I still don't (and won't) believe the bloviating ignoramus will be the Republican nominee. Whether his shtick grows old, or he is forced to spend his own money and decides not to, or the rest of the field coalesces around someone, I don't know. The Democrats have a much harder choice: socialist or felon. Good luck with that.
An interesting comparison for you: The bloviating ignoramus got about 93,000 votes in NH. The felon about 89,000.
Here's what I don't understand about this election: the major issues pushed by the socialist, the felon and the bloviating ignoramus are, to me, not even on the list of things I care about. I don't care about immigration. More immigration is better for the country than less immigration, but if everyone else wants to build a wall to make prices higher, go ahead. Won't hurt me that much. I don't care about income inequality. The blathering about income inequality doesn't rise to the level of debate or conversation. It's filled with statistical errors, intellectual errors and demagoguery. I don't care about Citizen's United or Super Pacs. Jeb Bush wants to spend $100 million on a failed campaign? Why do I care. Besides, if anything, the socialist's popularity shows money ISN'T driving election results.
Almost everything the socialist, felon and bloviating ignoramus propose will harm the groups they claim to care most about. Walls, restricting trade, taxes on oil, banks, and the wealthy will raise prices, reduce choice, reduce income and reduce growth. And the group hurt most will be the lower income, less educated. You like to tell me the game is fixed. I almost agree. It is fixed to hurt the poor, but the fix is a result of policies put in place with the proposed purpose of helping the poor. The socialist and the bloviating ignoramus have it completely backwards.
Meanwhile, the real world recently slapped my second child in the face. He was complaining about his FICA taxes and having to support old people. Bummer dude. His candidate? The socialist, of course.
Thank God for gridlock.