorance . 
   Never are liberals able to debate without  either outshouting   OR  those three charges.
   
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      As a Republican, I have to point out that this type of post is an embarrassment to our cause. But, since we are putting up posters we like. Here's one that appears to rightly identify Trump supporters.
      
      
      

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Not sure that 1,3 or 4 are actually true...

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Does that matter? I didn't think facts were something the person I was responding to was concerned with. When in Rome, and all.

            replyreport
            1. 95

               wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Guess the humor didn't come across.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Actually, I thought it was tongue in cheek and was going to respond, but then I thought, maybe not...

                  replyreport
                  1. 95

                     wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Well, it was supposed to be.  After all, who would make a meme about such a basic, universal thing as that?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        Very true. I think we're just not used to such subtle humor on these boards. Or subtle anything. 

                        replyreport
                        1. 95

                           wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           

                           replyreport
      2. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Indeed it is.

         replyreport
      3. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
6. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   Here are a few reasons more conservatives  won't endorse Hillary like leftists do .
   1 -bigotry
   2 -bigotry
   3- bigotry
   4- bigotry
   5- wrong email server

   replyreport
7. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   Americans have been geographically isolated from a lot of terror and violence other nations have dealt with for decades ,  I cannot believe that  some of you , especially  liberals ,  will arrive one day in shock and awe at how close its getting to you  and yours ,personally AND cry like babies for the protections and liberties of such things as  the second amendment ,That  of which you are so eager to  deliver to political correctness .
   
   It will be fun to watch then , as some liberals cower behind the rest of us .

   replyreport
8. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   And right here  is the perfect example of a mentality of people and government  that believes it can legislate insanity , that you can put every action of man into a neat little box  for placing on the shelf of normal humanity .
   
   There are always going to be those who defy  control ., No gun law , no automobile laws , no public regulation can control insanity . Get used to it - the insane   are always going to be out there .

   replyreport
9. 90

   IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

   1. Jeb Bush's top adviser, Sally Bradshaw, has left the Republican Party to become an independent, and says if the presidential race in Florida is close, she'll vote for Hillary Clinton.
   
   (The GOP) is "at a crossroads and have nominated a total narcissist -- a misogynist -- a bigot."
   "This is a time when country has to take priority over political parties. Donald Trump cannot be elected president."
   "As much as I don't want another four years of (President Barack) Obama's policies, I can't look my children in the eye and tell them I voted for Donald Trump. I can't tell them to love their neighbor and treat others the way they wanted to be treated, and then vote for Donald Trump. I won't do it.
   Ultimately, I could not abide the hateful rhetoric of Donald Trump and his complete lack of principles and conservative philosophy."
   
   2. Longtime Chris Christie aide Maria Comella says she plans to vote for Hillary Clinton -- saying that after Donald Trump's nomination, Republicans are "at a moment where silence isn't an option."
   
   "Donald Trump has been a demagogue this whole time, preying on people's anxieties with loose information and salacious rhetoric, drumming up fear and hatred of the 'other'.
   Instead of trying anything remotely like unifying the country, we have a nominee who would rather pick fights because he views it as positive news coverage. "It may make him media savvy, but it doesn't make him qualified or ready to be president."
   "Instead of speaking out against instances of bigotry, racism and inflammatory rhetoric whether it's been against women, immigrants or Muslims, we made a calculus that it was better to say nothing at all in the interest of politics and winning elections. For me, if our party has a future, we have to change that trajectory and lead by example."
   
   3. Meg Whitman, a major GOP donor and former California gubernatorial candidate, said Tuesday she would support Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump.
   
   "Donald Trump's demagoguery has undermined the fabric of our national character."
   "I urge all Republicans to reject Donald Trump this November."
   "I won't be voting for Donald Trump. Look at the comments he's made about women, about Muslims, about reporters, it's just repugnant."
   
   4. Retiring GOP Rep. Richard Hanna (R-NY) said he will vote for Hillary Clinton in November, making him the first Republican member of Congress to openly announce his support for the Democratic presidential nominee.
   
   Trump is "deeply flawed in endless ways" and "unrepentant in all things" before declaring: "While I disagree with her on many issues, I will vote for Mrs. Clinton."
   "... the Republican Party is becoming increasingly less capable of nominating a person who is electable as president."
   "Months ago I publicly said I could never support Trump," Hanna wrote, calling him "profoundly offensive," "narcissistic," and "a world-class panderer."
   "I do not expect perfection, but I do require more than the embodiment of at least a short list of the seven deadly sins."

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Knowing all these facts makes Trump look like the only choice. https://youtu.be/kypl1MYuKDY

      replyreport
      1. 78

         colorfuloneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         It would be great if Killary supporters would listen to that video, and did their own research on everyone of those criminal issues mentioned to get to the truth about the Clintons, especially Hillary.  But, some people will turn a blind eye and go on defending that corrupt criminal and even vote for her. 
         
         It was signal for the corrupt politicians when they saw Debbie Wasserman Schultz removed from DNC chair for her corrupt behavior and given a free pass by Hillary Clinton and promoted.  No doubt Debbie will be millions of dollars richer for her corrupt-deeds.  Yep, stick with Hillary if you are corrupt and she will take care of you, or rather Hillary's globalist owners will!

         replyreport
10. 0

    ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

    After this primary season , The GOP is deeply in trouble , I say watch what happens in the next mid terms !     Those who cross the line now , will pay dearly later. Every state right now should be taking names and checking lists .   The GOP has broken it's own promise to Trumps campaign .   No they are being actually treasonous in the betrayal of the party ! 
    
    Paul Ryan is useless as a republican speaker . There might as well not be one - THIS reduces his entire  character to the level of  Nancy Pelosi  and  Diane  Feinstein,   Mitch McConnell and  other useless  do nothings !     Get him out of their NOW!

    replyreport
11. 57

    Alternative Primeposted 7 years ago

    Sooner or LATER ALL Public Servant Republicans who have "Quasi-ENDORSED" "Delusional Donald" while Harmoniously CONDEMNING just about all of his "Racist & INSANE" Behavior, will be FORCED to "Reconsider" & Perhaps "Recind" said ENDOREMENT once they finally REALIZE he was NEVER REALLY RUNNING for PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATEs of AMERICA ~ ~ The EVIDENCE Continues to GROW each day which Supports the Assertion that Donald was and still is, Conducting a Covert Operation to "SABOTAGE" Congressional REPUBLICANs & Perhaps Destroy his OWN Name for some DEEP Seeded PSYCHOLOGICAL Reason ~
    
    Donald is NOW ATTACKING the PARENTs of GOLD STAR Families & Conducting Exercises to ENCOURAGE Communist RUSSIA to BREACH the National Security of the UNITED States !!!! Get the PICTURE Yet?? Probably NOT ~ He's ACTING like a "TRAITOR" of this Country while at the SAME TIME ASKING for your VOTE !!!! ( ~
    
    It's CLEARLY Apparent to all Rational Individuals that Donald & some Family Members, are indeed Psychologically DAMAGED & Compromised ~

    replyreport
12. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Henry Paulson, treasury secretary
    
    Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of state and adviser to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush — Trump "doesn't appear to be a Republican, he doesn't appear to want to learn about issues. So I’m going to vote for Mrs. Clinton."
    
    Brent Scowcroft, chairman of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board and adviser to three previous GOP presidents — "The presidency requires the judgment and knowledge to make tough calls under pressure.... [Clinton] has the wisdom and experience to lead our country at this critical time."
    
    Alan Steinberg, regional EPA administrator
    
    Kori Schake, National Security Council and State Department aide
    
    Doug Elmets, former Reagan spokesman — "I could live with four years of Hillary Clinton before I could ever live with one day of Donald Trump as president." Elmets spoke at the Democratic National Convention, along with other Republicans now backing Clinton.
    
    Jim Cicconi, former Reagan and George H.W. Bush aide — "Hillary Clinton is experienced, qualified and will make a fine president. The alternative, I fear, would set our nation on a very dark path.”
    
    Charles Fried, former U.S. solicitor general under Reagan and current Harvard Law professor -- "Though long a registered Republican, this will be the third consecutive presidential election in which my party forces the choice between party and, in John McCain’s words, putting America first. ... It is to [Mitt[ Romney's  credit that this year, like John Paulson and George Will, he is standing up against the brutal, substantively incoherent, and authoritarian tendencies of Donald Trump.
    
    Robert Kagan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, former Reagan State Department aide and adviser to the presidential campaigns of John McCain and Mitt Romney
    
    Max Boot, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and adviser to GOP presidential candidates — "I'm literally losing sleep over Donald Trump. She would be vastly preferable to Trump."
    
    Peter Mansoor, retired Army colonel and former aide to David Petraeus — "It will be the first Democratic presidential candidate I’ve voted for in my adult life."
    
    Marc Andreessen, venture capitalist — "[Silicon] Valley wouldn't be here, we wouldn't be doing any of this if we didn't have the amazing flow of immigrants that we've had in the last 80 years. And the idea of choking that off just makes me sick to my stomach."
    
    Dan Akerson, former chairman and chief executive of General Motors — "Serving as the leader of the free world requires effective leadership, sound judgment, a steady hand and, most importantly, the temperament to deal with crises large and small. Donald Trump lacks each of these characteristics."
    
    Chuck Robbins, chief executive of Cisco
    
    Hamid Moghadam, chairman and chief executive of Prologis — "Our country is about tolerance and inclusion and that's why, as a lifelong Republican supporter, I endorse Hillary Clinton for president in this election."
    
    William Oberndorf, $3 million to GOP candidates since 2012 — "If it is Trump vs. Clinton, and there is no viable third-party candidate, I will be voting for Hillary Clinton."
    
    Mike Fernandez, $4 million to GOP candidates in recent years — "If I have a choice — and you can put it in bold — if I have a choice between Trump and Hillary Clinton, I’m choosing Hillary. She’s the lesser of two evils."
    
    Larry Pressler, former three-term Republican senator from South Dakota who lost an independent campaign for his old seat in 2014 — "I can’t believe I’m endorsing Hillary Clinton for president, but I am. If someone had told me 10 years ago I would do this, I wouldn’t have believed them."
    
    Arne Carlson, a former two-term Republican governor of Minnesota who supported President Obama
    
    Robert Smith, former judge on New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals — "This year, I’m going to vote for a Democrat for president  —  the first time I’ve done it in 36 years  —  and I think the decision is easy. Hillary Clinton is the only responsible choice, and I don’t understand why so few of my fellow conservatives see it that way."
    
    Mark Salter, former top adviser to John McCain — "Whatever Hillary Clinton’s faults, she’s not ignorant or hateful or a nut. She acts like an adult and understands the responsibilities of an American president. That might not be a ringing endorsement. But in 2016, the year of Trump’s s campaign, it’s more than enough."
    
    Mike Treiser, former Mitt Romney aide — "In the face of bigotry, hatred, violence, and small-mindedness, this time, I’m with her.”
    
    Craig Snyder, former chief of staff to then-Republican former senator Arlen Specter (Pa.) and also an ex-colleague of former top Trump adviser Roger Stone and current top Trump adviser Paul Manafort.

    replyreport
    1. 95

       wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Gotta love the one from Marc Andreessen: that silicon valley wouldn't be what it is without the huge flow of illegal aliens coming through.  That if they had to pay American wages, they wouldn't be rich now. 
       
       Good thinking, Marc!  You belong with Clinton!

       replyreport
    2. 85

       Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       What about the Kahn father who put down Trump looks to have a deeper sinister connection to Hillary and Obama? Much to learn here! https://youtu.be/Xh2HVlzZbGU

       replyreport
13. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Rep. Scott Rigell, R-Va. said Saturday that he would support Libertarian Gary Johnson for president over GOP nominee Donald Trump.
    
    "I’ve always said I will not vote for Donald Trump and I will not vote for Hillary Clinton," Rigell told The New York Times.
    
    Rigell is the third Republican House member this week to say he would not vote for the real estate mogul, who has caused an uproar on the campaign trail with a series of controversial comments.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Just fyi, my Republican husband is on the verge of changing his vote to Hillary.  He has previously said he will vote for neither Trump nor Hillary, but after this past week of Trump insanity, he said he's actually considering voting for Hillary to ensure that moron (his favorite word for Trump) does not become Commander in Chief.  I like to think he isn't the only regular guy conservative who is moving in this direction.

       replyreport
       1. 89

          GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Does your husband really think Trump has a chance of winning? I know he is appealing to a certain base, and I know some Republicans will vote the party-line regardless, but I don't think Trump has any chance of getting enough votes to win.
          
          GA

          replyreport
          1. 0

             PrettyPantherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

             If the vote were held today, no. We still have three months to go.

             replyreport
14. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Frank Lavin, who was Reagan's political director from 1987 to 1989, (also worked in the Commerce Department for George H.W. Bush and as US ambassador to Singapore), became the latest GOP official to announce he won't back Donald Trump.
    
    "It might not be entirely clear that Hillary Clinton deserves to win the presidency, but it is thunderingly clear that Donald Trump deserves to lose...
    From this premise, I will do something that I have not done in 40 years of voting: I will vote for the Democratic nominee for president. The depressing truth of the Republican nominee is that Donald Trump talks a great game but he is the emperor who wears no clothes."

    replyreport
    1. 90

       IslandBitesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       "Trump falls short in terms of the character and behavior needed to perform as president. This defect is crippling and ensures he would fail in office. Trump is a bigot, a bully, and devoid of grace or magnanimity. His thin-skinned belligerence toward every challenge, rebuke, or criticism would promise the nation a series of a high-voltage quarrels. His casual dishonesty, his policy laziness, and his lack of self-awareness would mean four years of a careening pin-ball journey that would ricochet from missteps to crisis to misunderstandings to clarifications to retractions."
       
       "I have seen presidents work with difficult people and difficult issues. It requires a blend of strategic vision and tactical flexibility, combined with optimism and good humor. A president needs the thick skin to ignore criticism and the management discipline to stay fixed on goals. Trump, on the other hand, manages to pick fights that are unrelated to his goals."
       
       "Less poignant is a part of the Trump story that ought to have particular resonance with Republicans: his four business bankruptcies, more than a trivial matter for a party that prides itself on thrift, sound money, and prudential management.
       The bankruptcies reflect a man who either lacks reasonable business judgment or reasonable business ethics. By themselves, four bankruptcies are pretty bad. But four bankruptcies and a private jet is deplorable. How can everyone lose money in the collapse of a project yet Trump flies away again and again?
       
       In the early days of my startup, there was a moment when I could have shut the firm, declared bankruptcy, and walked away from my obligations, but I have employees, investors, clients, and customers -- all of whom rely on my commitment. I have a moral obligation to stand by people who are standing by me. No wonder so many Americans are skeptical of market economics if the system can be so easily manipulated by Trump.
       
       To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, one bankruptcy may be regarded as a misfortune, but four begins to look like carelessness. We can suppose that Trump has every legal right to declare bankruptcies and to walk away with millions. And voters have every legal right to vote against him for those actions."

       replyreport
15. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Former Michigan Gov. William Milliken, a Republican, says he will vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton for president instead of Donald Trump.
    
    Milliken issued a statement Monday saying he was "saddened and dismayed" that Republicans had nominated a candidate who does not embrace the country's ideals of "tolerance, civility, and equality."
    
    He says the election "will define whether we maintain our commitment to those ideals or embark on a path that has doomed other governments and nations throughout history."

    replyreport
    1. 95

       wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       That would be funny if not so sad.  Republicans are not noted for either tolerance OR equality; just ask gays how much of either they get from the party.  Or those not considered "Christian" - you might ask atheists how tolerant the party is when it comes time to teach science to their children.

       replyreport
       1. 90

          IslandBitesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Agree. (Although most of them believe they are.)

          replyreport
       2. 85

          Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Is it the Republican or Democrat Presidential candidate that is taking millions from people who murder Gays and shun women and their rights. Isn't that Hillary? It is in fact! https://youtu.be/ZZM-s7YZAhA

          replyreport
    2. 85

       Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       This is what Hillary will breed more of in the US. Then what? https://youtu.be/iqAJGXI5l88

       replyreport
16. 57

    Alternative Primeposted 7 years ago

    My Apologies if this is a DUPLICATE ~
    
    Former C.I.A. DIRECTOR Michael Morell ENDORSES Hillary while Raising SERIOUS Concerns about Trump's Relationship with Russia's PUTIN ~
    
    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/m … ton-226707

    replyreport
17. 57

    Alternative Primeposted 7 years ago

    Well Respected Republican Maine SENATOR Susan Collins REJECTs Trump ~
    
    The "AVALANCHE of Republican Defections" CONTINUEs ~ COUNTRY before Party Loyalty ~ It's a Pretty EASY Decision to NOT Vote GOP in this Election Cycle when the Republican Candidate is Donald Trump, a Delusional Individual who is NOT Well Upstairs ~
    
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions … story.html

    replyreport
18. 0

    ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

    Except for one thing, the republicans hadn't resorted to ownership by and for  the new biased media only , What are you liberals gong to do when Trump actually wins  WITHOUT the  blind  devotion to leftist political ownership of this  media ?
    
    Leftists in America are gambling on the bias and  untruth of media , of the polls , of the image portrayed of Trump , while the Hillary campaign is entirely propped up for image only  ! How is it feeling to be little Nazi's ?  Good huh , ........march on ..........march on.  To defeat.

    replyreport
19. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    William D. Ruckelshaus, who was the first EPA administrator under President Richard Nixon and then again the fifth under President Ronald Reagan, and William K. Reilly, the administrator under President George H. W. Bush endorsed Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, citing her plan to tackle climate change and Donald Trump's "profound ignorance of science."
    
    "That Trump would call climate change a hoax -- the singular health and environmental threat to the world today -- flies in the face of overwhelming international science," the duo said.
    
    "For us, there is simply no choice in this election," Ruckelshaus and Reilly add. "We Republicans should be shocked, outraged even, at the prospect that all this progress, this legacy will be repudiated and rolled back by Donald Trump."

    replyreport
20. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Former Bush administration official Carlos Gutierrez says he will be voting for Hillary Clinton, calling Donald Trump's economic policies a "disaster."
    
    The former commerce secretary under President George W. Bush said he looked at the "totality" of the choice between the two candidates and decided on Clinton.
    
    "I have one resume here for Donald Trump, I have one resume here for Hillary Clinton, and I've chosen this resume," Gutierrez said, indicating Clinton. "I think this person, Hillary Clinton, is the best for the country. I'm not thinking about (it as) a Republican, I'm thinking about (it as) a US citizen. I think at some point, you have to put the party aside and say what's best for the country? I don't want to live in a society that I think Donald Trump will create."

    replyreport
    1. 85

       Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Where have you been if you have missed all about Hillary and what she has been up to but not only that it looks like the Vice she has chosen may well be taking over.
       https://youtu.be/2Ojeiby_l7E

       replyreport
       1. 90

          IslandBitesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Ask the (many) republicans that endorsed her.

          replyreport
          1. 85

             Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

             Time will tell...so many liberal lies out there it could be a big surprise. I know all kinds of ppl for Trump and they haven't been counted...

             replyreport
21. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Robert Gates, a Republican who led the Defense Department under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama criticized both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on their preparedness to handle US foreign policy -- but the former defense secretary reserved his harshest language for the Republican nominee, who he said is "beyond repair."
    
    "When it comes to credibility problems, though, Donald Trump is in a league of his own... electing Trump is "too great a risk for America...The world we confront is too perilous and too complex to have as president a man who believes he, and he alone, has all the answers and has no need to listen to anyone. A thin-skinned, temperamental, shoot-from-the-hip and lip, uninformed commander in chief is too great a risk for America" wrote Gates, who worked for eight presidents for more than 50 years.
    
    Gates called Trump too "willfully ignorant about the rest of the world" to be commander in chief. "At least on national security, I believe Mr. Trump is beyond repair. He is stubbornly uninformed about the world and how to lead our country and government, and temperamentally unsuited to lead our men and women in uniform," Gates wrote. "He is unqualified and unfit to be commander in chief."
    
    He criticized Clinton for advocating "ill-fated regime change in Libya" and her shifting positions on the Iraq War and US trade agreements.
    
    But, he wrote, Clinton can still earn his vote.
    
    "Mrs. Clinton has time before the election to address forthrightly her trustworthiness, to reassure people about her judgment, to demonstrate her willingness to stake out one or more positions on national security at odds with her party's conventional wisdom, and to speak beyond generalities about how she would deal with China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, the Middle East -- and international trade," he wrote. "Whether and how she addresses these issues will, I believe, affect how many people vote -- including me."

    replyreport
    1. 85

       Jackie Lynnleyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Hillary Clinton trustworthy? You have got to be kidding. Is there anyone who does not know by now she let four Americans die in Benghazi lying to the Americans and these men's parent while at the very same time having emails showing she knew it was terrorist and not just that but we know now from emails that she refused pleas for help from Stevens for weeks at least! She let that man die on purpose and we none know why yet, but we will, eventually. She sold uranium here in America to the Russians and is taking money from terrorist countries while promising them to let all their scum right in our country as quickly as she can.
       She just like Obama is out to destroy America and if she becomes president she will waste no time doing that and Obama is standing right in the shadows with Soros to make sure she does. Wake up America! Hillary will be the death of us. I use to be a democrat but no more! It is not what it use to be and no one with any conscience should support it whether they vote for Trump or not. A vote for Hillary is a vote for evil. That is truth!

       replyreport
22. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Republican Mike Fernandez, a Miami billionaire, formally endorsed Democrat Hillary Clinton for president Thursday, as he promised to do last year if Donald Trump became the GOP nominee.
    
    Fernandez questioned Trump’s qualifications, calling him an “abysmally unfit candidate” who “has unleashed racist and violent acts.”
    
    “As a Republican who has contributed millions of dollars to the party’s causes, I ask: Why has our party not sought a psychological evaluation of its nominee?” Fernandez wrote in Thursday’s op-ed.
    
    “I harbor no illusion that Hillary Clinton is perfect; none of us is. I do not see eye to eye on some issues with the former senator from New York. However, Clinton is, without doubt, a superior choice to Donald Trump,” Fernandez said. “And so my fellow Republicans, swallow hard, look into your heart — and your gut. Vote for Hillary Clinton and then every single Republican on the ticket.”
    
    ------
    
    Former President George H.W. Bush said in a room of roughly 40 people Monday that he would vote for Hillary Clinton in November, according to sources close to Bush.

    replyreport
    1. 79

       Credence2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

       I saw the story on GHW Bush, I have to wonder what would make this staunch Republican bolt so, or whether Clinton will live up to progressive expectations, if the Senior Bush has no problem with her?

       replyreport
       1. 0

          ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Any politician Republican  voting Democrat or the opposite  is simply  one who is willing to vote the opposite party  in order TO HOLD ONTO THIER JOBS  !   
          
          Why ? Because  its more important for a congress to hold its job than to risk real change in the dying ,systematic do nothing attitude of  present political office holders !

          replyreport
23. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    The Cincinnati Enquirer, one of Ohio's largest newspapers, is backing Hillary Clinton after supporting Republican presidential candidates for nearly a century.
    
    "The Enquirer has supported Republicans for president for almost a century -- a tradition this editorial board doesn't take lightly. But this is not a traditional race, and these are not traditional times...Our country needs calm, thoughtful leadership to deal with the challenges we face at home and abroad. We need a leader who will bring out the best in all Americans, not the worst.That's why there is only one choice when we elect a president in November: Hillary Clinton."
    
    "Trump brands himself as an outsider untainted by special interests, but we see a man utterly corrupted by self-interest. His narcissistic bid for the presidency is more about making himself great than America. Trump tears our country and many of its people down with his words so that he can build himself up. What else are we left to believe about a man who tells the American public that he alone can fix what ails us?
    Our country needs to seek thoughtful change, not just change for the sake of change. Four years is plenty of time to do enough damage that it could take America years to recover from, if at all."
    
    Ouch!

    replyreport
24. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    The Arizona Republic, the state's largest newspaper, has never endorsed a Democrat for president -- until now.
    
    In an op-ed published to its website Tuesday, the editorial board backed Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump for president.
    
    "The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified," the editorial board wrote.
    
    The Arizona Republic endorsement said that Clinton, unlike Trump, for all of her mistakes and flaws, and has more experience with foreign policy than Trump does.
    
    The newspaper said that Trump is a candidate who can't control his words, unlike Clinton. And it writes that Clinton "can reach out to those who feel left behind. She can make it clear that America sees them and will address their concerns."

    replyreport
    1. 79

       Credence2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

       OUCH!!!

       replyreport
25. 90

    IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

    Former Sen. John Warner will endorse Hillary Clinton for president Wednesday morning, handing the Democratic nominee another high-profile Republican endorsement just 42 days before the election, CNN has learned.
    
    Warner is a former US Navy secretary, who served 30 years in the Senate, most of those in a senior position on the Armed Services Committee.

    replyreport
    1. 95

       wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       The political powerhouses don't like Trump any more than the money guys do, do they?  Only the simple citizen does - the man in the street that is tired of having a ruling elite in congress instead of leaders.

       replyreport
       1. 90

          IslandBitesposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          LOL

          replyreport
26. 0

    ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    replyreport