I told you so.

I did recently see a poll that said most voters, all ages together, were not turned off by the word “socialism.” If “socialism” means working on a kolkhoz, of course nobody wants it. If it means a paycheck that keeps you under a roof, or the ability to go to a doctor when you’re sick, that doesn’t sound so bad. Real socialism sucks. Plutocrats have not done themselves or the English language any favor by defining any type of social safety net (except, nowadays, those for decrepit white folks) as “socialism.” Working-class people are not terrified of safety nets.

Maybe that is because they are mental defectives, as you suggest, or maybe because it is because they view Clinton as too corrupt, dishonest, arrogant, and secretive to be a good president. Or maybe they are afraid that if she gets indicted in October, even her election would be followed immediately by an impeachment effort.

And I keep trying to explain that while Sanders (unlike Clinton) represents a left-wing liberal viewpoint, many of his voters do not. They represent America’s increasingly desperate and hopeless working class, a group in whom Clinton has not had much interest historically.

“Milleniums like socialism– until they get jobs.”

Pretty much cover the bases.

I know it isn’t going to have any effect on your understanding, but for those logical types among us, and to illustrate how pointless looking at these early polls is…

People who would vote for Sanders supposedly represent the very left, liberal viewpoint.

According to this poll, some of those people who would vote for Sanders against Kasich would completely turn around and vote for Kasich, who is extremely right-wing, against Clinton.

Either those people are lying, or are very stupid, or acting under the influence of some kind of mental/personality/cognitive disorder.

In deciding who the best nominee would be, this kind of “voter” is just random noise– there is no predictive value in this data.

Now that would be an interesting research project.

But I have to give the R’s credit– it is probably a pretty cost-effective way to achieve voter suppression without all the bad publicity.

Zebra – I said a while ago that Kasich was the GOP’s best candidate left, which at the time you didn’t like. I agree that, since he’s also establishment, Hillary could be the safer choice against him. However, he’s a very distant third and had almost no hope of being nominated even before Drumpf started saying his followers would riot if he wasn’t nominated – then advising his followers to pack heat. The GOP is in a very ugly and dangerous predicament now (and yes, they got themselves there, and it’s tempting to wallow in Schadenfreude except for the fact that the rest of us may end up getting what they deserve).