Whose shoes are you looking for, runner?

If successful communities have shared value systems, this looks to me like a demonstration of the opposite. Those who can afford to leave do so. Those who can't have to continue under dire situations that have continued for at least - how long has it been since people put rocks on their sidewalks? But it still looks as if those who can afford to leave seek the source of their troubles outside their state borders instead of the local politicians who determine local policies.

It's just another reason for me to discard the candidate this community endorses. If they're not running from earthquakes or fires, they're fleeing the needles that sparkle like dew in the grass and calling on those who can't get away from these dangers to vote for a candidate they themselves don't believe in. (The celebration of the choice of his second makes it more than explicit who exactly is running against whom.)

The party in question had a chance to choose as their candidate the person who's now in the second seat. Now that their first choice looks less viable, this seems like an attempt to remedy a serious case of buyer's remorse. It should be an interesting situation when debates come up, considering one person at those debates won't quite be the name the voters look for on the ballot.

Unrelated thoughts -

How many guys have found their way into my feed because they decided to throw a tantrum when an Asian chick tells them no? Methinks they're watching too many PI flyboy reruns.

And thanks for that reflection, but I'm relatively certain it's understandable should one choose to keep a weather eye out on these situations nevertheless.