On Bernie... and Trump (of course)
From the comments:
"Bernie won Michigan by nearly 19,000 votes even though Nate Silver gave him a 6% chance of winning tonight."
Well, polls suck nowadays, so it's not all that surprising that we see a 19% swing in a Democratic primary. Trump has had about equal that happen in a number of states during this election cycle.
Since the delegates are awarded proportionally, Bernie wins 65 delegates and Hillary wins 58 with 17 delegates yet to be awarded. Kick back and enjoy the ride. Hillary is running out of former Confederate States to save her campaign...
You should realize that these are African-Americans that are the reason why Clinton is winning in these states? ie, the KKK voters, perhaps still Democrats too, are crossing over and voting for Trump.
Trump has a great coalition of losers going on, which does include those ignorant enough to view a color of skin as a substantive difference. Besides the prejudiced, he has the shallow and the crazy. TPM has a couple of articles here and here highlighting this latter group of voters, who I like to think of as having an 'anarchist' flavor of participation. The crazy ones are the driving force behind Trump, and just want to blow up the system. The shallow are just brand-leechers, who want to cling to something bigger than themselves; they show up to vote. This is an important distinction.
Here's a quote from "RollTideRoll" commenter from some rightwing blog I'd rather not remember, reflecting on Trump having a negative view by nearly 70% of voters in the GE:
"This poll means nothing. Obviously, the people who keep turning out to vote for Trump in mass numbers do not view him unfavorably. Both McCain and Romney were viewed favorably, what did that get them?"
That's not an anarchist, but one from the shallow bucket. I've interacted with a few of these people online in comments, and it's always the same. They are offended when confronted, and quickly cocoon themselves. They are not the prime movers, like the anarachist ones. Consumers first, they are buyers of whatever Trump is selling (and this includes goods in the future). They are the ones you see if the funny interviews being read quotes from Hitler, and attributed to Trump, to which they therefore agree.
Those on the side of anarchy are neither shallow nor entirely without reason. I mean, it's pretty obvious that what we have going on is neither sustainable or smart, and a drastic change is needed. Trump is just a vehicle for those that want to say "none of the above" in a not so polite manner. They haven't thought it through, in fact they don't want too, and that is their ultimate fault. Many of them view this as a patriotic task, but they are blind to how their loyalty is being manipulated. The usual bag of tricks here, the 'other' that's changing the way or order.
An authoritarian needs people to blow up shit, destablize things, and create the vacuum in which they step in to make order. Trump plays into this with high words that mean nothing, what he's selling, on the domestic side and anger, what he's projecting, toward the other, outside the border.
Now, about Bernie (Drumph just leeches into everything nowadays). Sanders got the same number of delegates in Michigan. It was a terrific moral victory.
It's not actually his fault that he loses in Dixie. The voters there, as a block, recognize that Hillary got behind Barack in '08 with unfaulting support, and they have her back for it now. It's a sense of loyalty that she earned with them.
Will Bernie win any of the next-Tuesday states?
Florida? No. Missouri? No. Illinois? No. North Carolina? No. Ohio? No. He could probably go hang out in Wisconsin for three weeks and win there, but if the above is correct, he should recognize it as over and suspend his campaign. Will he? Unlikely.
What Sanders should do is make it a crusade to get rid of the superdelegate system.
I am very interested if Trump can somehow be stopped from gaining the Republican nomination with a convention fight. Otherwise, it's just a waste of time, as Clinton will easily defeat Trump in the GE (and if not... I cannot fathom that possibility). Can Trump be stopped still from the Republican nomination? Yes, there are a couple of ways still. Let me list them:
1) Rubio wins Florida and Kasich wins Ohio. This seems slim, but possible. Without them, Trump needs over 60% of the remaining delegates, which will not happen.
2) Trump wins Florida, but Kasish wins Ohio. This actually seems the most likely. Trump would need 51% of the remaining, which he is not likely to get. More to the point, Rubio would drop out, and the Kasich would come to the fore in a three-way.
3) Trump wins Florida and Ohio, leaving it him vs Cruz. Trump needs 48% of the remaining, and the GOPe has to get behind Cruz to defeat Trump. If you wanted to write a more fantastic karmic deal for the GOPe, I don't know what you could come up with that tops this faustian bargain.
I'm guessing number 2 happens, but either of the others are possible. If it is that, then Kasich could go on a roll after Ohio, winning Wisconsin, California, New York, New Jersey, the eastern states. The fever might break and the Republican party may save itself from those wanting to blow it up. I wouldn't bank on it, but it does give a glimmer of hope that Trump isn't one election away from being the President.