The ever-expanding Republican presidential field, which threatens to splinter over social issues as dark horses grab hot-button topics for attention, is being urged to stick to the economy where the real pot of voter gold sits.
"Concern over the economy is the highest I've ever seen," top GOP pollster Ed Goeas told the moderate Republican Ripon Society. He said 72 percent are worried about an economic downturn.
"Republicans need to get into the game on better turf and that means talking in specifics about how we will bring the economy back and help create the jobs that go with real recovery," added pollster David Winston.
The exit polls from the 2012 and 2008 primaries and caucuses back them up, and show that the candidate who was considered by voters to be best on the economy usually won that state's contest.
According to Winston, the economy was the top voter concern in 45 of 46 primaries and caucuses. The only exception was the 2008 Iowa caucus when illegal immigration trumped the economy, 33 percent to 26 percent.
Typically, during both elections, issues like immigration and abortion were minor blips. And social issues don't dominate southern contests. In 2012, for example, the states of Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma, Maryland and Wisconsin had the highest concerns about abortion, well above that among the voters of South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.
Comment: A 1984 EPA report stated there was "a detrimental link between radiation and immunity, including negative changes in blood count, immunity and overall health among animals exposed to radio waves." In 1992, the EPA stated "We are not sure if EMF exposure adversely affects human health. "[S]ome studies...suggest a potential relationship between exposure to EMFs and certain cancers. [...] While admitting ELF and magnetic fields affect various activities of cells and there are examples of correlation and results, it is 'unclear' to the EPA that the effects would be harmful or whether they are minor changes that our bodies could adjust to. The bottom line is there is no established cause and effect relationship between EMF exposure and cancer or other disease." The whole EPA report is a copout. Every question was hedged neutral with guarded language, an impression the agency was under someone's hammer.
Latest wiggle is that "EMF is a 'promoter,' and not an 'initiator'...rather it fosters its (tumor) growth and development." In spite of findings that "those exposed to the highest magnetic fields were likely to develop the most aggressive types of brain tumors (grade III or IV astrocytoma, also known as glioblastoma multiform) [...] the new finding will help sidestep the most often cited objection to the idea that magnetic fields are linked to cancer because no EMF-induced DNA breaks would be required." (Do we see the heavy hand of health insurance, big pharma and the utility industry in this one?)