Observer

.Agreed. The Republican motherment types are embarrassing themselves by making it such an issue.

In an election cycle where Trump referred to the size of his schlong, it should be no shock that where 0.000001% of the population go to the bathroom is an election cycle "issue." For Conservatives.

Agreed. Rubio is off the rails but this doesn't really change the trajectory of his travels except that it will put another soundbyte nail in his coffin when he endorses Trump. Mixing the metaphors like crazy there.

You mean he's following through on the (stupid) pledge they all make? What a bad guy. I'm sure it will look like the Christie hostage press conference. (I agree that Rubio has blown himself up, but not because of this point. I wish he had the spine to not endorse Trump but he's shown he doesn't.)

Hillary is no Obama. She's likely worse but in totally different ways.

Elected officials can't help help you with your whining but they will give speeches to make you think they can.

Don't care what adults do. Do care what kids do.

People who respond to gatorman's posts are the Trump voters of PPP. Gatorman would go away if you would stop feeding him.

I've commented previously in this thread about the Senate's embarrassing behavior on federal judicial nominations. This time the stakes are higher with the seat belonging to the Supreme Court, which has a limited number of seats to fill.

This Senate is proving that no Senate ever has to act to confirm a nominee. All they have to do is put the process on permanent procedural hold until they get a president they agree with because to the Rep Senate, the Constitution doesn't require them to advise and consent unless they agree with the person making the nomination. The Reps are playing chicken with the constitution and if the war powers clause and many others have proven anything, the executive wins in games of chicken. Nothing better could happen to these Senate idiots than Hillary winning and nominating the most liberal but qualified candidate possible (maybe a minority attorney who has been living in Washington for the last 8 years?) and then getting a Senate to confirm him/her.

Paul Ryan but at this point, anybody but Trump and Cruz would be OK. I don't see Romney unless the Republicans just want to keep the party together in a losing effort. They need to nominate someone who might win and that someone needs an ability to work the center on immigration, spending, entitlements.

Does this comment make you feel better? Attacking a woman for being a woman?

to pick a guy who is a long shot to play anywhere in the NFL? It's more of an FU to Manuel. Jones's chances of making an NFL roster in 5 years are slim. His chances of starting in the NFL are slimmer. Jones is a definition of a project QB, ie, a QB who is way more likely to do nothing than something. I don't see this as a shot across anyone's bow except EJ's.

That article has 1.5 people who still support Rubio. It's a start. Don't let your bias for him get in the way of objectivity. He had the best positions and got wiped off the map. Big establishment donors backed Bush and Rubio and got obliterated. They won't back guys who showed themselves to be losers in 2016. Big $$ will be looking for someone who can at least make a showing in their home state. And Rubio didn't resonate with the Rs so he won't cause a grass roots revival. All the above from a Rubio supporter. But I see he is not a winner now. Time to move on to 2020 and who can unseat Clinton.

He turned into one of the children instead of remaining the adult. If he'd stayed the grown up, he would be in Kasich's position right now with a good shot at the nomination on a second ballot. He blew himself up and turned in his character in favor of trying to out-Trump Trump. It was horribly disappointing. He's damaged goods and won't be back as presidential candidate. No one will be lining up to back a guy who couldn't win his home state despite all the money lined up behind him.

If Trump doesn't get to 1237, he won't leave the convention as the winner. Delegates who abandon their first ballot won't be rushing to him. They will be rushing away from him. You underestimate the damage Rubio did to himself. I started this process with Rubio as my top choice by far. I not only thought he would win the nomination, I thought he'd kill Hillary. But the campaign killed him. The campaign exposed that he was a weak candidate and stunning to say it but Christie left him bloodied and dead in that debate moment. And he was a shill of the donors. It will be one and done for him--if he runs again, he can only do worse. Cruz is nowhere near as calculating as you give him credit for. He may moderate his message a little but he's got the "no-compromise" Evangelical Right streak that will never move the country forward. He's got no shot at beating Clinton even if he somehow gets the nomination. Best case is thin-skinned Kasich or a person not yet known.

Rubio lost his gleam during this race. I don't see anyone tapping him for VP. VPs don't win races anyways. Kasich could win vs Hillary. The convention is going to be a blast. I hope a documentary crew with a 10 year NDA gets full access. It would be the greatest documentary of all time.

180,000 people registered Republican in PA since January. The Republicans should not read that as people flocking to their cause. Most just want a say in the Donald getting the nomination. Even a lot of Independents switched to cast a vote against Trump (and many Dems switched for their own reasons). I should have done it but never thought to. Kind of pissed at myself. I'd have happily cast a vote for Kasich over Trump. My presumed delegate says he'll vote for who the voters select but only on the first ballot. After that, he's following his conscience, ie, not Trump.

I use my card plenty of times at places like that without a pin.

I wonder if the party "bosses" (sounds like a Deranged Rhino conspiracy) want Cruz. I suspect the party will swing hard for Kasich at the convention. He's the only one polling ahead of Clinton. She will wipe Cruz and Trump off the map, especially when you look at delegates.

Whose answer is worse?

Everyone uses the chip but they also have the swipe on the same machine and if you don't have your pin, they just make you sign. Nothing to worry about. Both technologies still work.

Ditto. Parisians are definitely the most likely to be snobs but they are mostly just a more private people. I studied up on my French phrases and often interacted in stores only or mostly in French. People appreciated it and worked with me, and if I was a mess, they'd all switch to English. Never had an issue. I walked all over at night so don't listen to the poster who said don't walk at night. It's like a big city anywhere: Keep your head on straight and you'll be fine. L'Orangerie, Louvre, Rodin, Musee de Orsay are among the best museums in the world. If you're into that sort of thing, do it. If you're not, get a tour and do it to appreciate it. Don't listen to these people talking about the subway. Walk everywhere or rent the bikes from the rent and return places. Eat like the french. Go to the local places and fumble with the language--you'll be rewarded with the best food. Drink wine. Lots of it. I did go to Giverny, Monet's home. Took a train and then rented a bike at the train station and rode 5 miles through the countryside to his town. Stayed the night there. As one person said, there are no original Monet's, but as far as beautiful places and charming towns go, Giverny is hard to beat. Of course you'll do the tourist stuff like Eiffel Tower and Notre Dame. Definitely do those. Got to get the pictures. Have a great time.

My own posts on the topic contribute to the problem. So blow me. And, I'm a moron .

Bow down before the one you serve.