2016 Presidential Horse Race

[NDVirginia19]

Can we all agree that Xboxes and cigarettes should be an American birthright and move on to discussing when the bottom feeder Republican are going to drop out - looking at you Carly and Ben. Christie needs a reality check too.

Yeah, I guess Christie got pissy things weren't going his way, ruined somebody's campaign (and most likely the Republican's best hope at beating Trump) and still finished 6th, so I guess its time he drops out. If the best he can do in the only state he campaigned in is 8% then he's shit out of luck

 

[woolybug25]

I hope a second place finish accelerates John Kasich's bid for the Presidency. It's amazing to me that we live in a world where Donald Freaking Trump is leading the race for the most important role in the world. I feel like we are in a scene from Idiocracy. Especially when there is a serious, well intentioned, proven leader like Kasich getting ignored.

Who is John Kasich? - CNNPolitics.com

 

[connor_in]

I hope a second place finish accelerates John Kasich's bid for the Presidency. It's amazing to me that we live in a world where Donald Freaking Trump is leading the race for the most important role in the world. I feel like we are in a scene from Idiocracy. Especially when there is a serious, well intentioned, proven leader like Kasich getting ignored.

Who is John Kasich? - CNNPolitics.com

I don't know if he has much hope at the overall nomination, Bug. On both left and right sites, people don't think he has the $ or the structure in place. Now obviously with the number of people in the R race, that could change as people drop out and structure merges if Kasich can get some actual momentum from this, but March 1st should shake things out for sure

 

[zelezo vlk]

Kasich would give me some hope.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[RDU Irish]

I have been called ignorant multiple times in this thread for having an opinion and talking about what I have seen first hand on several occasions. I did not start out disrespectful but am simply matching the tone.



On the issue of what's purchase with SNAP. It's not that processed food is the cheapest, which it is, the problem is it's the easiest.

Personally I don't think anyone should go hungry. I would have no problem with SNAP levels being doubled or tripled..hell make it whatever is needed. Provided only good foods are eligible for purchase. Make sure people have enough milk, bread, eggs, meat and most importantly veggies to feed the entire home. But you also need to make sure soda, candy and shitty processed food is not purchased.

This is a very reasonable position but for some reason having it is seen as racist or an attack on the poor. Stating that people take the easy way out, which they do regardless if they are poor or rich, is simply the truth. The difference is I don't care how someone who makes their money spends it but I do care how someone taking assistance spends others money.

Here is a great study on the subject - http://www.eatdrinkpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/FoodStampsFollowtheMoneySimon.pdf

When PepsiCo, Coca-Cola and Kraft Foods are purchasing policy you have a problem. A real problem. These companies have made sure that feeding your kids a bag of Lays and a liter of Mt Dew is not against the rules. This allows others to say that parents are not doing anything wrong with SNAP. See above comments.

But morally...it's outrageous. It's just wrong.


If we can't have an honest conversation about what's wrong we're never going to get anything fixed. If every time someone points out the flaws in a system is called out for being a hateful person who wants to starve kids, keep the elderly in the poor house or whatever rhetoric is used to make someone who has it OK to feel bad...you're not going to fix anything.

• In one year, nine Walmart Supercenters in Massachusetts together received more than$33 million in SNAP dollars—over four times the SNAP money spent at farmers markets nationwide

First of all - farmers markets are a rip off in my experience. Easily double the price for pretty much everything, often of lesser quality. Mind you, I think "organic" is pure marketing BS and only buy "organic" if it is cheaper or better quality. So please, don't try to convince me I am poisoning my family - start a new thread.

Second, the fact the government makes ZERO effort to try to track what the money is spent on is just a complete embarrassment. My sister has worked for WIC for years, it is completely embarrassing the crap that goes on - tons of people drop out because there are easier programs to get free food that do not restrict what you can and can't buy or try to educate you. I guarantee you Wal-Mart, Kroger and any chain grocer of any size has plenty of data on SNAP purchases - it could be corralled with more than adequate accuracy in less than a week if anyone was serious about it. You will never convince me that SODA should ever be purchased with SNAP money, and unless you are a WalMart exec with access to real data you will not convince me it is not a significant portion of SNAP spending.

One of the reports above excluded disabled and retired people, without giving any color to how many disabled or retired people make up the whole. Well if you are screwing one system why wouldn't you screw another. Remove the abusive subset and claim no abuse, makes perfect sense to me. On top of the definition of abuse which is as comical as anything.

So yes, keep bashing Dale. Obviously if we don't throw more money at the problem our obese poor will starve to death. Any changes must make life easier for people as their lives are hard enough the way it is. Living in squalor with HSN boxes piled to the ceiling and a goat path from the couch to the fridge is as American as apple pie, but only if that pie is a processed food from Hostess with a 200 year shelf life. We can't be inconvenienced with actual baking!

 

[dales5050]

I agree with the bolded.

Maybe you're just phrasing your posts in a poor manner. Your "coasting" comments really set me off. You've made valid points but you keep going back to the poor abusing the system and again, it's a very low percentage who do that. Does that mean we should just ignore the problem? No, of course not. Which is why I agree with the bolded parts of your post.

I don't see an issue with the use of 'coasting' but if that set you off so be it. I honestly feel that if you're in a situation where you can only get a minimum wage job and you're married with kids...if you're not working more than 40hrs a week and close to 60hrs a week you are coasting.

It's also not just the poor abusing the system but also the system abusing the poor. I understand that you don't want to kick someone when they are down on their luck and trying but the reality is many, if not most, people who are poor are there through poor choices made.

With that being the case, why is it so horrible to say it should be OK to tell these folks they are doing something wrong. That's what a parent would do to their kids. Isn't the government acting like a parent? Paying for food, heat, rent while they get on their feet.

Coasting is equal to doing the same exact thing and expecting different results. Which has been the plan for poverty for the last 60 years. It's insanity.

 

[pkt77242]

Oh progressives sure did get their feathers ruffled.....

First off, I did not inject the notion of abuse to SNAP. I simply said, in reply to people saying others go hungry, that there are programs like SNAP. People like to paint a picture that is as bleak as possible because that's what sells the idea of expanding government and programs.

But when the limited amount of fraud happens it's bad. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/us/food-stamp-fraud-in-the-underground-economy.html

But since your on the subject, the subject of fraud or abuse in studies can only be based on what's allowed or not allowed. For example, there is nothing wrong with a mother of 3 going to the store and spending 100% of her SNAP budget on processed food, soda and candy. Not a single thing wrong with that. However, if you don't find doing so abusive to the system you're a moron.

If we are going to give people a dollar to help them put food on the table, they have the responsibility to make that dollar go as far as they can. But for some reason, it's become bad to think like this. It's even worse to say it in the open. And that's why we can't nice things.

I do my part. I work hard. I give to charity, I volunteer and I help my neighbor. I pay my taxes. I vote.

I am not against SNAP. I am not against Welfare. I am not against the idea of any social program.

I am however against any and all waste, fraud and abuse. I have read the studies and stories that cover both sides and I have seen in first hand. I think people should always get a hand up but I don't think they should be carried. I think people should start taking responsibility for their actions and stop looking for someone else to make their life better.

But most importantly, I think the hammer needs to come down on the folks who are more concerned about feelings of the poor in conversations about poverty than they are with actually solving the never ending cycle of poverty. I am sick of the people who enable poor life choices, that can be avoided, simply because they are uncomfortable with any feeling of having a backbone or personal opinion.

I didn't link the article to discuss the fraud or abuse (though it is very low), I linked the article because it discusses work rates among the people on SNAP and it shows that the majority of able bodied people on SNAP (not children, elderly or disabled) are working and that within a year of receiving SNAP most are working. You seemed to be arguing earlier that poor people are lazy, and I was countering that argument by showing that many are working or want to work.

Also the WSJ article I posted shows the same thing (work rates among people on benefit programs) but also shows how some corporations pass the cost of their employees onto society.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I hope a second place finish accelerates John Kasich's bid for the Presidency. It's amazing to me that we live in a world where Donald Freaking Trump is leading the race for the most important role in the world. I feel like we are in a scene from Idiocracy. Especially when there is a serious, well intentioned, proven leader like Kasich getting ignored.

Who is John Kasich? - CNNPolitics.com

Repubs could do a lot worse. I don't like that he wants to defund PP. I don't like that he tried to take down the unions (unsuccessfully). And I don't like that he's against same sex marriage. Also, wasn't he the one who jumped on the religious test during the whole Syrian refugee story a few months back?

I do like how the Koch brothers don't like him. An enemy to them, is a friend to me.

Kasich was intentionally snubbed by the leadership of AFP. Sources close to both the national organization of AFP and several state AFP chapters told Rare that Kasich was not even invited to address the summit. Not only that, but the same sources said that Kasich tried to purchase a ticket to the event and was denied by AFP. AFP and the Koch Brothers—David Koch chairs AFP’s board of directors—had problems with two of Kasich’s stances: his support of Ohio’s Medicaid expansion under Obamacare and his removal of language from this year’s Ohio budget that would have restricted “project labor agreements.”

The Koch brothers intentionally snubbed John Kasich at their Ohio event last weekend – Rare

 

[RDU Irish]

The Decline of Work - Barron's

This is worth a read for everyone. The stats of people on disability are absolutely incredible. 1/6 people age 55-64 on SSDI is completely absurd. The rise from 1960 to now is astonishing.

Labor force participation is the stat that I think speaks to the "will to work" issue that many of us take issue with. This rhetoric that the world is stacked against you and its not fair is destructive to inspiring people to even try. We also have the issue that being poor in the US is to be wealthy by global standards. Many folks are A-Ok with living in squalor and getting by with the bare minimum effort. Until and unless we exert any social pressure to do better you are not fixing squat.

And you folks getting "offended" by someone's tone on an internet message board make me laugh.

 

[connor_in]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Oh my god fire all of the political commentators and please just let Pop react to all election results from now on <a href="https://t.co/OZqeQbs9MO">https://t.co/OZqeQbs9MO</a></p>— Mark Berman (@markberman) <a href="https://twitter.com/markberman/status/697244918268489729">February 10, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Ndaccountant]

I think I understand your position better. If you don't minimize your bank account over your working career, then you are greatly divorced from the working man.

This means no one outside of that camp can understand them or truly feel what it's like to be them. So by instituting this logic, you've eliminated every candidate from contending for the "common man" title because Bernie was the closest thing we've ever seen, and his is a schtick, impressively devised and followed over the past 20-30 years.

So now he's just a bad capitalist and an average politician. This eliminates his strongest point of relation with the masses and does nothing to harm the other candidates because they all have much higher reported financial assets.

Smart move.


**note: your numbers used were smart by leaving the retirement accounts out of average households, this made the 55 number much more grabby than the 7. I'm guessing you left it out because the pension he receives is likely not included in his reported financial assets so other retirement accounts should be left out? How do you know some of his financial assets aren't in retirement accounts though? Perhaps old Bern knew a 401k, 457b, Roth or other vehicle was a smart way to stow money away, tax-deferred.

Lot of leaps to digest in this post.

The most important one is the bolded. You are right. I believe there is nary a politician in Washington that can truly look into the eyes of middle class voters and say "I am one of you". That is b/c politicians have been divorced from the common man for quite some time. It's sad, but true. Bern very well could be the closest we have had compared to other politicians. But that doesn't mean he is truly close. It just speaks volumes about what politics have become. It's an elitist game and once you are in, you are in.

Finally, as I mentioned in the post last night, I don't think the chart is saying what you think it does. The 55 is correct as it looks at all households, whether they have retirement accounts or not. The 7 would ignore the people that don't have a retirement account.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I don't see an issue with the use of 'coasting' but if that set you off so be it. I honestly feel that if you're in a situation where you can only get a minimum wage job and you're married with kids...if you're not working more than 40hrs a week and close to 60hrs a week you are coasting.

It's also not just the poor abusing the system but also the system abusing the poor. I understand that you don't want to kick someone when they are down on their luck and trying but the reality is many, if not most, people who are poor are there through poor choices made.

With that being the case, why is it so horrible to say it should be OK to tell these folks they are doing something wrong. That's what a parent would do to their kids. Isn't the government acting like a parent? Paying for food, heat, rent while they get on their feet.

Coasting is equal to doing the same exact thing and expecting different results. Which has been the plan for poverty for the last 60 years. It's insanity.

Your claim that the poor coast is just flat out wrong though. That's why I take issue with that phrasing. You may want to read up on how much the working poor are actually working and how difficult it is to find 40 hrs per week, let alone 60 hrs, even while taking on multiple jobs.

 

[GoIrish41]

I have been called ignorant multiple times in this thread for having an opinion and talking about what I have seen first hand on several occasions. I did not start out disrespectful but am simply matching the tone.



On the issue of what's purchase with SNAP. It's not that processed food is the cheapest, which it is, the problem is it's the easiest.

Personally I don't think anyone should go hungry. I would have no problem with SNAP levels being doubled or tripled..hell make it whatever is needed. Provided only good foods are eligible for purchase. Make sure people have enough milk, bread, eggs, meat and most importantly veggies to feed the entire home. But you also need to make sure soda, candy and shitty processed food is not purchased.

This is a very reasonable position but for some reason having it is seen as racist or an attack on the poor. Stating that people take the easy way out, which they do regardless if they are poor or rich, is simply the truth. The difference is I don't care how someone who makes their money spends it but I do care how someone taking assistance spends others money.

The fact that your tax money is being used to help poor people does not give you the right to make decisions about every facet of their lives. Perhaps everyone should eat health food and not junk. You don't get to decide who eats what.

The comment that you made that drew fire from other posters is that poor people on public assistance are "coasting through life." Do some take advantage? Sure they do, just like some billionaires use their vast fortunes to bribe politicians to write laws that benefit them. Are all billionaires evil? Nope. Your broad brush approach to painting all poor people by the actions of a relatively small segment of that group is intellectually dishonest, and offensive to not only poor people, but those who advocate for them.

When PepsiCo, Coca-Cola and Kraft Foods are purchasing policy you have a problem. A real problem. These companies have made sure that feeding your kids a bag of Lays and a liter of Mt Dew is not against the rules. This allows others to say that parents are not doing anything wrong with SNAP.

Now you are getting somewhere. But there are far better examples of corporations using their influence to do far more damaging things to this nation ... things that make poor people on assistance buying Hot Pockets seem pretty trivial. That is certainly not to say that this isn't a problem ... it is. It is just one in a long line of examples of how money in our political system is corrupting every facet of our lives.

If we can't have an honest conversation about what's wrong we're never going to get anything fixed. If every time someone points out the flaws in a system is called out for being a hateful person who wants to starve kids, keep the elderly in the poor house or whatever rhetoric is used to make someone who has it OK to feel bad...you're not going to fix anything.

Honest conversations about poverty usually not begin with insulting, demonizing and stripping the dignity away from a large and growing segment of the population. Such conversations begin with freeing ourselves of our preconceptions and prejudices and really examining the problem from all sides. Understanding what is causing it, why people can't just simply pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work hard and escape it. If it were that simple, we'd have much, much less poverty, so there must be something deeper, more profound that is causing poverty to languish. Only when we understand the nature of the problem can we set out to find practical solutions to help. What you did was to piss people off with your inflammatory and inaccurate statements about the joy ride the poor are on in life, and you immediately ensured that most reasonable people would not even listen to anything else you had to say.

 

[RDU Irish]

I take issue with hiring someone to lead the free world who is not financially successful. Bernie has made a good income for decades, wife apparently had good work too. And they are worth less than $2 million in their mid 70s? Without that pension their standard of living would be cut more than half, so on one hand he didn't NEED to plan as much for himself, on the other hand he really can't relate to what normal people have to plan for.

Rubio is getting slammed for his personal finances - he is the closest person to have an actual understanding of middle class, IMO.


Let me clarify that finances are relative - someone living on $200,000 per year needs a lot more savings to keep up that standard of living than someone who has gotten by on $50,000 per year. Yes that $200k earner COULD live on less, but then so could the $50k earner.

 

[dales5050]

I think everyone should eat nutritious food, and keep junk food out of their diets. But, who am I to say what people can and cannot eat? When people accept public assistance, it does not give us the moral superiority to direct how they live their lives.

Not only is there a moral obligation for people to try and do the best they can when getting a helping hand...there is an oversight.

Frankly, not feeding your kids the proper food is negligent. Not only are you increasing the odds of childhood obesity (which we have a bit of a problem with) but you're also stunting their development. If you're giving soda to your kids at dinner, odds are you're going to mess with their sleeping. Messing with sleep patterns has an impact on their education.

Here are some facts:

• Obesity rates increased by 10 percent for all U.S. children 10- to 17-years old between 2003 and 2007, but by 23 percent during the same time period for low-income children (Singh et al., 2010a).
• This national study of more than 40,000 children also found that in 2007, children from lower income households had more than two times higher odds of being obese than children from higher income households.
• Rates of severe obesity were approximately 1.7 times higher among poor children and adolescents in a nationally representative sample of more than 12,000 children aged 2 to 19 years (Skelton et al., 2009).

Source: Food Research and Action Center

It's not about moral superiority. It's a moral responsibility to help break the cycle.

But if your fear of offending people is greater than your concern for health and education issues of kids...that's pretty pathetic.

 

[RDU Irish]

enabling vs empowering

 

[pkt77242]

ok...ok...ok...I had to ask...Did you have to clean the grease trap in the cafeteria?

Nope. It was during the summer. I trimmed trees, laid sod, painted classroom, laid tile in the classrooms, ran internet cables to the classrooms, did some minor electrical work, and did some work on the swamp coolers (by far the worse part, being on a roof in Phoenix in 110 degree weather for a couple of hours). Nothing in the cafeteria, sorry.

 

[pkt77242]

Can we all agree that Xboxes and cigarettes should be an American birthright and move on to discussing when the bottom feeder Republican are going to drop out - looking at you Carly and Ben. Christie needs a reality check too.

All 3 should be gone. I wish Bush would be gone as well (if he can't do better than 4th in NH, he really should be out) but I doubt he will dropout.

ETA: A race of
Trump
Cruz
Rubio
Kasich

would be ideal going forward.

 

[dales5050]

Your claim that the poor coast is just flat out wrong though. That's why I take issue with that phrasing. You may want to read up on how much the working poor are actually working and how difficult it is to find 40 hrs per week, let alone 60 hrs, even while taking on multiple jobs.

https://www.census.gov/sipp/workpapr/wp119.pdf

Your report and the data in it is from 1984.

 

[GoIrish41]

All 3 should be gone. I wish Bush would be gone as well (if he can't do better than 4th in NH, he really should be out) but I doubt he will dropout.

ETA: A race of
Trump
Cruz
Rubio
Kasich

would be ideal going forward.

Glad to see Kasich still in the race. I was beginning to believe that there wouldn't be any adults in the room moving forward. He's going to have to conjure up a miracle to win the nomination, but at least there is still hope. As for the bottom feeders ... Jeb, Christie, Carly, Ben please clean out your lockers. At this point, you are just embarrassing yourselves.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Your report and the data in it is from 1984.

Oh sorry. That's my bad. The link I meant to post seems to be subscription only. I'll try and find something else. Point still remains, the working poor are working, not coasting.

 

[pkt77242]

Not only is there a moral obligation for people to try and do the best they can when getting a helping hand...there is an oversight.

Frankly, not feeding your kids the proper food is negligent. Not only are you increasing the odds of childhood obesity (which we have a bit of a problem with) but you're also stunting their development. If you're giving soda to your kids at dinner, odds are you're going to mess with their sleeping. Messing with sleep patterns has an impact on their education.

Here are some facts:

• Obesity rates increased by 10 percent for all U.S. children 10- to 17-years old between 2003 and 2007, but by 23 percent during the same time period for low-income children (Singh et al., 2010a).
• This national study of more than 40,000 children also found that in 2007, children from lower income households had more than two times higher odds of being obese than children from higher income households.
• Rates of severe obesity were approximately 1.7 times higher among poor children and adolescents in a nationally representative sample of more than 12,000 children aged 2 to 19 years (Skelton et al., 2009).

Source: Food Research and Action Center

It's not about moral superiority. It's a moral responsibility to help break the cycle.

But if your fear of offending people is greater than your concern for health and education issues of kids...that's pretty pathetic.

I agree that healthy food is important but the problem is stretching the money to cover healthy food. I have to admit buying vegetables can be damn expensive (and I rarely buy organic ones) and when you are on a tight budget, I can understand buying processed foods. I do agree that Soda shouldn't be on the list of purchases though, as there is no reason for it.

 

[ACamp1900]

I agree that healthy food is important but the problem is stretching the money to cover healthy food. I have to admit buying vegetables can be damn expensive (and I rarely buy organic ones) and when you are on a tight budget, I can understand buying processed foods. I do agree that Soda shouldn't be on the list of purchases though, as there is no reason for it.

Coca Cola bought off their politicians just like all the others... fair is fair...

 

[wizards8507]

All 3 should be gone. I wish Bush would be gone as well (if he can't do better than 4th in NH, he really should be out) but I doubt he will dropout.

ETA: A race of
Trump
Cruz
Rubio
Kasich

would be ideal going forward.

That's a recipe for Trump victory. Trump loses a two-man race but wins a four-man race. In a three-man race, it probably depends on who the other two candidates are.

 

[RDU Irish]

All 3 should be gone. I wish Bush would be gone as well (if he can't do better than 4th in NH, he really should be out) but I doubt he will dropout.

ETA: A race of
Trump
Cruz
Rubio
Kasich

would be ideal going forward.

Agree completely - Bush is cannibalizing Kasich big time, money and votes. The governor ticket needs to consolidate. In the four above I think Kasich would pick up a vast majority of the Christie and Bush support. Fiorina probably goes to Trump and Cruz. Carson is hard to predict since it has to be more of a protest vote than anything. Consolidation benefits Kasich and Rubio the most I think.

As for a Trump recipe, Bush + Christie + Kasich = a third of the vote - Kasich is the only one I see able to consolidate that entire group. The question becomes where Rubio/Fiorina/Carson supporters run to as they die on the vine. If the Fiorina/Carson supporters go non-establishment primarily Kasich loses - hard to predict where those folks migrate to.

Rubio will be interesting - he is great option for VP for a lot of reasons. Seems to have lost luster as a POTUS candidate but has to be tops of Cruz or Kasich lists for VP. Trump would tell him to pound sand. Making an early deal with Cruz or Kasich could be a route to beat Trump and bump one of those guys to the front.

Jeb just needs to hang it up. Is he just sticking in there out of guilt, intent on spending all the money he raised? Maybe the thought is controlling 5% - 10% of delegates might be needed to beat out Trump? Kind of a contingency plan (damned expensive one at that).

 

[pkt77242]

That's a recipe for Trump victory. Trump loses a two-man race but wins a four-man race. In a three-man race, it probably depends on who the other two candidates are.

I think you would see further consolidation down the line but all 4 have a top 3 finish from Iowa/NH so they should get a few more states before more drop out.

 

[pkt77242]

Agree completely - Bush is cannibalizing Kasich big time, money and votes. The governor ticket needs to consolidate. In the four above I think Kasich would pick up a vast majority of the Christie and Bush support. Fiorina probably goes to Trump and Cruz. Carson is hard to predict since it has to be more of a protest vote than anything. Consolidation benefits Kasich and Rubio the most I think.

This was posted last night on fivethirtyeight's live blog.
New Hampshire Primary: Live Coverage | FiveThirtyEight

Who Benefits If Carson And Fiorina Drop Out?

Fiorina and Carson are projected to finish a distant seventh and eighth, respectively, in New Hampshire. Despite their poor finish today, they have the support between them of about one in nine Republican voters nationally: In our latest national polling average, Fiorina had 2.5 percent and Carson 8.3 percent. So what happens if they drop out of the race? Cruz probably would benefit more than Trump would.

The online pollsters at Morning Consult added up results from January polls it conducted among 5,456 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents nationally, asking for their first and second choices among the candidates. So far Morning Consult has published second-choice data for supporters of candidates who have already dropped out. They shared with us the data for Carson and Fiorina. Among Carson supporters, 24 percent had Cruz as their second choice, 19 percent named Trump and 10 percent named Rubio. Fiorina had far fewer supporters, but they might be higher leverage: 23 percent said they supported Rubio, 14 percent named Cruz and 5 percent named Trump. (Another 18 percent named Carson, and in this scenario those supporters would need to go to their third choice, or maybe skip voting.) Of course, these polls preceded the votes in Iowa and New Hampshire, and voters’ second choices could be even more volatile than their first choices are.

I agree that Bush and Christie supporters would mostly go to Kasich and Rubio.

 

[Irish#1]

Socialism is built on sharing and a sense of morality. A socialist doesn't dine on caviar on his luxury liner in the Caribbean while his neighbor and his children are going without food, wearing shoes and clothing with holes, and dying of illnesses that can be treated with proper medical care. That is the product of capitalism. Capitalism is built upon greed. I've got mine. Too bad you don't have anything. Oh, well! Not my problem.

Socialism never works, because those in charge don't abide by the same rules. Those at the top live better then the others.

 

[RDU Irish]

Interesting, but that adds up to 53% of the Carson supporters and 42% of Fiorina (60% if Carson included). Also well before Iowa and NH so always interesting to see how sentiment changes with the field narrowing. It does seem to disprove the notion that Trump has peaked (which surprises me a bit).

 

[GoIrish41]

Socialism never works, because those in charge don't abide by the same rules. Those at the top live better then the others.

Aren't those dynamics what we have in play today, without Socialism?