Javier Galeano / Reuters

MIAMI — As the final tallies came in on Super Tuesday, even after Hillary Clinton had already secured massive victories among people of color in the Southern states, campaign aides were still keeping special watch over results from the very rural and very white wedge of land that makes up Virginia’s 9th Congressional District.

The southwestern corner of the state, encompassing 20 full counties and parts of two others, is comprised almost exclusively of white voters. And Clinton — after faltering early against Bernie Sanders in mostly white states like Iowa and New Hampshire — appeared to be winning.

If she could hold her lead there, aides argued inside the dark Miami event space where the candidate held her victory rally, it would be evidence of a broadening, diverse, November-ready Clinton coalition.

By night’s end, Clinton clinched seven states, one U.S. territory, and a lead of more than 180 pledged delegates over Sanders, campaign manager Robby Mook noted in a four-page memo released by the campaign on Wednesday. The delegate margin, Mook argues, is larger than any Barack Obama had in the last Democratic primary — making it “increasingly difficult and eventually mathematically impossible for Sanders to catch up.”

But on Tuesday, aides seemed particularly interested in places like Virginia’s 9th District, where they saw signs of growth in their base of older voters, women, and people of color. Clinton ultimately won the area, and by a margin of nearly 10%, according to AP results in the district’s 20 counties.

“We’re very encouraged to see that not only is she performing well in the places that she did all along, but we’re seeing good results in rural, largely white parts of the state of Virginia,” said campaign spokesman Brian Fallon, who huddled with reporters here after Clinton’s speech to discuss Super Tuesday results.

The “meaningful development,” he argued, was as much a promising sign for future Democratic contests, such as in Rust Belt states like Ohio and Michigan, as for the general election.

“That’s a good indication that we are broadening the coalition that we built in the first four states,” Fallon said. “We have the makings of a broad-based, diverse coalition that could not just power her to the nomination, but also make for a winning coalition in a general election.”

(Virginia's 9th District is not without its complications: Once Democratic, the district has leaned Republican the last few cycles — and in a potential general election against Trump, who did well in there with significantly higher turnout, Clinton may face difficulties with Rust Belt voters while performing better with other voters.)

The campaign moves into the next set of contests — held on March 5, March 8, and March 15 — with a strong Super Tuesday showing among voting blocs already supporting Clinton in the Democratic primary. Where Obama in 2008 claimed young voters, liberals, and people of color during the Democratic primary, Clinton appears to be building a base of older voters, people of color, and women. Across those states, black voters supported Clinton widely. (In Alabama, the margin was as large as 93% to 5%.) Clinton also did better with Latino voters, particularly in Texas.

Fallon acknowledged that the campaign has “room to grow,” particularly among young people, who have rallied in early contests behind Sanders and the anti-Wall Street political revolution at the center of his campaign. Clinton has refined her pitch to young people, promising to be “for them,” even if they aren’t “for her” right now. Campaign aides hope to grow the support they’ve already seen among young people of color. “We want to expand and build off of that,” Fallon said.

In the campaign memo released Wednesday, highlighting the vast margins in Southern states, Mook argues that Sanders can not recover from the delegate lead Clinton has already amassed. Through strategic targeting, Mook says, Clinton may, for instance, be able to claim more delegates from just one congressional district, Alabama’s 7th, than Sanders will from his victory in the state of Oklahoma.

Clinton aides questioned Sanders’ larger strategy, saying the Vermont senator has not been able to expand his support among people of color — even in states such as South Carolina, where he spent $2 million on ads and sent 200 paid staffers. (Clinton won by a nearly 50-point margin, and 68 points among black voters.)

Ahead of Super Tuesday, the Sanders campaign targeted five states as must-wins — Vermont, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Colorado, and Massachusetts — ceding the most diverse states to Clinton. “You can’t win the nomination writing off the most diverse states,” said Fallon. “If you’re seriously going to vie for the Democratic nomination, you need to be able to win states like here in Florida — and there’s not been a result yet where the Sanders campaign has won in a state that gives you confidence to think that they will seriously vie in a state like Florida."

"So that’s just true of the Democratic nomination," Fallon said, "to say nothing of the coalition you would need in a general election.”

Sanders aides recognize the problems they face going forward. The morning after Super Tuesday, at a breakfast with reporters, top strategist Tad Devine said the campaign would be working harder to introduce Sanders to people of color in the South. "We think we can do a lot better, and this is why: because Bernie has an incredible personal story to tell about his activism in the civil rights movement,” Devine said. “We think that as they get to know him better — understand where he comes from and what he's saying — we think we're gonna do better.”

Still, in the same breath, Devine also said the campaign is looking forward to contests in the Midwest — friendlier terrain for Sanders. “The experience of communities in places like Michigan will perhaps make Bernie's message on economics a much more powerful and resonant message,” he told reporters.

On the other side, Clinton aides see an important difference in the way the two campaigns are approaching voters across the map.

Put by Fallon: “We are running a truly national campaign,”

Evan McMorris-Santoro contributed reporting from Vermont.

“We’re now having a debate about sweating, about the size of their hands, about make up, about hair, and that is a great disservice to American people in this time of great challenge.”

Jeff J Mitchell / Getty Images / BuzzFeed

w.soundcloud.com

John McCain, in a radio interview on Wednesday, lamented that the Republican presidential race has devolved into petty insults and attacks.

"The thing that I regret the most is we're now with all these threats that I just described to you – there will be further attacks on the United States of America – we're now having a debate about sweating, about the size of their hands, about make up, about hair, and that is a great disservice to American people in this time of great challenge," the Arizona senator told the Alan Colmes Show on Wednesday. "Thousands of Syrians and Iraqis are being slaughtered as we speak. Ukraine is being dismembered by Vladimir Putin. The Chinese are acting in the most aggressive fashion in the South China Sea, so, the American people are not well served."

In recent days, Rubio has criticized Trump for having small hands. Trump has criticized Rubio for sweating.

McCain said he will support the nominee of the party, including Trump, though McCain didn't sound enthusiastic about the idea.

George Frey / Getty Images

Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate who lost to Barack Obama in 2012, delivered a blistering indictment on Thursday of the frontrunner for his party’s nomination — calling Donald Trump “a con man,” a “phony,” and “not very smart.”

Speaking before a packed auditorium at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, the former governor of Massachusetts asked his fellow Republicans to nominate anyone other than Trump, predicting that choosing the reality TV star would compromise “our prospects for a prosperous and safe future.”

Romney began by attacking Trump’s domestic policies, which he said would lead the country into a recession. In particular, he attacked the real estate mogul’s proposal for a 35% trade tariff, which he said would plunge the world into a “trade war” and force business to leave the United States. Romney also criticized Trump’s tax plan, which he said would “balloon” the deficit and the national debt.

Romney then moved on to Trump’s foreign policies, which he said would make the world less safe. He called Trump’s proposal to let ISIS take out the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria “the most ridiculous and dangerous idea of the campaign season.”

The former presidential candidate also challenged Trump to release his tax returns and the transcript of an interview with the New York Times in which, sources told BuzzFeed News, he may have softened his immigration stance.

Romney concluded by calling Trump a “con man” who is “playing the members of the American public for suckers,” warning that nominating him could help Hillary Clinton win the election, and asking his fellow Republicans to nominate pretty much anyone else.

Here are some of Romney’s notable quotes:

• "But wait, you say, isn't he a huge business success that knows what he's talking about? No he isn't."
  
• "What ever happened to Trump Airlines? How about Trump University? And then there's Trump Magazine and Trump Vodka and Trump Steaks, and Trump Mortgage? A business genius he is not."
  
• "Donald Trump tells us that he is very, very smart. I'm afraid that when it comes to foreign policy he is very, very not smart."
  
• "Donald Trump says he admires Vladimir Putin, while has called George W. Bush a liar. That is a twisted example of evil trumping good."
  
• "There is dark irony in his boasts of his sexual exploits during the Vietnam War while John McCain, whom he has mocked, was imprisoned and tortured."
  
• "His is not the temperament of a stable, thoughtful leader. His imagination must not be married to real power."
  
• "Now imagine your children and your grandchildren acting the way he does. Will you welcome that?"
  
• "He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants, he calls for the use of torture and for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit first amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss."
  
• "His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He's playing the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat."
  

You can watch the entire speech here.

youtube.com

And here's the full text of Romney's remarks, in case you want it:

I am not here to announce my candidacy for office. I am not going to endorse a candidate today. Instead, I would like to offer my perspective on the nominating process of my party. In 1964, days before the presidential election which, incidentally, we lost, Ronald Reagan went on national television and challenged America saying that it was a "Time for Choosing." He saw two paths for America, one that embraced conservative principles dedicated to lifting people out of poverty and helping create opportunity for all, and the other, an oppressive government that would lead America down a darker, less free path. I'm no Ronald Reagan and this is a different moment but I believe with all my heart and soul that we face another time for choosing, one that will have profound consequences for the Republican Party and more importantly, for the country.

I say this in part because of my conviction that America is poised to lead the world for another century. Our technology engines, our innovation dynamic, and the ambition and skill of our people will propel our economy and raise our standard of living. America will remain as it is today, the envy of the world.

Warren Buffett was 100% right when he said last week that "the babies being born in America today are the luckiest crop in history."

That doesn't mean we don't have real problems and serious challenges. At home, poverty persists and wages are stagnant. The horrific massacres of Paris and San Bernardino, the nuclear ambitions of the Iranian mullahs, the aggressions of Putin, the growing assertiveness of China and the nuclear tests of North Korea confirm that we live in troubled and dangerous times.

But if we make the right choices, America's future will be even better than our past and better than our present.

On the other hand, if we make improvident choices, the bright horizon I foresee will never materialize. Let me put it plainly, if we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished.

Let me explain why.

First, the economy: If Donald Trump's plans were ever implemented, the country would sink into a prolonged recession.

A few examples: His proposed 35% tariff-like penalties would instigate a trade war that would raise prices for consumers, kill export jobs, and lead entrepreneurs and businesses to flee America. His tax plan, in combination with his refusal to reform entitlements and to honestly address spending would balloon the deficit and the national debt. So even as Donald Trump has offered very few specific economic plans, what little he has said is enough to know that he would be very bad for American workers and for American families.

But wait, you say, isn't he a huge business success that knows what he's talking about? No he isn't. His bankruptcies have crushed small businesses and the men and women who worked for them. He inherited his business, he didn't create it. And what ever happened to Trump Airlines? How about Trump University? And then there's Trump Magazine and Trump Vodka and Trump Steaks, and Trump Mortgage? A business genius he is not.

Now not every policy Donald Trump has floated is bad. He wants to repeal and replace Obamacare. He wants to bring jobs home from China and Japan. But his prescriptions to do these things are flimsy at best. At the last debate, all he could remember about his healthcare plan was to remove insurance boundaries between states. Successfully bringing jobs home requires serious policy and reforms that make America the place businesses want to plant and grow. You can't punish business into doing the things you want. Frankly, the only serious policy proposals that deal with the broad range of national challenges we confront, come today from Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich. One of these men should be our nominee.

I know that some people want the race to be over. They look at history and say a trend like Mr. Trump's isn't going to be stopped.

Perhaps. But the rules of political history have pretty much all been shredded during this campaign. If the other candidates can find common ground, I believe we can nominate a person who can win the general election and who will represent the values and policies of conservatism. Given the current delegate selection process, this means that I would vote for Marco Rubio in Florida, for John Kasich in Ohio, and for Ted Cruz or whichever one of the other two contenders has the best chance of beating Mr. Trump in a given state.

Let me turn to national security and the safety of our homes and loved ones. Trump's bombast is already alarming our allies and fueling the enmity of our enemies. Insulting all Muslims will keep many of them from fully engaging with us in the urgent fight against ISIS. And for what purpose? Muslim terrorists would only have to lie about their religion to enter the country.

What he said on “60 Minutes” about Syria and ISIS has to go down as the most ridiculous and dangerous idea of the campaign season: Let ISIS take out Assad, he said, and then we can pick up the remnants. Think about that: Let the most dangerous terror organization the world has ever known take over a country? This is recklessness in the extreme.

Donald Trump tells us that he is very, very smart. I'm afraid that when it comes to foreign policy he is very, very not smart.

I am far from the first to conclude that Donald Trump lacks the temperament of be president. After all, this is an individual who mocked a disabled reporter, who attributed a reporter's questions to her menstrual cycle, who mocked a brilliant rival who happened to be a woman due to her appearance, who bragged about his marital affairs, and who laces his public speeches with vulgarity.

Donald Trump says he admires Vladimir Putin, while has called George W. Bush a liar. That is a twisted example of evil trumping good.

There is dark irony in his boasts of his sexual exploits during the Vietnam War while John McCain, whom he has mocked, was imprisoned and tortured.

Dishonesty is Trump's hallmark: He claimed that he had spoken clearly and boldly against going into Iraq. Wrong, he spoke in favor of invading Iraq. He said he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrating 9/11. Wrong, he saw no such thing. He imagined it. His is not the temperament of a stable, thoughtful leader. His imagination must not be married to real power.

The President of the United States has long been the leader of the free world. The president and yes the nominees of the country's great parties help define America to billions of people. All of them bear the responsibility of being an example for our children and grandchildren.

Think of Donald Trump's personal qualities, the bullying, the greed, the showing off, the misogyny, the absurd third grade theatrics. We have long referred to him as "The Donald." He is the only person in America to whom we have added an article before his name. It wasn't because he had attributes we admired.

Now imagine your children and your grandchildren acting the way he does. Will you welcome that? Haven't we seen before what happens when people in prominent positions fail the basic responsibility of honorable conduct? We have, and it always injures our families and our country.

Watch how he responds to my speech today. Will he talk about our policy differences or will he attack me with every imaginable low road insult? This may tell you what you need to know about his temperament, his stability, and his suitability to be president.

Trump relishes any poll that reflects what he thinks of himself. But polls are also saying that he will lose to Hillary Clinton.

On Hillary Clinton's watch at the State Department, America's interests were diminished in every corner of the world. She compromised our national secrets, dissembled to the families of the slain, and jettisoned her most profound beliefs to gain presidential power.

For the last three decades, the Clintons have lived at the intersection of money and politics, trading their political influence to enrich their personal finances. They embody the term “crony capitalism.” It disgusts the American people and causes them to lose faith in our political process.

A person so untrustworthy and dishonest as Hillary Clinton must not become president. But a Trump nomination enables her victory. The audio and video of the infamous Tapper-Trump exchange on the Ku Klux Klan will play a hundred thousand times on cable and who knows how many million times on social media.

There are a number of people who claim that Mr. Trump is a con man, a fake. There is indeed evidence of that. Mr. Trump has changed his positions not just over the years, but over the course of the campaign, and on the Ku Klux Klan, daily for three days in a row.

We will only really know if he is the real deal or a phony if he releases his tax returns and the tape of his interview with the New York Times. I predict that there are more bombshells in his tax returns. I predict that he doesn't give much if anything to the disabled and to our veterans. I predict that he told the New York Times that his immigration talk is just that: talk. And I predict that despite his promise to do so, first made over a year ago, he will never ever release his tax returns. Never. Not the returns under audit, not even the returns that are no longer being audited. He has too much to hide. Nor will he authorize the Times to release the tapes. If I'm right, you will have all the proof you need to know that Donald Trump is a phony.

Attacking me as he surely will won't prove him any less of a phony. It's entirely in his hands to prove me wrong. All he has to do is to release his back taxes like he promised he would, and let us hear what he said behind closed doors to the New York Times.

Ronald Reagan used to quote a Scottish philosopher who predicted that democracies and civilizations couldn't last more than about 200 years. John Adams wrote this: "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." I believe that America has proven these dire predictions wrong for two reasons.

First, we have been blessed with great presidents, with giants among us. Men of character, integrity and selflessness have led our nation from its very beginning. None were perfect: each surely made mistakes. But in every case, they acted out of the desire to do what was right for America and for freedom.

The second reason is because we are blessed with a great people, people who at every critical moment of choosing have put the interests of the country above their own.

These two things are related: our presidents time and again have called on us to rise to the occasion. John F. Kennedy asked us to consider what we could do for our country. Lincoln drew upon the better angels of our nature to save the union.

I understand the anger Americans feel today. In the past, our presidents have channeled that anger, and forged it into resolve, into endurance and high purpose, and into the will to defeat the enemies of freedom. Our anger was transformed into energy directed for good.

Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less than noble purposes. He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants, he calls for the use of torture and for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit first amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.

Here's what I know. Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He's playing the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat.

His domestic policies would lead to recession. His foreign policies would make America and the world less safe. He has neither the temperament nor the judgment to be president. And his personal qualities would mean that America would cease to be a shining city on a hill.

America has greatness ahead. This is a time for choosing. God bless us to choose a nominee who will make that vision a reality.

LINK: The Secret Plan To Nominate Mitt Romney From The Convention Floor

Mike Blake / Reuters

On Feb. 2, 2012, Mitt Romney stood uncomfortably on a stage at Donald Trump’s eponymous Las Vegas hotel and accepted the billionaire’s endorsement for president.

“There are some things you just can’t imagine happening,” Romney said, looking as though he couldn’t believe what was happening. “This is one of them.”

Four years later, Trump is on the verge of winning the Republican presidential nomination — and Romney has emerged as one of the frontrunner’s most outspoken opponents.

"Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud,” Romney said in a speech Thursday. “His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He's playing the American public for suckers."

Romney’s decision to fully throw his support behind the anti-Trump wing of the GOP was both personal and practical, according to friends and former advisers. In a fractured party with few neutral arbiters or power brokers, Romney came to believe he could play a key role in orchestrating the Republican opposition to Trump. And even though his allies continue to defend his cozying up to Trump in 2012, Romney himself has privately expressed a sense of personal obligation to help undo whatever damage that episode might have caused.

“Mitt Romney has positioned himself as an elder statesman in our party,” said Katie Packer, a former adviser who now heads the leading anti-Trump group, Our Priorities PAC. She added, “I think he views this as a time for him to not admonish the candidates, but to remind voters that the decision they face is a serious one and that these times require a serious candidate, not a con man who happens to be a reality TV star.”

Until recently, Romney had remained publicly neutral in the 2016 primaries, aside from criticizing a couple of Trump’s campaign provocations on Twitter. Last month, as Trump began racking up delegates, Romney decided to take him on more pointedly, calling on the billionaire to release his tax returns and speculating that they might contain secrets that would expose him as a fraud.

The irony of this line of attack did not escape Mitt, according to people close to him. In 2012, Harry Reid publicly speculated that Romney had not paid taxes for 10 years — a baseless accusation that drove media chatter for weeks. Romney took a certain amount of delight in using the same tack against Trump. He experimented with a variety of verbiage while deciding how best to level the charge, before finally settling on the word “bombshell.” He tapped it into his iPad and then chuckled to himself, awaiting Trump’s response.

“That ‘bombshell’ remark was all him,” said Spencer Zwick, a longtime friend and head of his 2012 fundraising effort. “At his core, he really does believe that Trump needs to release his tax returns because he might be trying to hide something. But he also knows that if you’re going to get into a Twitter war with Donald Trump, you have to be ready to fight.”

For Romney, the anti-Trump effort became more serious over the weekend, after he watched the candidate repeatedly refuse to disavow the endorsement of the Ku Klux Klan during a CNN interview. Romney, who has long idolized his father for championing civil rights as a Republican governor in the ‘60s, was viscerally revolted by Trump’s performance.

Two former Romney advisers said Trump’s CNN interview convinced him to speak out more forcefully against the frontrunner. They added, however, that he is under no illusion that his remarks will dissuade Trump’s supporters from voting for him. In fact, when friends and allies have urged him in recent months to weigh in more often on various 2016 developments, he has responded, self-deprecatingly, that he is “old news,” and a “loser” — a politician who lacks Marco Rubio’s skills as a communicator and Ted Cruz’s passionate base of supporters. “No one wants to hear from me,” he told one friend.

But he also acknowledges that, as the former Republican nominee, he has the ability to drive media coverage with his commentary, and sources said he will be much more visible on TV in the coming days and weeks as he makes the case against Trump.

"I don’t think Mitt's speech is going to make or break Donald Trump's candidacy. But I do think there are a lot of people in the party and a lot of people around the country who see him as being a man of integrity," said Robert O'Brien, a friend and former foreign policy adviser to Romney. "Mitt would probably tell you his speech will not necessarily move the needle one way or the other. But there has been a lot of attention to his views, and he thinks it's right that he weigh in at this time."

His reemergence has, predictably, set off a fresh wave of speculation about his own political intentions, and two former Romney advisers said they’ve heard from scores of donors and loyalists this week asking if he is positioning himself to be drafted from the convention floor. But Romney has been adamant in public that he has no interest in such an outcome, and is expected to keep pushing back against the speculation, believing that his anti-Trump message will be undermined if it’s viewed as advancing his own self-interest.

For the same reasons, Romney has opted not to endorse Marco Rubio, the candidate for whom he has privately expressed a preference.

“Once you back a candidate, you’re just one of their surrogates,” said Zwick. “Mitt Romney is the former nominee of his party and he has his own opinions. He doesn’t have to get up and read the talking points from another campaign.”

If Republicans do arrive in Cleveland to a contested convention, one former adviser said Romney’s more likely role would be to help broker a “unity ticket” among the remaining non-Trump candidates.

“He is one of the few people with the stature in the party to convene a meeting of the candidates at the right time and help midwife a Republican ticket that would help beat Hillary Clinton,” the adviser said.

Scott Brown drives his truck over Mitt Romney’s speech.

Joe Raedle / Getty Images

w.soundcloud.com

Donald Trump-backer Scott Brown defended Donald Trump from Mitt Romney in a radio interview Thursday.

Brown, the former Romney protege and senator from Massachusetts, said it was inappropriate for Romney to call Trump a phony and flip-flopper.

"You know, I have a very strong relationship with the governor," Brown told Boston Herald Radio's "Morning Meeting" on Thursday. "He's certainly has the ability and the right as somebody who has been there and won elections and fought in major elections to say whatever he wants. I just happen to disagree with him, and if he and other folks in the establishment want to do something about Donald Trump they should have probably done it months ago."

Brown said Romney's speech was not his style and made him feel uncomfortable.

"To do it now that he's in the lead, it just looks like unfortunately, you know, they're kind of ... it doesn't look good. It didn't make me feel comfortable listening to him because that's not his style," the former senator said.

And, said Brown, for Romney to call Trump a phony flip-flopper was inappropriate.

"It got a little personal," he said. "Obviously I don't mind drawing contrast at all, but to call people phony and fake and that sort of thing I think is inappropriate, certainly. That being said, I'm gonna continue to support him. I think what he has done, the governor, is he is going to rally even more people to come out for Donald Trump and mobilize them even more and have them understand what's at stake here."

“For the leading Republican presidential candidate to advocate war crimes, which he does openly, just advocates war crimes, doesn’t matter, makes me sick really,” says Rep. Adam Kinzinger.

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images / Via Facebook: RepKinzinger

w.soundcloud.com

Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, a former Air Force pilot who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said on Thursday that Donald Trump is openly advocating war crimes that would cause the soldiers who obeyed his orders to be jailed.

"If you're a private in the field and your major or your colonel orders you to do something that is a war crime, you actually bear responsibility, you can't say that the colonel made me do it," said Kinzinger, who is supporting Marco Rubio. "What Donald Trump, as wanting to be president of the United States is advocating, is a war crime that would force every soldier that did, i.e. killed the relatives of terrorists, tortured regardless of whether it not it works, the things that he's advocating would force all of these people in jail."

Speaking on the Steve Cochran Show on Chicago radio, Kinzinger argued that Trump was either "all bluster" or comparable to Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini.

"Now, you have to do one of two things," he said. "You either believe that Donald trump is all bluster which most people do but for some reason they like that, or you take him at his word in which case he is advocating, like what Benito Mussolini did, war crimes."

Kinzinger also said that what Trump was calling for "makes me sick."

"For the leading Republican presidential candidate to advocate war crimes, which he does openly, just advocates war crimes, doesn't matter, makes me sick really," he said. "Especially as somebody that's defended the country. It's just terrible."

Later in the interview, Kinzinger said, "I can't see myself supporting Donald Trump. I never say definitively because who knows in the future. But I have no intention of supporting Donald Trump."

As for his preferred candidate, Rubio, Kinzinger said he felt "pretty good" about the Florida senator's chances of winning his home state's primary, but that "I'd definitely rather be in Trump's position politically."

“He has, I think, diminished himself in the eyes of a lot of us,” says Rep. Bill Huizenga.

John Moore / Getty Images

w.soundcloud.com

Rep. Bill Huizenga, a Rubio-backer, said it would be a "tough decision" whether or not to support Donald Trump if he were to become the Republican nominee.

"We're a long way from that," said the Michigan congressman when asked if he'd support Trump. "He has, I think, diminished himself in the eyes of a lot of us. If my option though is Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders conversely, or when they go to convention and truly go into the smoke-filled back room and emerge with Joe Biden as their candidate, you have start looking to who's going to be impacting the Supreme Court, who's going to be impacting a number of these things that are going to be coming up in the next couple of years."

A growing chorus of Republicans, both elected officials and party leaders, have said in recent days they wouldn't vote for Trump under any circumstance. Huizenga left the option open, but said his comments show the antagonizing prospect many Republicans find themselves in as Trump marches to the nomination.

"I wish it wasn't such a tough decision, but he can turn that around. But so, you know, I'm a conservative," he continued. "I'm an American first but it's not so much about party, it's philosophy for me. So who at that point matches my philosophy most-closely."

Huizenga said that conservatives' options are getting limited very quickly, but ruled out voting for Gary Johnson on the Libertarian ticket.

The New Jersey governor says his angry/sad expression that went viral on Super Tuesday was just how he looks when he is listening.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie laughed off speculation that he is a Donald Trump hostage after he went viral for making what seemed like an angry and/or sad expression on Super Tuesday.

John Moore / Getty Images

During Trump's victory speech, Christie at times looked to be near tears and angry, sparking countless memes about what he was possibly thinking.

vine.co

But at a news conference on Thursday, Christie laughed off speculation that he was being forced on the stage against his will.

John Moore / Getty Images

View Entire List ›

Alabama's lethal injection chamber at Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore, Alabama.

Dave Martin / ASSOCIATED PRESS

A state trial court judge in Alabama on Thursday ruled from the bench that the state's death sentencing law is unconstitutional in a challenge brought by four capital murder defendants.

Jefferson County Circuit Judge Tracie Todd followed up hours later with a stark written ruling attacking the implementation of the death penalty in the state.

"There is a time and place for diplomacy and subtlety. That time and place has been expunged by the dire state of the justice system in Alabama," Todd wrote in her ruling, issued Thursday afternoon. "It is clear, from here on the front line, that Alabama’s judiciary has unequivocally been hijacked by partisan interests and unlawful legislative neglect."

The news of Todd's bench ruling was first reported by AL.com earlier Thursday. The ruling came in response to a hearing sought by capital murder defendants Benjamin Acton, Terrell McMullin, Stanley Chatman, and Kenneth Billups.

Todd concluded that Alabama's death sentencing scheme is similar enough to the Florida scheme struck down in January by the U.S. Supreme Court that it, too, violates the Sixth Amendment constitutional right to a trial by jury.

In the Florida case, the Supreme Court ruled in Hurst v. Florida that the state's sentencing scheme was unconstitutional because the state relied on “a judge’s factfinding” and not “a jury’s verdict” to sentence a person to death.

Specifically, Todd detailed how the Alabama system is, in her view, more constitutionally troubling than Florida's system due to the fact that judges in Alabama often override life sentences recommended by juries in capital cases, choosing instead to impose death sentences.

"At present Alabama is solitary in its unbridled system of allowing judges to deviate from jury advisory verdicts in order to effect life-to-death sentence overrides," Todd noted, later explaining, "The consequence of the judicial override has raised flags among legal circles for several decades."

Todd went on to note, "Approximately twenty-one percent of the 199 people on death row were sentenced to death through judicial override."

In conclusion, Todd wrote, "A jury’s recommendation of a life sentence based on a finding that the requisite aggravating factors have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the mitigating circumstances outweigh these factors, should remain undisturbed. ... More importantly, capital defendants in Alabama are subject to having the 'maximum authorized punishment...increased by a judge’s own factfinding.' In light of the ruling in Hurst, Alabama’s capital sentencing scheme, 'under which an advisory jury makes a recommendation to a judge, and the judge makes critical findings needed for the imposition of a death sentence, violates the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury.'"

Todd, however, went beyond the ruling in Hurst, finding systematic and pervasive problems throughout Alabama's system.

"[T]he imposition of the death penalty in Alabama by biased judges, improperly assigning criminal cases, and appointing counsel based on political motivation is in direct violation of the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to our Constitution," Todd wrote.

Further still, Todd found that state funding decisions — regarding representation and other parts of the judicial process — are insufficient to provide adequate safeguards and procedures.

"Alabama’s unlawful defunding of the judicial branch is in itself a violation of the Alabama Constitution of 1901," Todd wrote. "More importantly, the effects of this underfunding cause violations of the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution in one form or another."

In concluding her 28-page ruling, Todd found that "the death penalty in Alabama is being imposed in a 'wholly arbitrary and capricious' manner" and quoted Martin Luther King, Jr.: "This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action."

Read the ruling:

Trump in 1999: “He didn’t finish the war. I wish he’d finished the war.”

Ethan Miller / Getty Images

Donald Trump has for months claimed that he was "loud and clear" in warning the invasion of Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein from power would destabilize the Middle East.

His claim has come under scrutiny, with a clip unearthed by BuzzFeed News of Trump telling Howard Stern in 2002 that he supported an invasion of Iraq. "Yeah, I guess so," Trump said on the Howard Stern when asked if he supported invading Iraq. "I wish the first time it was done correctly."

The second part of his answer, referring to the way the Persian Gulf War was conducted by President George H.W. Bush, seemed to indicate that Trump previously supported removing Hussein from power. A BuzzFeed News review of Trump's statements on Iraq prior to the invasion and before the case was made by the Bush administration to invade shows Trump on two other occasions saying he wished Bush Sr.'s administration had deposed Hussein in the 1991 Gulf War.

Trump told Tony Snow in a Oct. 31, 1999 on Fox News Sunday about the first Gulf War: "No, I like the approach to the war, he did the right thing. He didn't finish the war. I wish he'd finished the war."

In his book as well, Trump made the case Bush should have finished the job.

"We can learn something here from George Bush and see how good a president he was," Trump wrote in his 2000 book The America We Deserve. "He wasn't afraid to use American power when he figured out that Saddam Hussein posed a direct threat to American interests in the East. I only wish, however, that he had spent three more days and properly finished the job. It is this kind of will and determination to use our strength strategically that America needs again in dealing with the North Koreans."

In that same book, Trump wrote that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction and targeted Iraq strikes had little effect on their overall weapons development. Trump concluded it wouldn't be crazy if we attack Iraq to "carry the mission to its conclusion."

On NBC's Meet the Press, Trump said he didn't know what he mean't when pressed by show host Chuck Todd about what doing it correctly "the first time" implied.

SNOW: How about Saudi Arabia?

TRUMP: They take such advantage of us with the oil.

mine, and they're terrific, and they laugh this country, how stupid. They have boats bigger than any boats you've ever seen, they have houses all over the world, including Palm Beach. They have houses like you've never seen before -- all because we're so stupid.

Hey, let them have a house, but this is getting a little ridiculous. I mean, the money they make.

And then when we wanted to go over and fly our planes and land our planes in Saudi Arabia, in the war, to protect them, they didn't want us on their land. I mean, you explain that one to me.

SNOW: George Bush talked them into it.

TRUMP: He talked them into it and then didn't finish the war.

SNOW: So he should have gone -- you think the United States should have gone into Baghdad.

TRUMP: When you say "talked them into it," how did he talk them into it? He gave them all sorts of goodies, gave them all sorts of gadgets, and we're supposed to be protecting them and we had to go through huge negotiations just to land planes on their soil.

They wouldn't even -- they wanted us to protect them, but they said: Protect us, but don't come into our country.

SNOW: You said you like his approach to that war. Are you having second thoughts?

TRUMP: No, I like the approach to the war, he did the right thing. He didn't finish the war. I wish he'd finished the war.

Oliver Lomas was four months old.

Facebook: susan.lomas.35

Facebook: susan.lomas.35

Oliver Lomas passed away at four months of age from SIDS on Feb. 25, his aunt Anastasia Lomas told the Associated Press.

gofundme.com

View Entire List ›

Whatever it was, he ate it.

View Entire List ›

Well, here we are.

Conservatives have revolted against Donald Trump over the last week, posting on Twitter under the hashtag #NeverTrump.

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

BRET BAIER: In 30 seconds, can you definitively say you will support the Republican nominee even if that nominee is Donald J. Trump? Sen. Rubio, yes or no?

MARCO RUBIO: I'll support the Republican nominee. I'll support Donald if he's the Republican nominee and let me tell you why: Because the Democrats have two people left in the race; one of them is a socialist. America doesn't want to be a socialist country — if you want to live in a socialist country, then move to a socialist country. The other one is under FBI investigation, and not only is she under FBI investigation, she lied to the families of the victims of Benghazi. And anyone who lies to the families of the victims of the people who lost their lives in the service of their country, can never be the commander in chief of the United States. We must defeat Hillary Clinton.

View Entire List ›

And some evidence to the contrary.

View Video ›

buzzfeed-video1.s3.amazonaws.com

Ted Cruz in the debate on Thursday twice hit Donald Trump for supporting John Kerry in the 2004 election, and in one instance, specified that Trump had supported Kerry over George W. Bush.

Cruz said, "Donald Trump supported Jimmy Carter over Ronald Reagan. Donald supported John Kerry over George W. Bush. If you don't like Obamacare, Donald Trump funded Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi taking over Congress to pass Obamacare."

While Trump certainly had nice things to say about Kerry in 2004, he praised (and donated to) both candidates and publicly said he was undecided about the race. One biography of Trump says he supported Bush over Kerry.

Trump was also critical of both Kerry and Bush. He said the Iraq War was a mess for Bush, but also praised Bush for effectively spinning Kerry's war record as a negative.

Here's the evidence we collected of Trump's position on the 2004 presidential campaign:

In April 2004 on Howard Stern, Trump called Kerry a "friend," but said he hadn't made up his mind:

"Let me just say, I haven’t made up my mind. Listen, Kerry’s a friend of mine. He’s a very good guy, he’s a very tough guy, and I think he’s gonna put up a great fight. He’s had a disadvantage, i guess, although I think Iraq could bring down Bush. But Bush, this is a terrible mistake what’s gone on in Iraq."

w.soundcloud.com

"I think it's going to be very close. I think it's going to be John Kerry against Bush. I know them both. They're both good guys and I think will be a close race."

View Entire List ›

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

About half an hour into Thursday night's presidential debate, Republican frontrunner Donald Trump took a moment to call me out for the worst prediction of my career.

It happened when a moderator asked him to respond to a recent BuzzFeed News report that he had secretly hedged on his hardline immigration proposals during an off-the-record interview with liberal New York Times editors.

Trump responded, characteristically, with a small declaration of victory.

"First of all, BuzzFeed, they were the ones that said under no circumstances will I run for president, and were they wrong," Trump said.

He was referring to a 2014 profile I wrote, titled, "36 Hours On The Fake Campaign Trail With Donald Trump." In the story, I chronicle two accidental days spent inside the billionaire's bubble, and I make the case that his 25-year history of flirting with — and then abandoning — various presidential bids constitutes a "long con" designed to generate publicity.

"If history is any judge," I wrote at the time, "Trump is about as likely to run for president in his lifetime as he is to accept follicular defeat."

Two years later, Trump is on the verge of winning the Republican presidential nomination.

Of course, as Trump himself acknowledged on the debate stage, I was not the only political journalist to get this particular prediction wrong. But I was wrong earlier, and at greater length. Not only did I write a 6,000-word profile utterly dismissing his claims that he was serious this time; I spent the next year making the same argument on TV every time "Trump 2016" speculation meandered into the news cycle. I have a vague recollection of offering, at one point, to bet my entire annual salary that Trump wouldn't appear on a ballot in Iowa. Thankfully, no one at the MSNBC roundtable that day took me up on it.

When Trump declared his candidacy last year, I called him the "bearded lady" of the campaign season, and for several days I publicly questioned whether he would actually file paperwork to make his campaign official. (He did.)

I continued my streak of wrongness through much of last summer, routinely tweeting that Trump's flameout was inevitable. When he attacked John McCain's war record, I mused that military families might angrily turn against him. (Wrong.) When he went to war with Fox News, I suggested conservatives would side with their favorite network over Trump. (Nope.)

Eventually I gave up altogether on predicting Trump's 2016 trajectory. But by then, I had already racked up enough faulty forecasts to fill years' worth of the "what I got wrong" columns.

Yet for all my predictive misfires over the past two years, Trump's debate-stage dig Thursday night suggests there's at least one thing I didn't get wrong about him. From my 2014 profile:

...among the chorus of “Yes, Mr. Trump”s and “You were great, Mr. Trump”s that tumble out of his yes-men at even the faintest prompt, the Donald can still hear the din of guffaws coming from a political class that long ago stopped taking him seriously. And it’s driving him crazy.

Trump's obsession with gaining the attention and respect of political-media elites was the thing that most struck me during my time with him. For Trump, it wasn't enough to have Celebrity Apprentice viewers gawking at his reality TV antics each Sunday. He wanted serious people to take him seriously — and in the wake of his 2012 "birther" crusade, he was generally regarded by the political class as a buffoon. The billionaire's presidential candidacy seems motivated, in part, by a fierce desire to prove those haters wrong.

As Maggie Haberman reported in the New York Times, a key moment that spurred Trump's eventual candidacy took place at the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner, where he was made to sit at a table in the middle of a packed ballroom while President Obama mercilessly skewered him, and all of official Washington laughed. "Five years later," Haberman wrote, "he seems determined not to be humiliated again, and to stop those who laughed at him."

In another story, Haberman reported that Trump "still recalls, often and with a bit of an edge, how many people predicted that he would never formally get into the race, or would prematurely get out."

Over the past nine months, friends and media types on Twitter have made a running gag out of blaming me for Trump's candidacy — and I've often played along. But lately, the meme appears to have spread beyond colleagues in the political press, and the tweets that now daily populate my @ mentions seem to be taking on an increasingly accusatory tone. If Trump did, in fact, launch his presidential bid to prove the "haters" wrong, it's fair to assume that category is considerably bigger than a single profile-writer. But just in case it will help, allow me go on the record now:

Mr. Trump, I underestimated you. You can leave the campaign trail and return to Trump Tower secure in the knowledge that you've put me fully in my place. Consider this hater duly scorned.

Scott Olson / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Bernie Sanders’ campaign for president will ramp up its outreach to black voters in delegate-rich states like Illinois, North Carolina, and Missouri, campaign aides tell BuzzFeed News.

In recent weeks, voters from more diverse states — and in particular, black southern voters — have delivered huge, decisive wins for Hillary Clinton. In advance of Super Tuesday, Sanders predicted more losses among black voters in the southern primaries, but suggested black voters in other parts of the country would be more supportive of his candidacy.

"I think you're going to see us doing — and I think the polls indicated it, much better within the African-American community outside of the Deep South," Sanders said on This Week. "You're going to see us much better in New York state where I think we have a shot to win, in California and in Michigan."

Over the next two weeks, Sanders campaign surrogates — and, in some cases, the candidate — will meet with local activists. The campaign has employed this strategy before, but surrogates and aides said now it will be more publicized. Sanders, according to two sources briefed on the campaign's plans, will also be more specific about economic inequality and its effect on black communities in his stump speech. One activist, who wasn't authorized to speak for their organization, said the Sanders campaign told the activist that Bernie would speak more about how structural racism is tied to the heart of his message about economic inequality.

"Right now, when you look at the political revolution — it needs to be more intersectional, and his economic proposals need to be more more explicit on the ground and publicly," the activist said. "The Clintons will exploit that. When he’s talking about it, he'll give specific examples on the stump in ways he hasn't before, is my understanding."

Privately, surrogates are figuring out how to ratchet up the rhetoric against Clinton, in ways meant to make black voters wonder how concerned she really is about the black community. In particular, the campaign has been in talks about how to use a video of Killer Mike talking about cracks in the "firewall," and underlining the difference between the candidates' reactions when confronted by Black Lives Matter demonstrators.

"The campaign is going to put more effort into churches, roundtables, and try to put pressure on Hillary now that the southern states are gone," said a campaign surrogate briefed on the campaign's plans in Chicago. "He just needs to make inroads and a lot of it is going to focus on clergy outreach."

The campaign was expected to go into the weekend with another high-profile black endorsement under its belt. Mark Stewart Tillman, the general president of Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, will endorse Sanders and will host a town hall Detroit for him before the debate in Flint, per a campaign aide.

“We are going to earn people’s votes, door to door, churches, community forums and at rallies,” for NAACP President and CEO Ben Jealous told BuzzFeed News. “Going into the Midwest, the confounding and contradictory nature of Hillary Clinton’s politics cannot help but to be on full display.”

Jealous said while campaigning in Chicago, for instance, Clinton's leadership will be called in question as it relates to the case of Laquan McDonald. Activists believe the mayor was involved in a cover-up, but while Clinton has called for a Justice Department probe into the issue, in December said she still had confidence in Emanuel's leadership.

“She’s running as a progressive, yet she’s embracing Rahm’s leadership, where a lot of the activists think he tried to cover up Laquan's death. She’s been contradictory across time and is contradictory in the present," Jealous said.

Jealous argued that the presence of Chicago in the lives of three prominent politicians is notable: that President Obama was a community organizer there, Sanders was a civil rights protester, and Clinton, he said, was a supporter of Barry Goldwater, who campaigned against the Civil Rights Act.

(Sanders attended the University of Chicago where he was arrested for protesting; Clinton, who grew up in Illinois, was infamously a "Goldwater girl" as a teenager and later significantly changed her political views while in college.)

"You can draw a straight line between her support of Goldwater, Rahm Emanuel, and her support of the death penalty and the fact that in 2008, she ran to the right of Obama on criminal justice," Jealous said.

“She does a good job of smiling on Sunday and voting for welfare reform on Monday," Jealous said, referring to Clinton's popularity in the black church, where Sanders has struggled to connect. "The midwest are states they're contesting and organizing in and we’re [zeroing in] on them in a very focused way. You’ll see us perform better."

Jealous described the fight as an uphill battle. He said he believes introducing more people to the candidate before Super Tuesday could have made more of a difference at the polls, and they're determined to not make the same mistake twice.

"We are fighting against the most powerful dynasty in American politics," he said. "Our campaign is one of hope that regular working people can be empowered to take back control of their government and switch it from helping the rich get richer."

“It’s one of those bridges you don’t ever want to have to cross. And so I don’t even want to think about it right now.”

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

w.soundcloud.com

A day after committing to support Donald Trump as the Republican nominee, Marco Rubio says Trump will not be the nominee and voting for him would be a "bridge you don't ever want to have to cross."

During the debate on Thursday, Rubio said, "I'll support the Republican nominee. I'll support Donald if he's the Republican nominee," arguing that Trump was preferable to Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.

Asked on Friday in an interview with Kentucky Sports Radio about the apparent contradiction between Rubio's support for the growing "#NeverTrump" movement among Republicans and his answer at the debate, Rubio said, "Well, I mean, for me, I'm never voting for Donald Trump in the Republican primary."

Pressed further, Rubio said the question itself was a reflection of how Trump has divided the Republican party.

"I get it, what you're asking me, I get the question," the Florida senator said. "What it opens our eyes to is think about that. If it was anybody else in first place right now, we would not be asked this question. I mean, you don't see Bernie Sanders being asked if he would vote for Hillary Clinton. You know, if the frontrunner was me or anybody else in this race, you wouldn't have people asking that question. They're asking it about Trump for a reason. And that is, he is fracturing the Republican Party and the conservative movement."

He added, "Now, if— I think my answer's a reflection of how bad I think Hillary Clinton is. I don't want us to reach this choice here, where it's Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. I don't want people to have to have a choice between two people they don't like or a choice of staying home. I want them to have a choice they can be excited about."

The host then asked him directly whether he would vote for Trump or stay home if the nominees are Clinton and Trump. Rubio replied that he didn't "even want to imagine that right now."

"Nah, I mean, you're--I get it," he said. "I get the question you're asking me. I've said it last—I'm gonna vote for the nominee. It's not gonna be Donald Trump. I can't even imagine that. I don't even want to imagine that right now to be honest with you. I don't believe it's gonna happen. I think there are enough people like your mom, in Kentucky, and around the country to keep this from happening. It's one of those bridges you don't ever want to have to cross. And so I don't even want to think about it right now. Other than to say to you, 'It's not going to happen.'"

“They’re very big. They’re very complex. But I would probably have — I probably wouldn’t have a problem with doing it.”

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

Donald Trump says he won't release his tax returns — because he's being audited.

During his 1999 flirtation with running on the Reform Party ticket, however, Trump actually took a much different tone, saying he'd have no problem releasing his tax returns.

Trump, speaking with MSNBC's Chris Matthews at an event in November of that year was asked about the tax returns. (The context was the problems Democratic vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro encountered in 1984 releasing the tax returns of her husband, real estate developer John Zaccaro.)

Trump said his life was an open book and he wouldn't have a problem releasing his tax returns.

"You know, it's something I haven't even thought of, but I certainly, I guess, as I get closer to the decision, which I'll probably make in February, it's something I will be thinking of," said Trump. "They're very big. They're very complex. But I would probably have — I probably wouldn't have a problem with doing it."

In the interview, Trump also noted he has "great casinos." He told Matthews that, "When I go through in Atlantic City, where I have great casinos that a lot of the folks here go to all the time, because it's right down there." Since then, Atlantic City has struggled, and Trump has largely exited.

Former Republican nominee Mitt Romney has called for Trump to release his tax returns.

"He doesn't want to release his tax returns under any circumstances, I don't believe he ever will," Romney said on With All Due Respect on Thursday.

Romney has aggressively pushed the issue, arguing their might be a bombshell in Trump's tax returns. Ted Cruz, meanwhile, has said he believes Trump's taxes might show ties to the mafia.

Trump has claimed he won't release his taxes because he's being audited by the Internal Revenue Service though tax experts say there's nothing about the audit that keeps him from releasing his records.

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you — one of the humiliations of running for the presidency and we saw this with Geraldine Ferraro from New York — her husband's a real estate developed -- you've got to show your tax returns. You've got to come out with a full financial statement. People in real estate don't normally like to do that. Are you ready to do that kind of, you know, show yourself kind of disclosure?

TRUMP: You know, one of the things about me, I've been an open book. I've been out there for 20 years — longer than 20 years. And I think everyone knows who I am, what I am, and they like me, they hate me, they somewhere in the middle. The fact is, I've really been an open book. When I go through in Atlantic City, where I have great casinos that a lot of the folks here go to all the time, because it's right down there.

(LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: Right. It's nearby.

TRUMP: But I do — I have great casinos. And we have a thing called the Casino Control Commission. These folks that are on the commission — the commissioners have done an unbelievable job in keeping the mob out; keeping things clean; making sure taxes are paid — everything else. It is an unbelieve — if I write a check to you, they'll get to see a copy of that check. If I write a check...

MATTHEWS: But when you run for president, will you release your income tax returns?

TRUMP: You know, it's something I haven't even thought of, but I certainly, I guess, as I get closer to the decision, which I'll probably make in February, it's something I will be thinking of. They're very big. They're very complex. But I would probably have — I probably wouldn't have a problem with doing it.

Drew Angerer / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court granted Louisiana abortion clinics' request on Friday to temporarily halt enforcement of a state law that required doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

The court noted the law's similarity to a Texas law at issue in the pending Supreme Court case that the justices heard argument in earlier this week.

Justice Clarence Thomas was the sole justice who noted that he would have left in place a lower court ruling allowing the Louisiana law to be enforced during the litigation.

A trial court had previously issued a preliminary injunction preventing the state from enforcing the law, which requires all doctors performing abortions at clinics to “[h]ave active admitting privileges at a hospital that is located not further than thirty miles from the location at which the abortion is performed or induced and that provides obstetrical or gynecological health care services.”

Last week, however, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay of the district court’s injunction pending the state’s appeal. In other words, the law would be enforceable while clinics and doctors appeal the ruling. The clinics then went to the Supreme Court, asking for the 5th Circuit's stay to be vacated as the litigation continues.

The Supreme Court's action in the Louisiana case comes in the wake of vigorous arguments in the Texas case on March 2 and after the justices would have met to cast their preliminary vote in that case.

When the Texas clinics had sought a similar halt on enforcement of that state's law during their appeal, the court granted it — but the relief was granted over the noted objection of four justices.

On Friday, neither Chief Justice John Roberts nor Justice Samuel Alito voiced objection to the move in the Louisiana case. Both had done so this past June in the Texas case. The fourth justice who had objected in the Texas case was Justice Antonin Scalia, who died last month.

Jim Young / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Major GOP donors praying for anyone but Donald Trump to emerge as their party's standard bearer have started to turn their hopes toward a contested convention, a wonky political dream that could finally come true.

As donors come to the realization that their non-Trump candidates have little chance of winning the nomination in the upcoming contests, chatter of a contested GOP convention has been dominating fundraising circles in recent days, and donors are beginning to re-evaluate how they can best spend their resources to increase the chances of a contested convention.

David Beightol, a former major Romney bundler and Bush backer, recently attended a briefing session Sen. Marco Rubio's campaign manager Terry Sullivan held in Washington, D.C. Although some donors were disappointed that Sullivan didn't make the case for Rubio to actually win primaries in upcoming states, Beightol said he and other donors, who realize that a contested convention at this point is the only way to stop Trump, were won over.

"It's inevitable that there's going to be a brokered convention at this point," Beightol said, adding that he might soon start donating and fundraising for Rubio's campaign because it's been doing the math and preparing for the scenario.

There were a number of former Bush bundlers at the meeting who hadn't decided on their next choice in the crowd.

Beightol also praised former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney's anti-Trump speech on Thursday as a "wake-up call" to voters. In his speech, Romney largely called for a contested convention. "Given the current delegate selection process, that means that I’d vote for Marco Rubio in Florida and for John Kasich in Ohio and for Ted Cruz or whichever one of the other two contenders has the best chance of beating Mr. Trump in a given state," Romney said.

Minnesota billionaire Stan Hubbard has given the maximum contribution to various GOP presidential candidates in the past few months, but he said he has been so disappointed by the tone of the primaries on both sides that until recently he hadn't made a bigger donation to a candidate-specific outside group since contributing to the pro-Scott Walker super PAC.

"Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan would be rolling over in their graves," Hubbard said, adding that with Trump in particular, "it's a question of ethics."

Hubbard said he still likes John Kasich of the candidates remaining, but decided to give $10,000 to the anti-Trump group Our Principles PAC in an effort to keep Trump from getting the delegates he needs because the chances of any of the other candidates winning outright are low.

"My hope is that no one is able to win the delegates and then it goes to a convention," Hubbard said, admitting, however, that as much as some donors would like to see one, chances of a contested convention actually happening were "fair to slim."

After months of not taking Trump seriously, a few major GOP donors other than Hubbard, including hedge-fund billionaire Paul Singer are now contributing to the anti-Trump super PAC to keep him below the 1,237 delegates he needs to secure the GOP nomination.

Even as some prominent Republicans including Sen. Lindsey Graham — one of the most vocal critics of Trump — have said it would be unfair to deny the billionaire the nomination after he wins two-thirds of the delegates needed, many donors are not convinced.

"A contested convention is emerging as the hope of increasing number of donors who would like to see an experienced and electable nominee, i.e. not Trump," said Fred Malek, a major GOP fundraiser.

Even in the late phase of the primary, some bundlers are still signing up with campaigns that they see as most capable of challenging Trump's delegate total.

A major fundraiser recently decided to start bundling for Sen. Ted Cruz as the best hope to keep Trump from winning any more states. Cruz has defeated Trump in four states — a fact he and his supporters like to point out to show he is strongest alternative to Trump.

"Ted has won important states and can appeal to Trump voters who want an outsider but become convinced that Ted is the more reliable conservative," the bundler said.

Others are now figuring out how best to respond, said Charlie Spies, a Republican lawyer who works with major super PACs and donors.

“Some donors are still trying to get a good grasp of what the situation is because the race reset itself,” he said.

Spies said talk of a contested convention has become more common since Super Tuesday, when, although Trump won several states, many Republican were somewhat relieved he underperformed in terms of delegate counts.

“In general, there’s a recognition that a contested convention is becoming more likely,” he added. "There’s absolutely chatter among the donors and consultants about the twists and turns this election is taking."