Home | About | Donate

The Atlantic Primaries: Trump and Clinton Consolidate


The Atlantic Primaries: Trump and Clinton Consolidate

Robert Borosage

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton – the two presumptuous if not yet presumptive leaders for their party’s presidential nomination – won big on Tuesday. Trump swept all five states (Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island) by double digits. Clinton won four of five, three convincingly, one (Connecticut) narrowly. The race is not over, but each is far closer to winning the nomination of her and his party.


Love that graphic! A thousand words, indeed.


I must offer congratulations to all those who kept ranting about how people should not vote for Bernie because he was running as a Democrat. Well Bernie didn't have the support progressives should have given him and many came on board only relatively recently, a whole lot were opposed early on. The argument became a disagreement not about Bernie's program but about his running as a democrat. Vote Green Party insisted some, don't vote for the lesser of two evils said many and some kept telling people to not vote at all!

Well congratulations to them.

We won't get the lesser of two evils but we will get one or the other of the two greater ones instead! Whether an autocrat like Trump (who actually may win the presidency) or a corrupt status quo corporatist member of the ruling elite. The greater of two evils from the republican side and the greater of two evils from the democratic side!

Pick your greater of two evils because the much lesser of all the evils is betrayed.

You didn't want the lesser of two evils and so congratulations because you won't get him but you get one of the two greater evils... Pick one! You earned it.


"But she’s won the most votes, and seems increasingly likely to win the most pledged delegates."

While anyone paying attention can see that blocking the 40% of independents from voting only to argue that "she won the most votes" is to give fraud a pass.

The meme that Mrs. Clinton won the most votes must itself be challenged since these "wins" for the most part ONLY occur in states that disenfranchise independent voters.

Since so many former Democrats are FED UP with the Bush Lite policies adopted by Obama, and quite a few are onto Clinton's WAR HAWK version of "Progressive values," they are searching for something else.

And many Independents are drawn to Sanders.

Limiting those who CAN vote also limits outcomes.

This is NOT a fair fight and no journalist or political pundit who cares about the direction of this nation should give this matter a pass...

How different is that from Obama giving the Torture Team a pass using the ole "Let's look forward, not back" item and/or "Mistakes were made."


The overall message of the voting so far seems to say that the whereas the majority of Democratic voters are satisfied with the Democratic establishment the majority of Republican voters are fed up with the Republican establishment. I think a big question is whether this is end of Reaganism? It appears it could be. It seems Republican voters have had it with the Republican conservatives trying to limit the federal government as much as possible and want them to do something positive for them. If Reaganism disappears then there is will be no need for Clintonism so maybe a whole new politics will emerge. On the other hand, if Trump gets soundly routed the conservatives might regain control of the Republican Party and we will be exactly were we have been since Reagan proclaimed that the problem is big government and many Americans agreed.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


It is possible that The Donald will become intoxicated with the idea that he could become president and morph to a more acceptable "respectable" moderate conservatism. He no longer has to feed the rabid right primary voter. It is possible that up to thirty percent of Bernie supporters will not vote for Clinton, I'm one. Such a scenario would effectively cancel Hillary's disproportionate minority vote cushion, she can't do it with minorities alone. Political memory lasts less than the twenty four hour, or twenty four second, news cycle. The New Nixon, The New Clinton, The New Tide, The New New. Don't count Trump out, wait til Madison Ave. gets a hold of him, get ready for the unveiling of The New Donald, all Spic and Span clean.


If the Republican Party rejects Reaganism, Hillary will be more than happy to accept those Republicans who like Reaganomics and don't care as much about conservative social issues into her party. On economic and financial issues Clintonism is a slightly lesser version of Reaganism. Recall that while Reagan said big government was the problem, Clinton was happy to say the era of big government is over. It's mostly social issues that divide the establishments of the parties.

If your goal is to advance progressive social issues, then having a bunch of former Republicans join the Democrats is probably a good thing. However, if the goal is to advance other progressive issues, then it would be time for liberal Democrats to look for a new party.


I wouldn't be so sure whether Clinton would not lose to Trump. I know Sanders would beat him, but I'm not sure about Clinton. During the Campaign Trump will not be the polite Sanders who didn't want to hurt Clinton, Trump is a gutter, and he will expose Clinton's corruption, "carelessness", and easy-trigger story. She will find it very hard during the debates. Besides, she has alienated loads of voters, scorned or just suppressed. It will be difficult they rally behind her in order to beat Trump. The Clinton campaign's foulplay and voter suppression, the closed primaries Sanders has lost, all that translates into the independents' disenfranchising. After they were denied the vote, so as Sanders would be crushed, will they vote for the Queen of Chaos? I don't think so, Clinton's nomination will be registered as a Pyrrhus Victory.


Sanders would defeat Trump. But I don't think it is true that Clinton will. I think Independents will not vote for her and half the Democratic base won't vote for her and no Republican will, except a few professional Neo-Cons.


You can't blame non-Democratic progressives. The blame entirely lies with dyed in the wool Democrats who voted for Clinton. If the primaries had been open to Independents, if no shenanigans of coin tosses, voter purgers, closing down polling places, and flipping votes hadn't been done by the established Democrats, Sanders would have won.


Borosage has given us the meme. If Clinton gets the nomination we who refuse to vote for her can say, "Well, anyone with a pulse should beat Trump, right? So what's the problem with us voting our conscience? Right?"


"“If Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she’d get 5 percent of the vote”

This is close to the truth. HC has huge a fan base among many women who believe that this nation "needs" a woman president, notwithstanding her abysmal lows in character, integrity, policy and judgement.


It's not enough not to vote for Clinton: all who love this country must talk to friends, relatives, neighbors and others and persuade them that a vote for Clinton is a vote for more of the same oppression and marginalization of the 99%, everyone except the stinking 1% usurpers of our democracy. To ensure Clinton won't escape the garbage heap of history, vote for Trump.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


TNo one blamed them. I just congratulated them. Some still persist in attacking Bernie or in telling people not to vote etc. To blame them gives them too much credit. I do blame the mainstream media. Them I do blame. The democrats were only able to succeed in rigging the game because of the MSM.

You remember how things were back in the early days when Bernie first announced? The nit picking about Bernie's foreign policy which the Greens and others constantly harped on and were proven wrong and the other stuff, just helped to defeat Bernie by providing support for the mainstream media attacks and bias. Also Hillary acknowledged the efficacy of the online discussions about the candidates by hiring shills. I also remember many people who changed their minds later on too. Every little bit hurt and now we are nearly sure to face a much worse situation with Trump or Hillary. I think too many progressives used Bernie but didn't help Bernie. It mattered just that much in a close race. People like the Greens who attacked Bernie rather than Hillary, like Hedges and Nader and others who couldn't support Bernie but were wrong and all those negative pieces in Counter Punch. Those people helped screw us and themselves by their spiteful and petty selfishness towards Bernie.

I just congratulated them all on their success for all their efforts helping to keep Bernie from being elected.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.