On what do you base this?
Because people who support Booker for president would be likely to support Booker for senate.
Next question will be asking you to independently confirm this as true.
In the span of one post, you went from
It would be less farcical if you were just be honest and say you like Trump instead of trying to distance yourself from him while at the same time criticizing his rivals for things he's a thousand times worse about.
You should really be charging turbo rent for that four bedroom three bath he lives in on your head
I've been mulling this over for several months now. Figure now is as good a time as any to tell you. Fairly certain you're an overweight closeted lesbian. Feel free to convince me otherwise.
I think it's inevitable in a large system with major democratic elements. Most voters won't do their research, since there is no consequence on an individual level for getting the wrong answer (one vote never decides an election of that scale). If you imagine a system in which all voters 1) voted only on policy 2) had well-defined policy preferences 3) had all the time and other resources necessary to research all candidates 4) believed their vote would be decisive, there would be no need for big campaign spending. Because voters are in fact very ignorant, don't have consistent preferences, don't only vote on policy, and think voting is a "duty" even if they haven't done their research, the whole project devolves into a PR battle, which is expensive.
