I'm not sure who's saddest right now

[drwex]

Ted Cruz supporters. Dude is gone. Contested convention is gone. Trump not only out-maneuvered you once he figured out the election of delegates was a separate thing, he just crushed your guy in (effectively) a 1:1 contest.

#stopTrump people. I believe the phrase is bend over and kiss your knees, people. Actually I think this camp will split into three. Camp 1 is the "anyone but Hilary" camp and they'll eat crow and support Trump. Camp 2 is the "fukkit I'm going home camp" and they'll slink away quietly to sulk in front of their favorite talk shows. Camp 3 is the future-seekers (see particularly Koch) who are going to just pretend there isn't a presidential contest and spend their money and time down-ticket, trying to hold onto Congress. People with their eyes firmly on 2020 are not necessarily stupid but I do think it's somewhat dangerous to pretend nothing of political import will happen for four years.

Clinton supporters. Damn, she should have won. At least squeaked it out. Instead, Sanders squeaked another win, about 4 percentage points I think. Clinton maintains her delegate lead but she cannot focus on Trump now. She needs to seal this deal. California might hand it to her, but that's still in the future. I expect we'll see the first wave of anti-Hilary Trump ads on the air before that.

Sanders supporters. At some point we are going to have to face the reality that Clinton's continued losses are pointing up her weaknesses as a national candidate. I support Sanders' run because it's shaping the debate in ways I like and because earlier I felt he was helping her sharpen for challenges the Republicans are going to throw at her. But things have gotten way nastier in the past month and that's not helping either candidate. If Sanders had lost he could have bowed gracefully, given a good speech about party unity (I note that Sen Warren gave a careful statement about her opposition to Trump recently) and then suspended his campaign. He can't do that now. Again, I look to California to settle this.

Comments

[davidfcooper.livejournal.com]

"Clinton maintains her delegate lead but she cannot focus on Trump now. She needs to seal this deal."

Sanders gained 5 net delegates from yesterday's 4% margin of victory. If he wins every remaining primary by the same slim margin the number of delegates he'll have to share with Clinton will get her to her target number of pledged delegates (http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/democrats/). The un-pledged delegates comprise the party establishment Sanders has been running against, so his talk of convincing them to flip to his side is a pipe dream. Clinton can indeed and has already started to focus on Trump.

[drwex]

It is, as I noted below, not about reality but about the perception and shaping thereof. The perception is that Sanders won and therefore Clinton is weak(er). She also isn't polling well against Trump in hypotheticals. Historically those have had terrible predictive value, but they do shape stories.

[dcltdw]

Clinton supporters. Damn, she should have won. At least squeaked it out. Instead, Sanders squeaked another win, about 4 percentage points I think. Clinton maintains her delegate lead but she cannot focus on Trump now.

Wait, what? Clinton was and still is at 108% of delegate target count. IN was on-target for her. (Source: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/democrats/ ) She would have to crash to 74% on-target to lose to Sanders (my math: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dPY3f3Ca2fK-4ZWghVQxfriC_NfvQF-3iJ-orwPy2k4/edit#gid=0 )

To me, she can totally pivot to dealing with Trump and let the primary run on autopilot, except for the minor but real detail that could be construed as snubbing Sanders' supporters, who she'll need.

---

Vennochi's editorial in the Globe today is interesting: if Warren endorses Clinton, she gives Sanders cover to gracefully bow out. But given that Sanders is grasping at straws, I don't anticipate Warren using her political capital for nothing.

[drwex]

I think Clinton has her eye on Trump and the general election but she can't ignore Sanders. The question is what the press stories are and how they cover things. To a significant degree Trump's win can be credited to the huge amount of free publicity he got (538 estimates it was the equivalent of two billion dollars worth of free advertising) and that shows the degree to which the press stories shape the reality. If the stories start being about "Clinton ignoring Sanders" then she ends up looking even worse.

[selenite.livejournal.com]

A good chunk of the #neverTrump camp is turning libertarian. I'm not sure if that's more or less than the ones giving up, but it's a big boost for the porcupine party.

[drwex]

I continue to think that big-L Libertarians are not going to poll a whole lot more than their usual 1% but I could be pleasantly surprised.

[wotw]

Re your headline: I feel quite sure that nobody is sadder than me.

[drwex]

I don't think it's a good contest but fwiw you have my sympathies. One of the great failings of our two-party system is that it consistently produces candidates that leave a significant chunk of the voting populace feeling they have no one representing their views and interests in any given contest.

[sariel-t.livejournal.com]

*pebble*

[vibrantabyss.livejournal.com]

Me: The DNC is saddest. Almost the entirety of Clinton's delegate lead are super-delegates that her campaign literally paid the DNC for. Clinton is clear runner up for being fully on board with the scheme.

What price democracy? Someone else can do the math when this is over.