"Are you a fan of Scott Walker? If so, you might want to avert your eyes from this chart":

Since February, Walker has gone from the front-runner in the state's first-in-the-nation caucuses to an also-ran. In a new Quinnipiac poll out of Iowa released Friday morning, Walker took a meager 3 percent of the vote -- which puts him in 10th place. TENTH!

This was an enjoyable read:

There are many, many reasons to abhor Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, but there’s at least one reason to appreciate it, for now: his constant and merciless trolling of Jeb Bush that is currently tanking Bush’s shot at the presidency. In some sense, Trump is doing democracy a service by helping ensure we will not have to suffer the embarrassment of having a third Bush family member as president within two decades.

Trump’s penchant for insulting anyone in his path is now well-known (and often deplorable and sexist), though most candidates usually have to deliberately poke the bear for Trump to engage in his usual charade. But just about every day, Trump will go after Jeb unprompted – whether on Twitter or at campaign events or in interviews with journalists – with a voracity virtually never seen in primary politics. Oftentimes it’s substantive and other times it’s not, but it’s almost always delightful to watch.

Trump will attack Jeb for his support for the Iraq War, but if Bush lightly criticizes George W Bush, Trump questions why he would throw his brother under the bus. Trump attacks Jeb for his record in Florida, rips him for his $1.3m “no show job” at Lehman Brothers after he left the governorship. He calls Jeb out for being “100% CONTROLLED” by his wealthy donors, and when a few donors recently left Jeb’s campaign, Trump made fun of him for that too.
...
During a recent 35-minute interview with the Washington Post, Trump criticized Jeb and the two other Bush presidents a total of 33 times (which the Post helpfully documented in a separate article). As one anonymous Trump associate told the Post, Trump is “driven and he has two goals: one, to be elected president, and two, to have Jeb not be president.” The former remains a terrifying prospect, but the latter is something a lot people can get behind.

I added the bolding just because I especially liked those parts.

voted 93% of the time with the Obama administration. When Sanders and Clinton were both in the Senate they voted the same 93% of the time.

That makes Sanders more of a Democrat than Democratic Sen. Manchin, Heitkamp, Donnelly, King, and Tester.

I cherish Democratic Sen. Manchin, Heitkamp, Donnelly, King, and Tester so don't think I'm trying to criticize them, but Sanders supports Democratic legislation and the Obama administration more than many with the party label "Democrat" and so, to me, actions and votes speak louder than labels.

Do you feel otherwise?

If so, you should probably ask yourself why.

I'm in the Sanders camp and not a Clinton supporter, but it bugs me when pundits suggest that her campaign is collapsing -- Bush's campaign is collapsing, Walker's campaign is collapsing, Perry's campaign has collapsed -- Clinton is still the favorite, she still has the overwhelming superabundance of endorsements, she has the campaign infrastructure, she has almost limitless funds, she has a very high approval rating and low disapproval rating among Democrats, etc.

Notwithstanding the fact that Clinton's campaign is experiencing a normal downward correction and not a collapse as some mischaracterize it, here is some interesting analysis (mostly notable for how the Bush campaign has fallen of the rails):

It wasn't that long ago that the pundits had the 2016 presidential contest pegged as a Clinton-Bush match-up. While that may still occur, I wouldn't place a bet on it.
...
On the Republican side, Jeb Bush and the rest of the GOP field of governors and senators ran smack into two non-politicians who, in most polls, are far and away leading the pack. Donald Trump, billionaire showman, and Ben Carson, neurosurgeon, are currently capturing the support of about one-half of Republican voters. Meanwhile, Bush is polling in the mid-single digits.

Just how disturbed the GOP base has become was in evidence after the last debate. At its conclusion, the consensus among the pundits was that Trump had performed not only poorly but badly and that Carson had been present/absent. But in the weeks following the debate, Trump's lead grew and Carson significantly increased his polling numbers, while the candidates favored by the GOP establishment (Bush, Marco Rubio and Scott Walker) lost ground. Too many Republican voters, it appears, are mad at, fed up with and just don't trust politicians.
...
For those who thought that Jeb was the "smart one" -- the Bush who should have been president -- his lackluster performance, to date, has been disappointing. He has repeatedly stumbled when confronted with both tough and easy questions. His supporters were baffled by his failure to have a quick and ready response to questions about his position on the Iraq war. After all, it was started by his brother over 12 years ago and was one of the most consequential foreign policy events of this century. His bungled response was inexcusable.

Source: The Huffington Post

Carly Fiorina will join 10 of her fellow GOP presidential candidates during next week's CNN debate, the cable network announced Thursday.

Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee, Rand Paul, John Kasich and Chris Christie will also participate in the Sept. 16 debate in Simi Valley, California.

CNN revised the criteria it used to select which candidates would qualify for the debate after complaints from Fiorina's camp following her strong performance at Fox's early debate on Aug. 6. ...

The network will also hold an earlier forum for the candidates trailing in the polls: Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, George Pataki and Lindsey Graham. Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore did not meet CNN's polling threshold to participate in either debate.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/carly-fiorina-cnn-debate_55f21e57e4b03784e278bfed?jtjzto6r

---

How is poor Trump going to withstand looking at her face?

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton's lead in the race for the Democratic nomination has fallen to just 10 points, and at the same time, her advantage in hypothetical general election matchups against the top Republican contenders has vanished, a new CNN/ORC poll has found.

The new poll finds Clinton with 37% support among Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, down 10 points since August, followed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders at 27% and Vice President Joe Biden at 20%. Sanders' support is about the same as it was in August, making Biden the only candidate to post significant gains in the last month. His support is up 6 points in the last month as he weighs making a run for the presidency.
...
The shift away from the former secretary of state stems from shrinking support among women. Clinton's advantage among women has disappeared in matchups against Bush and Carson. Facing Trump, Clinton still carries women by a large, though tighter, margin. In August, 60% of women favored Clinton to 37% for Trump, but that's narrowed slightly to 55% Clinton, 41% Trump now. Clinton's advantage among women against Trump is fueled by independent women, despite that group shifting away from Clinton in the head-to-head against Bush.

The poll suggests Republican women have consolidated their support around their party's front-runners in the last month, and are now more apt to back both Bush and Trump than they were a month ago. At the same time, the near-universal support for Clinton among Democratic women has softened slightly, bringing it more in-line with her support among Democratic men.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/hillary-clinton-poll-women/

Source: The State

A Public Policy Polling survey found Donald Trump would win 37 percent of the vote from S.C. Republicans and Ben Carson would pick up 21 percent. ... When asked about the state’s own “favorite son,” U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, nearly four out of five S.C. GOP primary voters said the Seneca Republican should drop out of the presidential race.
...

GOP presidential primary

37 percent: Donald Trump

21 percent: Ben Carson

6 percent: Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas

4 percent: Carly Fiorina, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida

3 percent: U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham of Seneca, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

2 percent: Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania

1 percent: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry

Not registering: Former New York Gov. George Pataki, former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore

Democratic presidential primary

54 percent: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

24 percent: Vice President Joe Biden

9 percent: U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont

2 percent: Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, former U.S. Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia

1 percent: Former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee


Read more: http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article34403052.html

---

Sucks to be Lindsey Graham

Biden has been a great VP, but he's been wrong on several key issues:

* eviscerating consumer bankruptcy protections
* banking deregulation
* mandatory harsh sentences for drug possession crimes
* the Iraq war vote
* the Clarence Thomas confirmation

When the MSM touts a Biden candidacy, it is because it helps the news/punditry industry generate content for sale, not because it would help the Democrats nominate or elect a better candidate or president.

Excerpts from some great analysis:

A lot of people are linking the candidacies of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump under headings like “populist” and “anti-establishment.” Most of these comparisons are too cute for their own good — not only because it’s too early to come to many conclusions about the campaign, but also because Trump and Sanders are fundamentally different breeds of candidates who are situated very differently in their respective nomination races.

You can call both “outsiders.” But if you’re a Democrat, Sanders is your eccentric uncle: He has his own quirks, but he’s part of the family. If you’re a Republican, Trump is as familial as the vacuum salesman knocking on your door.
...
Sanders is campaigning on substantive policy positions, and Trump is largely campaigning on the force of his personality. I’m not sure this assertion requires a lot of proof, but if you need some, check out the candidates’ websites. Sanders’s lists dozens of specific policy proposals across a wide range of issues; Trump’s details his position on just one, immigration.
...
Sanders has a much better “ground game.” Trump, in addition to his ubiquity on television, has some semblance of a campaign operation. But Sanders’s organization is much larger and more experienced.
...
Sanders holds policy positions of a typical liberal Democrat; Trump’s are all over the place. While Sanders doesn’t officially call himself a Democrat — a fact that might annoy Democratic elites — he takes policy positions that are consistent with those of Democrats in Congress. In the previous Congress (113th), Sanders voted the same as liberal Democratic senators Barbara Boxer, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand and Sherrod Brown 95 percent of the time or more.1 He voted with party leader Harry Reid 91 percent of the time and the expressed position of President Obama2 93 percent of the time. He also voted with Clinton 93 percent of the time when the two were in the Senate together.
...
Sanders’s candidacy has clear historical precedents; they’re less obvious for Trump. Even the most formidable-seeming front-runners haven’t won their nominations without some semblance of a fight. Clinton’s position relative to Sanders is analogous to the one Al Gore held against Bill Bradley in the 2000 Democratic primary. Sanders’s campaign also has parallels to liberal stalwarts from Howard Dean to Eugene McCarthy; these candidates can have an impact on the race, but they usually don’t win the nomination.

Trump has some commonalities also: to “bandwagon” candidates like Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain; to media-savvy, factional candidates like Pat Buchanan; and to self-funded candidates like Steve Forbes. None of those candidates, however, was as openly hostile to their party as Trump is with Republicans.

NOTE!:

The headline of this article buries the message. The key quote providing context for this headline is "I’d put each of their chances at about 5 percent."

Walk away point: Trump and Carson have about the same chance of winning the Republican nomination, and that chance is a snowball's chance in hell.





Nate Silver:

Carson is a little bit different from the “flavor-of-the-month” candidates from 2011. At least in terms of his demeanor, he’s much less bombastic than someone like Gingrich or Bachmann. And he has a much more compelling life story — it’s not an exaggeration to say it’s a heroic life story. ...I guess I’d put each of their chances at about 5 percent....Obviously, Carson has much higher favorables {than Trump}. He also has policy positions that are much more in line with the GOP mainstream. So, you can imagine a universe in which GOP elites grudgingly tolerate Carson, even if he’s not their first (or second or third or sixth) choice, whereas they’ll do everything in their power to make sure that Trump is not the nominee.

On the other hand, Trump has survived quite a bit more scrutiny so far. Not very much scrutiny as compared to what he’ll face between now and February. But some of it, certainly, and much more than Carson.... We’ve talked before about whether Trump fits into the template of a bandwagon candidate (like Newt Gingrich or Cain) or a factional candidate (like Pat Buchanan). The answer could be: both?
...
I agree that the most likely outcome is some establishment-ish candidate — Bush, Rubio, Kasich, Walker — gaining momentum at the right time and winning the nomination. It’s still very early — too early to be paying much attention to polls. And if you do want to look at polls, Rubio and Walker have very high favorability ratings, which speaks against the notion that GOP voters are rejecting establishment choices wholesale.

But I also don’t think we should be all “LOL, brokered convention.” It’s not that far-fetched this year, as compared to most years in the past.

Harry Enten:

Let me point out one other big difference between Carson and Trump. Carson’s favorable rating in the latest Monmouth University poll was 67 percent. His unfavorable rating was just 6 percent. Trump, even with improving favorables, was at a 59-29 split....Ben Carson {is more likely than Trump to win the nomination}, and I’m not sure there is much doubt in my mind. Reasons include:

He’s better-liked by Republican voters, at least at this point.
He’s better-liked by party actors. He has a much more presidential demeanor than Trump. He also happens to be African-American at a time the GOP wants to reach out to black voters.
This isn’t to say he is anything more than a long shot, but he’s a trip to the West Coast while Trump is a trip to the moon.