Since my last post we have witnessed a growing hostility between the Clinton camp and the Sanders campaign. I do understand that the frustration must be high for those who support Bernie, but the tone and tenor of the dialogue emanating from the Sanders' campaign has obviously intensified over the past several weeks. Just days ago, the Nevada Democratic Convention to select delegates for the National Convention and to adopt state rules for future delegate selection methods resulted in near violence, for the most part, emanating from the Sanders supporters. Press reports clearly laid the near-violence on the Sanders supporters who came as protesters and disruptors, not as debaters ready for a calm discussion. They shouted down Senator Barbara Boxer and disrupted the convention. No one has denied this description. If mob violence is a "future we can believe in", then I will take a pass.
As should have been done by all leaders in the party, this sort of behavior - and the threats that were made against the state chairperson in the aftermath - are more the actions of an angry mob and not the civil discourse of a political policy debate. The DNC chair, several Senators, and other observers decried this behavior and called upon all of the players to denounce violent, disruptive behavior as well as personal threats and intimidation which also took place after the Nevada convention. Bernie Sanders, sadly, did not. Although his comments generally were a rejection of violence, he defended his supporters and blamed their frustration on the Democratic Party "leaders" instead. In other words, he blamed the outbreak of violence and threats in Nevada on the victims of that disruption and violence. Hmmmm... blaming the victim.... heard that somewhere before..... I would have thought that Senator Sanders was better than that.... It seems more and more that Bernie's presence in the race - and the level of discourse that his campaign is encouraging - is creating real damage to the nominee of the party - Hillary Clinton. Bernie's heated negative attacks against the party, the process, and the candidate are doing nothing more than handing the Trump camp fodder for the fall. Makes one wonder just what the objective of the Sanders campaign truly is. Democratic Party process reform is one thing - but, blowing the election cycle - the equivalent of taking your ball and going home - is just not acceptable.
Recall that the Democratic Party could have prevented Bernie - an independent until this election cycle - from running inside the party primary process. That would have cast Sanders in the role of previous independent candidates with Democratic Party leanings like Ralph Nader. Instead, the Party took a risk and welcomed him into the Party and the process. Notably, the process then and now was the same and well-known to all parties. Bernie has complained that he is losing because of "closed" primaries" - elections that only permit registered Democrats to vote in the selection of the candidate. Hmmmmm. Who should we let vote to determine the candidate of the Democratic Party? Republicans? Independents? Or, should Democrats select the Democratic candidate? Perhaps Bernie the Independent "Democratic Socialist" wanted this one to be a two-fer - get registered Democratic votes AND Independent votes knowing the fate of Ralph Nader and others who ran as Independent-only candidates. Of course, there is no national party called the "Democratic Socialist Party" but there is the "Socialist Party" and a number of others to choose from. However, these do not offer either the platform, media attention, or the numbers of voters available to advance a candidacy to the finish line. Does the Republican Party permit registered Libertarians vote in their primaries? Of course not. Do they let the America First Party or the Prohibition Party standard bearers onto their Presidential Debate stage so they can appeal to registered Republican voters? Come on.....
So, Bernie gets to run as a Democrat - which he had prior to this cycle, he had steadfastly contended that he was not. And, he does surprisingly well against the presumed candidate in-the-wings, Hillary Clinton. Baggage, yes. But, with a wealth of experience - as First Lady, as US Senator from New York, and as Secretary of State, no modern candidate has been better prepared for the office of the Presidency. Her knowledge and experience, her battle-tested and well-scarred toughness in the face of adversity is unmatched. As I write this, we all know that Hillary will become the nominee - with a majority of the raw votes case, a majority of the won Pledged Delegates, and a majority of the Super Delegates (unless Bernie takes California by 50+ points over Clinton). The Sanders' campaign continues to pretend that they can still win the nomination..... and pretend that their increasingly intense attacks on Hillary actually help the Party. His position is that he "will do everything that I can to defeat Donald Trump this fall." Now, what does that mean? Does he, along with Elizabeth Warren, campaign night and day to make sure that Bernie's supporters remain engaged and vote for Hillary come fall? Or, could it mean that Bernie leads his "political revolution" on a quixotic journey into an independent campaign effort... say, as "Democratic Socialists" and, in combination with the Socialist Party, try to establish a new political construct in the array of national political parties? Could it be that the Sanders' plan is to split the Democratic vote so that Trump wins while cloaking himself in "doing everything that I can...." as an independent candidate? Is it possible that, after 4 years of s disastrous Trump Presidency, he plans to emerge as the "savior" candidate to take on Trump in 2020? OK... so, I may be crossing over into the political twilight zone.... but, all of these are at least possible....
More likely, Bernie loses to Hillary, Hillary becomes the nominee, Bernie endorses Hillary and Hillary gets booed by Bernie Delegates, and Bernie appears on Hillary's behalf several times in the fall and in some TV ads and maybe mail to his donors and identified voters in negative-Trump messaging. But, after the Bernie-inflicted damage of these last several weeks, the narrowing Hillary lead over Trump in the polls, and a continuing Bernie attack on Hillary and the Party for next month or so before the Convention, will that be enough? And, isn't that the real question? Stay tuned.
Wednesday, May 18, 2016
Friday, May 6, 2016
TRUMPOLOGY 101
So, here we are.... post Bush and Rubio... post Cruz and Kasich... And, the last man standing is DONALD TRUMP! This had all been foretold months earlier by the obviously insightful and most prophetic political observer and prognosticator in America. You guessed it.... DONALD TRUMP.
From the start of this election exercise, Donald trump was essentially dismissed as a "buffoon", a "clown", not a serious candidate, only trying to get some exposure for a new TV venture or, playing at "reality TV". Add an entire host of negative adjectives essentially portraying Trump as an "also-ran" type who wouldn't last three months. After all, he was running in a field populated by experienced elected officials - governors, senators, and others with either the experience or the apparent disposition to become Commander-in-Chief. Trump, on the other hand, with his uneven presentations, and ill-informed opinions, seemed not equipped to assume the mantle of national, if not global, leadership. It seemed as though - no one - not the other candidates, the media, political analysts, national consultants, and others well experienced in presidential electoral combat - not one person believed that Trump was a serious contender. The consensus was that, regardless of whatever ridiculous reason that Donald Trump had for entering the race, he would fall out early in the contest. There was only one person who dismissed all of the nay-sayers - Donald Trump himself.
As the Republican field was winnowed down from 17 to 15 to 12 to 5 and then to the final three, somehow, Donald Trump was never among the missing in action. He would soldier on - sometimes in a painfully clumsy way, tweeting his way to the lead in state after state. Trump saw something that others did not see at all. And, he pursued it so fiercely that others were blinded by the flash of combat and the fog of war. Most thought that he was just "crazy" by leaving some deeply held conservative policy positions, long the mainstay of the Republican Party orthodoxy and national platform. Abortion bans with no exception, de-funding Planned Parenthood, eliminating health care plans for all Americans, and free trade policy like NAFTA and the elimination of trade barriers, just to name a few. Trump's failure to sign on to these issues and others convinced the Republicans that he could not really, really be serious about winning the Republican nomination for President, especially with a strong conservative like Ted Cruz in the race, and against the Capitol Hill budget hero and current Governor John Kasich. His antics really must be a joke, they thought. He was getting a bunch of attention, though. But, we chalked it all up to his "celebrity" status and the unusual nature of his behavior that attracted "oddballs and crazies" as well as his completely unorthodox campaign. But, the Donald had other plans.
While the other candidates focused their efforts on the traditional Republican base, Trump went after the disaffected, angry, disappointed, fearful, and left behind voters who had not participated in the process for years. In the days of Nixon, these folks were referred to as "the silent majority." Trump correctly identified this cohort of the potential electorate and aimed dead center. He believed that tapping into their anger at the Washington "establishment" and "politics as usual" (translation - lying to voters every election and doing nothing) and the "corruption" of the process through large campaign contributions (bribes, according to Trump) to purchase influence that was against the interests of working class and middle class families. Trump refused contributions and so far is self-funded. No bribes or donations that might make him beholding to some lobbyist or corporate leader.
Better yet, whatever you need, he will deliver. Re-open coal mines - well, of course. Get rid of the EPA - sure... done. Lower taxes on you and raise them on others - hey, that's the plan, right? And, just this week, (heaven forbid!) he expressed willingness to raise taxes on the wealthy! No wonder that Ted Cruz described Trump as an identical reflection of Hillary Clinton. After all, they are both from New York... and they must share New York "values", right? The point is, Donald Trump had his eye squarely on the ball. It was just a different ball than Lyin' Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Little Marco, and low-energy Jeb had on their agenda. So, while the rest of the field was dividing up the "conservative" standard Republican Presidential primary voters, the Trump campaign was romancing a different group of voters, appealing to their frustration and anger at the system (and its occupants - like governors, senators, and other Beltway regulars), energizing them with his antics, tweets, unique persona, and his marketing skills. His goal - to create an entire new constituency - a Trump constituency of new voters in the Republican primary, not steeped in the conservative orthodoxy but driven by economic arguments that would motivate those left behind in the current sluggish economy. This would be the basis of the Trump"cult of personality" that would sustain him throughout the primary season. He would blame immigrants, Muslims, and minorities for the failure of the economic recovery to lift up all boats. And, his solutions - building a wall, keeping Muslims out, rounding up and exporting illegal residents, abolishing Obamacare, tearing up free trade deals and imposing tariffs on imports, and re-negotiating NATO and other alliances sounds more like the nativists of the late 19th century and the isolationists of the mid-20th century before America took on a global leadership role after WW II and continues to occupy on the world stage. Is this who we have become? Build a tall wall around the castle, throw out problem children, raise the drawbridge, and man the barricades? This is the American dream? A closed off and garrisoned nation bristling with nuclear weapons, daring the world to ... just try it! Really?
Donald Trump added thousands if not millions of "new" Republican primary voters to the equation. While the others were dividing up the old-school pizza, Trump was having an entirely new meal delivered - the new Trump voter. Fluid, vague, and malleable, the Trump campaign calculated that he could appeal to many outside the traditional Tea-Party, or right-wing conservative voters who had dominated the Republican party for decades. The strategy worked and Donald Trump re-shaped the Republican Party in his own image, nearly free of the confining policy positions of the past. Once the nominee, look for the post-convention Trump to adopt more mainstream positions so compete for Main Street votes. With conservative leaders, media outlets, and elected officials complaining on the right, and attacks on the left from progressives against the excesses of a billionaire, criticism from women who he has regularly maligned along the way, or from Latinos objecting to being scapegoated as murderers, drug dealers, and rapists, or from Black voters already feeling the distance and dismissive attitude of a racist candidate with little claim to support for civil rights, voting rights, employment opportunity, or educational assistance for minorities, Trump has quite the challenge ahead. But, Trumpology holds that he will "make America Great Again" by sheer force of will, a dash of confused policy, slowly simmered with the anger of the working class white voter, especially the white male voter, with a big dose of Hillary poison, negative ads, and the most ugly attacks ever presented in a presidential campaign. The question for the fall is - can he do it again. Trumpology says, but, of course. What do you say?
From the start of this election exercise, Donald trump was essentially dismissed as a "buffoon", a "clown", not a serious candidate, only trying to get some exposure for a new TV venture or, playing at "reality TV". Add an entire host of negative adjectives essentially portraying Trump as an "also-ran" type who wouldn't last three months. After all, he was running in a field populated by experienced elected officials - governors, senators, and others with either the experience or the apparent disposition to become Commander-in-Chief. Trump, on the other hand, with his uneven presentations, and ill-informed opinions, seemed not equipped to assume the mantle of national, if not global, leadership. It seemed as though - no one - not the other candidates, the media, political analysts, national consultants, and others well experienced in presidential electoral combat - not one person believed that Trump was a serious contender. The consensus was that, regardless of whatever ridiculous reason that Donald Trump had for entering the race, he would fall out early in the contest. There was only one person who dismissed all of the nay-sayers - Donald Trump himself.
As the Republican field was winnowed down from 17 to 15 to 12 to 5 and then to the final three, somehow, Donald Trump was never among the missing in action. He would soldier on - sometimes in a painfully clumsy way, tweeting his way to the lead in state after state. Trump saw something that others did not see at all. And, he pursued it so fiercely that others were blinded by the flash of combat and the fog of war. Most thought that he was just "crazy" by leaving some deeply held conservative policy positions, long the mainstay of the Republican Party orthodoxy and national platform. Abortion bans with no exception, de-funding Planned Parenthood, eliminating health care plans for all Americans, and free trade policy like NAFTA and the elimination of trade barriers, just to name a few. Trump's failure to sign on to these issues and others convinced the Republicans that he could not really, really be serious about winning the Republican nomination for President, especially with a strong conservative like Ted Cruz in the race, and against the Capitol Hill budget hero and current Governor John Kasich. His antics really must be a joke, they thought. He was getting a bunch of attention, though. But, we chalked it all up to his "celebrity" status and the unusual nature of his behavior that attracted "oddballs and crazies" as well as his completely unorthodox campaign. But, the Donald had other plans.
While the other candidates focused their efforts on the traditional Republican base, Trump went after the disaffected, angry, disappointed, fearful, and left behind voters who had not participated in the process for years. In the days of Nixon, these folks were referred to as "the silent majority." Trump correctly identified this cohort of the potential electorate and aimed dead center. He believed that tapping into their anger at the Washington "establishment" and "politics as usual" (translation - lying to voters every election and doing nothing) and the "corruption" of the process through large campaign contributions (bribes, according to Trump) to purchase influence that was against the interests of working class and middle class families. Trump refused contributions and so far is self-funded. No bribes or donations that might make him beholding to some lobbyist or corporate leader.
Better yet, whatever you need, he will deliver. Re-open coal mines - well, of course. Get rid of the EPA - sure... done. Lower taxes on you and raise them on others - hey, that's the plan, right? And, just this week, (heaven forbid!) he expressed willingness to raise taxes on the wealthy! No wonder that Ted Cruz described Trump as an identical reflection of Hillary Clinton. After all, they are both from New York... and they must share New York "values", right? The point is, Donald Trump had his eye squarely on the ball. It was just a different ball than Lyin' Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Little Marco, and low-energy Jeb had on their agenda. So, while the rest of the field was dividing up the "conservative" standard Republican Presidential primary voters, the Trump campaign was romancing a different group of voters, appealing to their frustration and anger at the system (and its occupants - like governors, senators, and other Beltway regulars), energizing them with his antics, tweets, unique persona, and his marketing skills. His goal - to create an entire new constituency - a Trump constituency of new voters in the Republican primary, not steeped in the conservative orthodoxy but driven by economic arguments that would motivate those left behind in the current sluggish economy. This would be the basis of the Trump"cult of personality" that would sustain him throughout the primary season. He would blame immigrants, Muslims, and minorities for the failure of the economic recovery to lift up all boats. And, his solutions - building a wall, keeping Muslims out, rounding up and exporting illegal residents, abolishing Obamacare, tearing up free trade deals and imposing tariffs on imports, and re-negotiating NATO and other alliances sounds more like the nativists of the late 19th century and the isolationists of the mid-20th century before America took on a global leadership role after WW II and continues to occupy on the world stage. Is this who we have become? Build a tall wall around the castle, throw out problem children, raise the drawbridge, and man the barricades? This is the American dream? A closed off and garrisoned nation bristling with nuclear weapons, daring the world to ... just try it! Really?
Donald Trump added thousands if not millions of "new" Republican primary voters to the equation. While the others were dividing up the old-school pizza, Trump was having an entirely new meal delivered - the new Trump voter. Fluid, vague, and malleable, the Trump campaign calculated that he could appeal to many outside the traditional Tea-Party, or right-wing conservative voters who had dominated the Republican party for decades. The strategy worked and Donald Trump re-shaped the Republican Party in his own image, nearly free of the confining policy positions of the past. Once the nominee, look for the post-convention Trump to adopt more mainstream positions so compete for Main Street votes. With conservative leaders, media outlets, and elected officials complaining on the right, and attacks on the left from progressives against the excesses of a billionaire, criticism from women who he has regularly maligned along the way, or from Latinos objecting to being scapegoated as murderers, drug dealers, and rapists, or from Black voters already feeling the distance and dismissive attitude of a racist candidate with little claim to support for civil rights, voting rights, employment opportunity, or educational assistance for minorities, Trump has quite the challenge ahead. But, Trumpology holds that he will "make America Great Again" by sheer force of will, a dash of confused policy, slowly simmered with the anger of the working class white voter, especially the white male voter, with a big dose of Hillary poison, negative ads, and the most ugly attacks ever presented in a presidential campaign. The question for the fall is - can he do it again. Trumpology says, but, of course. What do you say?
Monday, May 2, 2016
ON THE ROAD WITH HILLARY.....
As this campaign season has moved forward toward the party conventions, it has become increasingly clear that Hillary will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. State after state, contest after contest, the Clinton raw vote totals have steadily increased. Hillary's majority in the raw vote now is at around 3,000,000 more votes than Sanders. And, this same lop-sided margin is reflected in the delegate votes that the two currently claim - Clinton 2165; Sanders 1357. The Sanders campaign has complained for months that the "Super Delegates", a collection of party leaders, elected officials and others elected at state conventions or caucuses, have inappropriately tilted the delegate totals heavily in favor of Hillary. Bernie is correct that the Super Delegates favor Hillary by a wide margin - 520 to Sanders 39 - and that is a part of the delegate math. But, Bernie is wrong when he takes the position that if the "Super Delegates" were set aside and the "Pledged Delegates" (those that were won in caucuses and primaries in the various states) were counted, he would be the nominee. Subtract the "Supers" from the totals above and the current result is: Clinton 1645; Sanders 1318, a 327 delegate lead for Clinton. Only 1243 delegates remain in future contests, including New Jersey and California.
New Jersey is a "proportional" delegate state with 126 delegates in total - 72 elected in 20 paired legislative districts, 24 at-large delegates "elected" at a meeting of the NJ State Democratic Committee one week after the NJ Primary election on June 7th, and the balance being "Super Delegates", pledged or not. The big prize yet to be determined is California. With a total of 548 delegate votes to be determined - 475 elected in congressional districts and 73 "Super Delegates", Sanders is relying on some pretty optimistic projections in thinking that Hillary will not gain enough delegates to secure the nomination before the Convention meets in Philadelphia. The current average of 8 polling organizations has Hillary ahead of Sanders by 8 points. The Sanders strategy is to target selected congressional districts to secure a substantial amount of delegates. Still, making up nearly 330 votes in a political environment with Hillary ahead in polling and the largest delegates states having proportional plans in place, seems unlikely. Add to that problem that Hillary has a substantial and disproportionate edge in pledged "Super Delegates (520-39), and she currently has a total of 2165 delegates. 2383 delegates are necessary to secure a majority of all delegates and the Presidential nomination. Absent lightening striking, that means that Hillary just needs 218 additional delegates in the contests ahead. With 1243 still available between now and June 7th - the last Primary Election day in the Democratic calendar, Sanders could win a very unlikely 80% of the remaining delegates, and Hillary would still win 249 - and the nomination. This nomination is OUT OF REACH for the Sanders' campaign.
So, why does Bernie continue? He has the financial resources. He has an agenda of a number of progressive policy issues and objectives to advance. He and his supporters can (and will) impact the Democratic party Platform through the Platform Committee. And, he may seek a substantial change in party nomination rules for future presidential contests - especially in the role of the "Super Delegates" that has so haunted the Sanders' campaign since the start of the election season. However, this primary selection process is effectively over.
The 2016 contest will be Clinton vs. Trump.
New Jersey is a "proportional" delegate state with 126 delegates in total - 72 elected in 20 paired legislative districts, 24 at-large delegates "elected" at a meeting of the NJ State Democratic Committee one week after the NJ Primary election on June 7th, and the balance being "Super Delegates", pledged or not. The big prize yet to be determined is California. With a total of 548 delegate votes to be determined - 475 elected in congressional districts and 73 "Super Delegates", Sanders is relying on some pretty optimistic projections in thinking that Hillary will not gain enough delegates to secure the nomination before the Convention meets in Philadelphia. The current average of 8 polling organizations has Hillary ahead of Sanders by 8 points. The Sanders strategy is to target selected congressional districts to secure a substantial amount of delegates. Still, making up nearly 330 votes in a political environment with Hillary ahead in polling and the largest delegates states having proportional plans in place, seems unlikely. Add to that problem that Hillary has a substantial and disproportionate edge in pledged "Super Delegates (520-39), and she currently has a total of 2165 delegates. 2383 delegates are necessary to secure a majority of all delegates and the Presidential nomination. Absent lightening striking, that means that Hillary just needs 218 additional delegates in the contests ahead. With 1243 still available between now and June 7th - the last Primary Election day in the Democratic calendar, Sanders could win a very unlikely 80% of the remaining delegates, and Hillary would still win 249 - and the nomination. This nomination is OUT OF REACH for the Sanders' campaign.
So, why does Bernie continue? He has the financial resources. He has an agenda of a number of progressive policy issues and objectives to advance. He and his supporters can (and will) impact the Democratic party Platform through the Platform Committee. And, he may seek a substantial change in party nomination rules for future presidential contests - especially in the role of the "Super Delegates" that has so haunted the Sanders' campaign since the start of the election season. However, this primary selection process is effectively over.
The 2016 contest will be Clinton vs. Trump.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
IT'S A TRUMP WORLD AFTER ALL.......
Whew! Donald trump took a giant step forward... and, without saying "may I", in his drive to the Republican nomination for the presidency. Yesterday's elections in 5 states produced a clean sweep - and by very wide margins - for this upstart billionaire from New York. He swept all 5 primaries with big double-digit wins in each state. Even more impressive, Trump carried the majority of Republican primary votes cast ranging from 54% to 64%. Kasich ran second to Trump in 4 of 5 states with the sole exception being Pennsylvania where ted Cruz scored second place. However, even if the "Never Trump" votes were added together, Trump still thrashed both opposing candidates.
Candidate Trump scored big in delegates as well. Of the 119 pledged delegates in those 5 states, Trump's crushing victory carried with it 109 delegates while Cruz and Kasich scored 5 delegates each. Even more impressive, the long-discussed 54 "un-bound" Pennsylvania delegates have indicated to various media outlets that 39 either support Trump or will vote for Trump on the first ballot, reflecting their congressional district preferences as expressed in the votes cast. Just 2 delegates are for Cruz, none expressed support for Kasich, 7 others remain uncommitted, and the remaining 6 made no comment. Adding those 39 un-bound PA delegates to Trump's 109 count brings his total for yesterday to 148 with just 12 either committed or expressing a preference for others. By any measure, that is a delegate landslide of biblical proportions! Counting the 39 un-bound Pennsylvania delegates and those he won outright yesterday, that brings Trump's total delegate count to 993 with Cruz second at 564 and Kasich a distant third at 153. Of note is the fact that Trump also added a significant raw vote advantage to his totals - further muting the argument that someone other that the front-runner be selected as the party's nominee. Perhaps time has run out for his opponents and just maybe the "Never Trump" movement is, to quote Edgar Allen Poe, "Nevermore." Time will tell... but, from my perch, it really doesn't look good for the Trump opponents no matter how many Carlys re-appear in support of Cruz or Rubios appear to lend a hand as well.....
PS: Current poll data also shows that Trump is leading the race at the next "stop sign" selected by the anti-Trump forces - Indiana. The latest poll data has Trump 15 points in front of Cruz with Kasich a distant third. Trump is humming "New York, New York"... "if I can make it there, I can make it anywhere." The NY primary does seem to have been a major turning point in the march of the state primaries. Stay tuned......
Candidate Trump scored big in delegates as well. Of the 119 pledged delegates in those 5 states, Trump's crushing victory carried with it 109 delegates while Cruz and Kasich scored 5 delegates each. Even more impressive, the long-discussed 54 "un-bound" Pennsylvania delegates have indicated to various media outlets that 39 either support Trump or will vote for Trump on the first ballot, reflecting their congressional district preferences as expressed in the votes cast. Just 2 delegates are for Cruz, none expressed support for Kasich, 7 others remain uncommitted, and the remaining 6 made no comment. Adding those 39 un-bound PA delegates to Trump's 109 count brings his total for yesterday to 148 with just 12 either committed or expressing a preference for others. By any measure, that is a delegate landslide of biblical proportions! Counting the 39 un-bound Pennsylvania delegates and those he won outright yesterday, that brings Trump's total delegate count to 993 with Cruz second at 564 and Kasich a distant third at 153. Of note is the fact that Trump also added a significant raw vote advantage to his totals - further muting the argument that someone other that the front-runner be selected as the party's nominee. Perhaps time has run out for his opponents and just maybe the "Never Trump" movement is, to quote Edgar Allen Poe, "Nevermore." Time will tell... but, from my perch, it really doesn't look good for the Trump opponents no matter how many Carlys re-appear in support of Cruz or Rubios appear to lend a hand as well.....
PS: Current poll data also shows that Trump is leading the race at the next "stop sign" selected by the anti-Trump forces - Indiana. The latest poll data has Trump 15 points in front of Cruz with Kasich a distant third. Trump is humming "New York, New York"... "if I can make it there, I can make it anywhere." The NY primary does seem to have been a major turning point in the march of the state primaries. Stay tuned......
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
"...NEW YORK, NEW YORK.. if I can make it there, I'll make it anywhere.... it's up to you - New York, New York...."
Ok, so Frank Sinatra was singing about New York as a place that could test the mettle of a person and challenge them in many ways. But, if they could make it there.... and, you know the rest. It seems that last week, both the Donald and Hillary "made it" quite well in New York. Crushing their opponents in the New York primary election, both Trump and Clinton scored major delegate victories in their respective elections. Let's take a quick look.
Donald Trump, born and raised in New York (Queens), is a well-known entity in the NY public arena. Often a focus of the tabloid and the mainstream press for decades, not to mention a TV star with his own shop - "The Apprentice," the Donald has had more than his share of ink and media coverage - some positive, some negative. As a pundit once said, it doesn't matter whether what they say is good or bad, as long as they are talking about you. It seems that this observation was well proven out during the current Republican election cycle. Hardly given any chance at all last summer when the campaign slowly began to take shape with some 17 candidates, Trump was the butt of cartoons and late-night talk-show jokes for weeks as most observers thought that his "candidacy" was nothing more than a public relations stunt designed to life Trump's public persona. Actually running for President? Nah! More likely a new TV series was in the planning stages and that this "candidacy" was a way to garner attention for act three of the Trump saga, having nothing to do with political office. At least, that is what most pundits believed back then. It was just so much fun to pretend that Trump was a serious candidate so much of talk TV had a great time exploring "Trump for President" tongue in cheek. Fast forward to today, and more and more it appears as though Trump has the Republican establishment on the ropes. Even if Trump does not gather the requisite number of delegates to secure the nomination on the first ballot (1237), he will certainly enter the convention with far more delegates than any of his opponents. Right now, based on the primaries to come and current available poll data, it appears that Donald Trump will have near enough delegate votes and far more than any of the remaining two opposing candidates, Cruz and Kasich. Both the Cruz and the Kasich argument is, if Trump comes close but not over the line, then the delegates should select someone who Trump regularly beat in most states across the nation and gathered far fewer popular votes than the Donald. Or, maybe the delegates would select someone who didn't run in the primaries at all - say, Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney. Hey, how about the Chair of the Benghazi Committee - "Howdy" Dowdy? What does that scenario say to the largest block of committed supporters at the Convention - the Trump Delegates? I think that Donald is correct in his observation.... that, if the "rigged process" results in the abandonment of the Trump battle group, there will be "riots" in Cleveland.... and an exodus that will sink the Cruz Battleship and the Kasich Destroyer with it.
As a matter of fact, Cruz and Kasich have just now determined that they will "collude" (Trump's term for their joint plan) in a last ditch plan to prevent Trump from gaining the nomination BEFORE the convention. The deal - announced by Cruz who, evidently couldn't contain his excitement, used a press conference to proclaim the "deal" (did they both read Trump's book, "The Art of the Deal?"), reached by the two. Kasich abandons Indiana and Cruz stays out of New Mexico and Oregon. Cruz, excited at the prospect of taking on the Donald one-on-one, made it sound as though Kasich "abandoned" his Indiana delegates and supporters. Of course, Cruz is expecting that the Kasich supporters - delegate candidates and voters - will now vote for him. With the latest Indiana polls indicating that Trump is again double-digits ahead of both Cruz and Kasich, Cruz would need the Kasich voters to outlast Trump and score a victory here. Therefore, it must have been quite shocking for Cruz to discover that the first handful of Kasich Indiana supporters told local media outlets that they were suspicious of the "deal", felt "stranded" by Kasich and manipulated by Cruz. Asked who they would vote for as a second choice, they firmly said TRUMP, not Cruz. If this is indicative of a pattern among Kasich voters, then the conspirator's plot to add to the Cruz vote totals will fail and they will have, instead, boosted Trump to near or over the 50% mark! Should that occur in Indiana, Trump will be on his way to the nomination. This plot could turn out to be a self-inflicted and fatal wound to the Trump opponents.... they could be blowing themselves right out of the water if their respective supporters and voters, instead of turning to another non-Trump candidate, cast their votes and their lot with Trump. Ask yourself this - do you really think that the typical Kasich supporter is excited to vote for "Lyin' Ted Cruz?"
"There is no place like home," said Hillary in her victory speech on New York's election night as she scored a double-digit victory over Bernie Sanders. Of course, it was the place of Bernie Sander's birth but Hillary and Bill made the choice to make it their home after leaving the White House in 2001. Hillary's polling advantage had been substantial from the start and her large win should have been expected .... just as the Sander's victory was a given in New Hampshire. But, Sanders made a serious dialogue mistake. In numerous interviews, Bernie hinted that he was close to winning New York! Once again, as he had done in South Carolina, Sanders raised expectations for his supporters. But, the tactic made no sense at all... so, maybe he believed it himself? So, when he lost NY by 300,000 votes and 16 points, it was magnified into a crushing loss for Sanders - and, a momentum changer for Hillary. Had he not claimed the narrowing of polls and the possibility of winning New York, the loss would have been logged in as expected and so what? Since NY, Bernie seems to be off his game a bit and facing his "loss" with deep disappointment. His hoped-for "political revolution" just failed to materialize. In most states so far, voter turnout has been about the same as the last presidential or some percentages less. Certainly, we have not seen the large voter turnouts that Sanders often makes reference to and counts on to get him the nomination. Crowds may show up at his rallies, but voter turnout has been average at best so far.
Right now, the smart money is on the two front-runners: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, 2 New Yorkers. Could it be that we are about to witness the very first modern presidential election pitting two candidates against each other, one Republican and one Democrat, believing in different policies, growing up in far different places and with life experiences quite dissimilar - but, both who call New York home - the Presidential version of a Subway Series? If there is one thing that we have learned this primary season it is this: "It ain't over 'til it's over."
Stay tuned for the next round..... tomorrow is yet another election day.... including Indiana!
Donald Trump, born and raised in New York (Queens), is a well-known entity in the NY public arena. Often a focus of the tabloid and the mainstream press for decades, not to mention a TV star with his own shop - "The Apprentice," the Donald has had more than his share of ink and media coverage - some positive, some negative. As a pundit once said, it doesn't matter whether what they say is good or bad, as long as they are talking about you. It seems that this observation was well proven out during the current Republican election cycle. Hardly given any chance at all last summer when the campaign slowly began to take shape with some 17 candidates, Trump was the butt of cartoons and late-night talk-show jokes for weeks as most observers thought that his "candidacy" was nothing more than a public relations stunt designed to life Trump's public persona. Actually running for President? Nah! More likely a new TV series was in the planning stages and that this "candidacy" was a way to garner attention for act three of the Trump saga, having nothing to do with political office. At least, that is what most pundits believed back then. It was just so much fun to pretend that Trump was a serious candidate so much of talk TV had a great time exploring "Trump for President" tongue in cheek. Fast forward to today, and more and more it appears as though Trump has the Republican establishment on the ropes. Even if Trump does not gather the requisite number of delegates to secure the nomination on the first ballot (1237), he will certainly enter the convention with far more delegates than any of his opponents. Right now, based on the primaries to come and current available poll data, it appears that Donald Trump will have near enough delegate votes and far more than any of the remaining two opposing candidates, Cruz and Kasich. Both the Cruz and the Kasich argument is, if Trump comes close but not over the line, then the delegates should select someone who Trump regularly beat in most states across the nation and gathered far fewer popular votes than the Donald. Or, maybe the delegates would select someone who didn't run in the primaries at all - say, Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney. Hey, how about the Chair of the Benghazi Committee - "Howdy" Dowdy? What does that scenario say to the largest block of committed supporters at the Convention - the Trump Delegates? I think that Donald is correct in his observation.... that, if the "rigged process" results in the abandonment of the Trump battle group, there will be "riots" in Cleveland.... and an exodus that will sink the Cruz Battleship and the Kasich Destroyer with it.
As a matter of fact, Cruz and Kasich have just now determined that they will "collude" (Trump's term for their joint plan) in a last ditch plan to prevent Trump from gaining the nomination BEFORE the convention. The deal - announced by Cruz who, evidently couldn't contain his excitement, used a press conference to proclaim the "deal" (did they both read Trump's book, "The Art of the Deal?"), reached by the two. Kasich abandons Indiana and Cruz stays out of New Mexico and Oregon. Cruz, excited at the prospect of taking on the Donald one-on-one, made it sound as though Kasich "abandoned" his Indiana delegates and supporters. Of course, Cruz is expecting that the Kasich supporters - delegate candidates and voters - will now vote for him. With the latest Indiana polls indicating that Trump is again double-digits ahead of both Cruz and Kasich, Cruz would need the Kasich voters to outlast Trump and score a victory here. Therefore, it must have been quite shocking for Cruz to discover that the first handful of Kasich Indiana supporters told local media outlets that they were suspicious of the "deal", felt "stranded" by Kasich and manipulated by Cruz. Asked who they would vote for as a second choice, they firmly said TRUMP, not Cruz. If this is indicative of a pattern among Kasich voters, then the conspirator's plot to add to the Cruz vote totals will fail and they will have, instead, boosted Trump to near or over the 50% mark! Should that occur in Indiana, Trump will be on his way to the nomination. This plot could turn out to be a self-inflicted and fatal wound to the Trump opponents.... they could be blowing themselves right out of the water if their respective supporters and voters, instead of turning to another non-Trump candidate, cast their votes and their lot with Trump. Ask yourself this - do you really think that the typical Kasich supporter is excited to vote for "Lyin' Ted Cruz?"
"There is no place like home," said Hillary in her victory speech on New York's election night as she scored a double-digit victory over Bernie Sanders. Of course, it was the place of Bernie Sander's birth but Hillary and Bill made the choice to make it their home after leaving the White House in 2001. Hillary's polling advantage had been substantial from the start and her large win should have been expected .... just as the Sander's victory was a given in New Hampshire. But, Sanders made a serious dialogue mistake. In numerous interviews, Bernie hinted that he was close to winning New York! Once again, as he had done in South Carolina, Sanders raised expectations for his supporters. But, the tactic made no sense at all... so, maybe he believed it himself? So, when he lost NY by 300,000 votes and 16 points, it was magnified into a crushing loss for Sanders - and, a momentum changer for Hillary. Had he not claimed the narrowing of polls and the possibility of winning New York, the loss would have been logged in as expected and so what? Since NY, Bernie seems to be off his game a bit and facing his "loss" with deep disappointment. His hoped-for "political revolution" just failed to materialize. In most states so far, voter turnout has been about the same as the last presidential or some percentages less. Certainly, we have not seen the large voter turnouts that Sanders often makes reference to and counts on to get him the nomination. Crowds may show up at his rallies, but voter turnout has been average at best so far.
Right now, the smart money is on the two front-runners: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, 2 New Yorkers. Could it be that we are about to witness the very first modern presidential election pitting two candidates against each other, one Republican and one Democrat, believing in different policies, growing up in far different places and with life experiences quite dissimilar - but, both who call New York home - the Presidential version of a Subway Series? If there is one thing that we have learned this primary season it is this: "It ain't over 'til it's over."
Stay tuned for the next round..... tomorrow is yet another election day.... including Indiana!
Thursday, April 7, 2016
INTO THE ABYSS????
Over the last several days, it seems as though both parties are edging ever closer to some serious self-inflicted wounds......
On the Republican side, the rhetoric - already high up on the nasty meter, seems to be soaring to even higher planes. With some really, really, tepid "endorsements" for Cruz in Wisconsin from former opponents who are all characterized as heading down the endorsement path as though they were holding their collective noses as they were led down the isle by the Beltway "establishment", to the renewed assault on Cruz when he arrived in New York and got a real dose of "New York values", it appears that we are headed for some real fireworks. Perhaps the two candidates will produce so much incendiary commentary that they will burn the Republican House down to the ground by the time that they are through and arrive at their Convention. Time will tell... but, with today's NY Post front page headline - "Cruz: Take the F U Train", and Trump turning up the heat at his opening rally in Long Island, the R side of the New York adventure looks HOT indeed. The "Presidential" Trump response should define "NY values" as welcoming to legal immigrants, sensitive to the needs of those of modest income, offering opportunity to those willing to work for it, providing education to millions and millions of children from all backgrounds, courageous in the face of the attack on the World Trade Center, proud of their police and fire personnel, and building a world-class city filled with jobs, commerce, history, arts and everything that makes for a diverse city for others to model.
Meanwhile, the Democrats supporting Sanders got their own share of "red meat" with Sanders' attack on Clinton's "qualifications to be President." Responding to a reported Clinton attack on Sanders qualifications for the office - that, by the way, didn't happen at all - the Sanders' statement damaged both campaigns as well as providing the Republicans with attack fodder for the fall.... BIG MISTAKE. My guess is that Bernie Sanders had long ago instructed his campaign staff that they were not to attack Hillary and, instead run an issue-based campaign. The goal of that was to be able to bring the party together for the fall, 2016 battle with as little self-inflicted damage as possible and to present a strong and united front against whoever the Republican Clown Car produced as their candidate. But, now that the Sanders staff can see the possibility of actually BECOMING the nominee, they have been trying to find a way to get Bernie to take off the gloves. So, the Sanders staff "spun" the Hillary comments in the Washington Post on Sanders' poorly thought out comments about how to "break-up the big banks" into a mis-characterization that she said Sanders was not qualified for the presidency. Then, they sent him out to the microphones to respond while they had him stoked. How do I know this? I have been in campaigns for more than 25 years.... and, that is exactly what I would do! I needed my candidate to GET TOUGH! In any case, just an educated guess... Hillary, in responding to Bernie's attack on her "qualifications" for the highest office in the nation, handled it well, I thought. Measured, calm, and supportive, she commented that Sanders would be - by far - a superior candidate to any Republican running and that she would support him in a New York minute and, enthusiastically should he become the Party nominee. In any case, it's pretty clear that Hillary IS qualified for the office of the Presidency - perhaps more so by experience and temperament than any candidate in living memory.
Right now, Hillary holds a double-digit lead over Sanders among likely NY Democratic voters. And, Trump - at 52% - with Kasich in second place and Cruz a dismal third at 17 %, is clearly in control so far. Now, how is that for a New York value! If numbers like this hold, we could see a Presidential contest between 2 New Yorkers - Hillary and Donald..... or Bernie and Donald?
On the Republican side, the rhetoric - already high up on the nasty meter, seems to be soaring to even higher planes. With some really, really, tepid "endorsements" for Cruz in Wisconsin from former opponents who are all characterized as heading down the endorsement path as though they were holding their collective noses as they were led down the isle by the Beltway "establishment", to the renewed assault on Cruz when he arrived in New York and got a real dose of "New York values", it appears that we are headed for some real fireworks. Perhaps the two candidates will produce so much incendiary commentary that they will burn the Republican House down to the ground by the time that they are through and arrive at their Convention. Time will tell... but, with today's NY Post front page headline - "Cruz: Take the F U Train", and Trump turning up the heat at his opening rally in Long Island, the R side of the New York adventure looks HOT indeed. The "Presidential" Trump response should define "NY values" as welcoming to legal immigrants, sensitive to the needs of those of modest income, offering opportunity to those willing to work for it, providing education to millions and millions of children from all backgrounds, courageous in the face of the attack on the World Trade Center, proud of their police and fire personnel, and building a world-class city filled with jobs, commerce, history, arts and everything that makes for a diverse city for others to model.
Meanwhile, the Democrats supporting Sanders got their own share of "red meat" with Sanders' attack on Clinton's "qualifications to be President." Responding to a reported Clinton attack on Sanders qualifications for the office - that, by the way, didn't happen at all - the Sanders' statement damaged both campaigns as well as providing the Republicans with attack fodder for the fall.... BIG MISTAKE. My guess is that Bernie Sanders had long ago instructed his campaign staff that they were not to attack Hillary and, instead run an issue-based campaign. The goal of that was to be able to bring the party together for the fall, 2016 battle with as little self-inflicted damage as possible and to present a strong and united front against whoever the Republican Clown Car produced as their candidate. But, now that the Sanders staff can see the possibility of actually BECOMING the nominee, they have been trying to find a way to get Bernie to take off the gloves. So, the Sanders staff "spun" the Hillary comments in the Washington Post on Sanders' poorly thought out comments about how to "break-up the big banks" into a mis-characterization that she said Sanders was not qualified for the presidency. Then, they sent him out to the microphones to respond while they had him stoked. How do I know this? I have been in campaigns for more than 25 years.... and, that is exactly what I would do! I needed my candidate to GET TOUGH! In any case, just an educated guess... Hillary, in responding to Bernie's attack on her "qualifications" for the highest office in the nation, handled it well, I thought. Measured, calm, and supportive, she commented that Sanders would be - by far - a superior candidate to any Republican running and that she would support him in a New York minute and, enthusiastically should he become the Party nominee. In any case, it's pretty clear that Hillary IS qualified for the office of the Presidency - perhaps more so by experience and temperament than any candidate in living memory.
Right now, Hillary holds a double-digit lead over Sanders among likely NY Democratic voters. And, Trump - at 52% - with Kasich in second place and Cruz a dismal third at 17 %, is clearly in control so far. Now, how is that for a New York value! If numbers like this hold, we could see a Presidential contest between 2 New Yorkers - Hillary and Donald..... or Bernie and Donald?
Monday, April 4, 2016
AND THE BEAT GOES ON....... Zombie Delegates?
As is obvious, there has been a lull in the action.... OK.. so, there are some "Trumpisms" to toy with... But, I have come to see that these dumb-ass utterances are momentarily a hot-button (like, "punish women who get an abortion..." or, not taking dropping nukes in Europe off the table, or, leaving NATO, or, lets encourage Japan and South Korea to develop their own nuclear bombs/missiles) occupy a lot of talk time for a day or two or three... and then recede into the background noise of the campaign as other issues come front and center. The issue that will continue right through the Republican Convention is the delegate selection process..... and the potential for "Unbound" ZOMBIE DELEGATES and SUPER-DELEGATES to make or break a candidate.
We have all watched the gradual, state-by-state contests and the accumulation of delegates - sometimes in winner-take-all, sometimes proportionate splits, and sometimes in primaries, sometimes in caucus states. One thing that we thought was sure, however, was that the delegates were pledged to one candidate or another. So, maybe not past the first or second ballot at the convention, based on the state rules for delegate behavior - but, you win a delegate, then they vote for you. So, what are the ZOMBIES? Well... on the Democratic side, some "Zombie" delegates are present from the start. They are called "Super-Delegates" and are selected under DNC rules and State Democratic Committee adopted Delegate Plans as approved by the DNC. They are elected officials, DNC Members from that state, other party officials such as the State Democratic Chairman, and a handful of others "elected" by the State Committee in Convention. These generally are self-pledged Delegates, are not elected by primaries or caucuses, and can vote for whoever they choose at any time, including the first ballot. What does that mean? If they are "pledged" to one candidate or another, are they not required to vote for that person? Answer: NO. They are the only Delegates that can change their minds, drop their "pledge" and switch sides BEFORE the first ballot at the Convention. And, that is what makes them SUPER-DELEGATES. If you ask does this really happen often? The answer is no. But, it can. On the Democratic side, Hillary has a GIANT lead in pledged Delegates who were pledged long ago before they were assigned these positions and before the state parade of primaries and caucuses. And, that is what "burns" Bernie. His campaign is attempting to transform those "pledged" Delegates into Zombie delegates who are not pledged to anyone and are free to vote for Sanders. Why would they consider doing that? Simple from a Sanders point of view - if Sanders carried their state by, say... 10 or 20 points in the Democratic Primary in their home state, should these "Super" Delegates consider reflecting the will of the voters in their state or keep their blinders on and vote AGAINST the interest of their own primary voters? Bernie argues that the answer is clear - these are at-large appointed Delegates and they should reflect the will of their electorate, regardless of who they may have been "pledged" to support. So far, there are 158 Undeclared Delegates. Hillary leads Bernie presently by 701 delegate votes including a Super-delegate count of 469 to 71. If those numbers were reversed, subtracting say 375 from Hillary and counting them for Bernie, the count would be 1337 for Hillary and 1386 for Bernie! See why Bernie is making the Super-delegate argument? Still, take the Super-delegates out altogether and Hillary leads 1243 Delegates to Bernie's 980 indicating the fact that Clinton has won 12% more Delegates in the rough and tumble of the primary process than Sanders to date (56 to 44). Add in the Super-delegates and you get a 26% difference - more than twice the elected Delegate spread.
On the Republican side, ZOMBIE delegates are delegates to the convention that are currently not pledged to anyone. In few states, delegates are simply appointed by the state Republican Committee without any pledge to vote for any particular candidate but to use their personal judgment to cast their ballot for the candidate that they believe best represents the Republican Party in their state and is better positioned to win in November. These are "unbound" Delegates. States that do this are Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota, Guam, and American Samoa. Taken together, these ZOMBIES subject to recruitment by any candidate number 112 delegates - far higher than the 95 New York Delegates that the Donald plans to win in a few weeks. Another group of ZOMBIES are the collection of abandoned Delegates who were selected or elected to vote for candidates who "suspended' their campaigns. These include Delegates elected for Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, Huckabee, and Paul. These "suspended" delegates number 26. A real question is whether or not these delegates will follow the lead of their failed candidates - most of whom oppose Trump - or if they follow their own instincts. With a close contest like this one, the answer to that question could really matter. I would bet that the pressure is on these ZOMBIES to support one or another and that they have already disconnected their phones, pulled the shades, and turned off their cell phones in favor of a "burner" phone. It wouldn't surprise me if they are presently hiding under the bed as well.
SUPERS or ZOMBIES - could be the key to the nominations in either or both parties. Stay tuned.... Onto Wisconsin and their 42 (Rep) winner-take-all delegates and the Dems with 96 proportional both by State and Congressional District. The present count is Trump - 736; Cruz - 463; Kasich - 158. (1237 needed). On the Dem side, presently, Clinton - 1712; Sanders - 1011; Uncommitted - 158. (2383 needed).
We have all watched the gradual, state-by-state contests and the accumulation of delegates - sometimes in winner-take-all, sometimes proportionate splits, and sometimes in primaries, sometimes in caucus states. One thing that we thought was sure, however, was that the delegates were pledged to one candidate or another. So, maybe not past the first or second ballot at the convention, based on the state rules for delegate behavior - but, you win a delegate, then they vote for you. So, what are the ZOMBIES? Well... on the Democratic side, some "Zombie" delegates are present from the start. They are called "Super-Delegates" and are selected under DNC rules and State Democratic Committee adopted Delegate Plans as approved by the DNC. They are elected officials, DNC Members from that state, other party officials such as the State Democratic Chairman, and a handful of others "elected" by the State Committee in Convention. These generally are self-pledged Delegates, are not elected by primaries or caucuses, and can vote for whoever they choose at any time, including the first ballot. What does that mean? If they are "pledged" to one candidate or another, are they not required to vote for that person? Answer: NO. They are the only Delegates that can change their minds, drop their "pledge" and switch sides BEFORE the first ballot at the Convention. And, that is what makes them SUPER-DELEGATES. If you ask does this really happen often? The answer is no. But, it can. On the Democratic side, Hillary has a GIANT lead in pledged Delegates who were pledged long ago before they were assigned these positions and before the state parade of primaries and caucuses. And, that is what "burns" Bernie. His campaign is attempting to transform those "pledged" Delegates into Zombie delegates who are not pledged to anyone and are free to vote for Sanders. Why would they consider doing that? Simple from a Sanders point of view - if Sanders carried their state by, say... 10 or 20 points in the Democratic Primary in their home state, should these "Super" Delegates consider reflecting the will of the voters in their state or keep their blinders on and vote AGAINST the interest of their own primary voters? Bernie argues that the answer is clear - these are at-large appointed Delegates and they should reflect the will of their electorate, regardless of who they may have been "pledged" to support. So far, there are 158 Undeclared Delegates. Hillary leads Bernie presently by 701 delegate votes including a Super-delegate count of 469 to 71. If those numbers were reversed, subtracting say 375 from Hillary and counting them for Bernie, the count would be 1337 for Hillary and 1386 for Bernie! See why Bernie is making the Super-delegate argument? Still, take the Super-delegates out altogether and Hillary leads 1243 Delegates to Bernie's 980 indicating the fact that Clinton has won 12% more Delegates in the rough and tumble of the primary process than Sanders to date (56 to 44). Add in the Super-delegates and you get a 26% difference - more than twice the elected Delegate spread.
On the Republican side, ZOMBIE delegates are delegates to the convention that are currently not pledged to anyone. In few states, delegates are simply appointed by the state Republican Committee without any pledge to vote for any particular candidate but to use their personal judgment to cast their ballot for the candidate that they believe best represents the Republican Party in their state and is better positioned to win in November. These are "unbound" Delegates. States that do this are Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota, Guam, and American Samoa. Taken together, these ZOMBIES subject to recruitment by any candidate number 112 delegates - far higher than the 95 New York Delegates that the Donald plans to win in a few weeks. Another group of ZOMBIES are the collection of abandoned Delegates who were selected or elected to vote for candidates who "suspended' their campaigns. These include Delegates elected for Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, Huckabee, and Paul. These "suspended" delegates number 26. A real question is whether or not these delegates will follow the lead of their failed candidates - most of whom oppose Trump - or if they follow their own instincts. With a close contest like this one, the answer to that question could really matter. I would bet that the pressure is on these ZOMBIES to support one or another and that they have already disconnected their phones, pulled the shades, and turned off their cell phones in favor of a "burner" phone. It wouldn't surprise me if they are presently hiding under the bed as well.
SUPERS or ZOMBIES - could be the key to the nominations in either or both parties. Stay tuned.... Onto Wisconsin and their 42 (Rep) winner-take-all delegates and the Dems with 96 proportional both by State and Congressional District. The present count is Trump - 736; Cruz - 463; Kasich - 158. (1237 needed). On the Dem side, presently, Clinton - 1712; Sanders - 1011; Uncommitted - 158. (2383 needed).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)