I don't recall, but it wasn't terribly low. 40s maybe? I have strong disagreements about national security and legislation of morals that separate me from Rubio. Likewise, I won't vote for Sanders because I believe he's being intellectually dishonest with the American people.

What is Sanders being intellectually dishonest about?

---

I don't recall, but it wasn't terribly low. 40s maybe? I have strong disagreements about national security and legislation of morals that separate me from Rubio. Likewise, I won't vote for Sanders because I believe he's being intellectually dishonest with the American people.

 

That's a low enough % to indicate at least from my perspective that the current version of the survey is a much better indicator of candidacy preference than the earlier version.   A major exception is regarding Donald Trump because of the trust factor.

---

What is Sanders being intellectually dishonest about?

For one, he has a lot of pie in the sky ideas and no idea how to pay for them aside from raising taxes. Two, his anti-NSA grandstanding is replaced by his thought-policing us by promoting movements like black lives matter and demonizing the thoughts--not just the illegal actions--of the Kentucky twit, whatever her name was. He preaches a utopian environment in which we all hold hands, sing Kumbaya and get free college educations so we can all go off and be hundred-thousandaires. The cold reality that he knows and refuses to address is that he has zero chance of getting this stuff passed, which means he'll have to either fall far short on his election promises or abuse executive orders to a level far beyond Obama. Probably both.

 

Long story short, he's talking a huge game, but he doesn't even know how to get out of the first quarter yet. He's only talking about seemingly utopian ideas, not how he's going to make them happen.

---

80% cruz


77% Gary Johnson


Everyone else less than 60%

---

For one, he has a lot of pie in the sky ideas and no idea how to pay for them aside from raising taxes. Two, his anti-NSA grandstanding is replaced by his thought-policing us by promoting movements like black lives matter and demonizing the thoughts--not just the illegal actions--of the Kentucky twit, whatever her name was. He preaches a utopian environment in which we all hold hands, sing Kumbaya and get free college educations so we can all go off and be hundred-thousandaires. The cold reality that he knows and refuses to address is that he has zero chance of getting this stuff passed, which means he'll have to either fall far short on his election promises or abuse executive orders to a level far beyond Obama. Probably both.


Long story short, he's talking a huge game, but he doesn't even know how to get out of the first quarter yet. He's only talking about seemingly utopian ideas, not how he's going to make them happen.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://m.imgur.com/drfyv82'>http://m.imgur.com/drfyv82</a>


As you can see, the vast majority of Americans will not have their taxes raised.


The thought policing comment doesn't warrant addressing.


Congress is broken. When the Millenials see the contest between Congress and Old Man Sanders, I think you know who they will be behind.

---

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://m.imgur.com/drfyv82'>http://m.imgur.com/drfyv82</a>


As you can see, the vast majority of Americans will not have their taxes raised.


The thought policing comment doesn't warrant addressing.


Congress is broken. When the Millenials see the contest between Congress and Old Man Sanders, I think you know who they will be behind.

 

Yep, the new generation of the Free [BLEEP] Army.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

The thought policing comment doesn't warrant addressing.

Why not? The topic of disbanding the NSA comes up plenty. Why shouldn't we talk about a guy who wants to replace the NSA with institutionalized peer-pressure and legislation designed to attack thoughts, not actions?

---

Why not? The topic of disbanding the NSA comes up plenty. Why shouldn't we talk about a guy who wants to replace the NSA with institutionalized peer-pressure and legislation designed to attack thoughts, not actions?

Ok, so what are you talking about exactly?

---

Why not? The topic of disbanding the NSA comes up plenty. 

 

It does?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Ok, so what are you talking about exactly?

Did you read my post?

 

It does?

Well, I mean, now that Rand's gone...

---

Did you read my post?


Well, I mean, now that Rand's gone...

Sure did. The question remains. Are you talking about anything specific or are those just vague fears of the unknown?

---

Sure did. The question remains. Are you talking about anything specific or are those just vague fears of the unknown?

"Do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?"

"BLACK. LIVES. MATTER."

---

"Do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?"

"BLACK. LIVES. MATTER."

 

That's a pretty stupid question honestly.  It's as a redditor said:


 

 

Imagine that you’re sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don’t get any. So you say “I should get my fair share.” And as a direct response to this, your dad corrects you, saying, “everyone should get their fair share.” Now, that’s a wonderful sentiment — indeed, everyone should, and that was kinda your point in the first place: that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share also. However, dad’s smart-[BLEEP] comment just dismissed you and didn’t solve the problem that you still haven’t gotten any!

<p style="font-family:'Roboto Slab';font-size:19px;color:rgb(46,46,48);">The problem is that the statement “I should get my fair share” had an implicit “too” at the end: “I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else.” But your dad’s response treated your statement as though you meant “only I should get my fair share”, which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that “everyone should get their fair share,” while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

As my dad said, the fair comes once a year.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

"Do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?"

"BLACK. LIVES. MATTER."

You've lost me. You don't like Bernie because a meme?

---

As my dad said, the fair comes once a year.

When my kids say that's not fair they repeat my response since they where knee high, were not socialist life isn't fair deal with it.

---

http://www.isidewith.com


Took this quiz I got 97% like Trump. Which kinda surprised me it was that much. My bottom choice was 51% like Sanders.

 

You know if you take the quiz seriously and expand the questions and click on more it actually gets a really accurate guess of who you are going to elect (or who you should) in this election.


I got Donald Trump 91%

Dr. Carson 84%  (I actually liked Carson the most for the last year but he hasn't done great in debates so leaning more towards Trump now)

Ted Cruz 81% (I liked Cruz but his lack of class and untrustworthy and dirty politics towards Dr. Ben Carson and Trump has me now not wanting to vote for him.

Rubio 72%  (He says he's against illegal immigration which is why it is probably so high but he said that before to get elected to the Senate only to turn his back on the people that voted for him.  Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.. well no shame on me because I didnt vote for him.

---

99% Trump.

---