There’s no greater testament to the end of the “American Century” than the two choices we will apparently have in November. This really is the best we can do.

Posted by: chuckvw | May 4 2016 17:41 utc | 3

Keep in mind that the MSM are just patsies or tools of TPTB .Zbigniew Brzezinski is noted as saying the biggest threat to them (tptb) was the public becoming politically aware . To counter this ,Trump may have been their Trump card …Just a thought but why not .We dont trust the MSM so what ever they are saying its a safe bet that the opposite is true . They dont care how they win as long as we don’t .imo

Posted by: Terry | May 4 2016 18:19 utc | 5

Simply delicious, b.
Nick Lowe wrote a song about this, decades ago.
Cruel To Be Kind…

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | May 4 2016 18:30 utc | 7

Trump won’t win. Hillary will be president.
Even MoA has been wrong.
What does this really mean?
– the punditocracy is way off
– big money is finding it hard to buy an election
– even the wise acres (like me) on blogs like MoA are flat ass wrong
– despite their best efforts, big conglomerate media has no clue
– AmeriKKKans are restless, confused, angry
– the average Joe is lashing out against the BS
BUT, there is a common thread. What the electorate seems to be asking for is simply to go back to the status quo ante … the world of the 1950’s when we lived with the illusion we were the #1 bad ass country that everyone loved (well, except for furriners, blacks, and those damned Indians that hadn’t all died and thus were around to make some people, though few, sad about the AmeriKKKan holocaust).
Bernie is talking about reinstating the New Deal; Trump is talking about being ‘great’ again; Killary is a neo-con in drag … dreaming the ancient AmeriKKKan dream of manifest destiny for the entire world.
And, you and me? We’re obviously just full of s—!
Now, go have a ‘nice’ day …
[Origin of nice
Middle English, foolish, wanton, from Anglo-French, silly, simple, from Latin nescius ignorant, from Latin nescire not to know]

Posted by: rg the lg | May 4 2016 18:45 utc | 9

Oh I see, Dana is a male name here.

Washington Post’s Dana Milbank ready to eat his Trump column

Posted by: radiator | May 4 2016 19:01 utc | 11

Congratulations for your research!

Posted by: Hervé de Tréglodé | May 4 2016 19:28 utc | 13

The elites must be terrified that despite a total media onslaught against Trump he not only has won the nomination, he has more delegates than both his rivals combined. Lacilir at 2.
The elites may be terrified, but about the total media onslaught against Trump, that is incorrect (and thus shows media-Gov relations in a different light.) I don’t even live in the US but can tell that the media, specifically TV, fed on Trump, the Donald, and Trumpism. His talks, his meets, his outrageous pronoucements, provocations, rallies, protestors against, girls in flags shortie skirts or what not, spectacularly bad hair, Amerika first, and on and on. While basically completely ignoring Sanders and giving him zero air time, be it pos or neg. Why? Show time! Money, viewers, clicks, advertisers, and more moolah, a bonanza! Scandal, disruption, novelty! Love it or hate it but watch! Ratings ratings and…jobs!

Posted by: Noirette | May 4 2016 19:37 utc | 15

Rg the lg @ 9
[.]” Hillary will be president.”
– AmeriKKKans are restless, confused, angry
– the average Joe is lashing out against the BS
~ ~ ~ ~
The anger and BS you cited imho, are just the tip of a very large iceberg.
I suggest Clinton fatigue will factor in her defeat.
Imo, Obama was the Clinton’s third and fourth terms. Same old recycled gang.
Among the failures; Hilary Clinton, his SoS, brought us Benghazzi. And, there was the great promise of Obamacare which Clinton can’t disown.
The FBI HRC’s email server investigation aside, if no indict, will be a slap on the wrist as was with Gen. David Petraeus who was given the opportunity to avoid prison and plead a misdemeanor charge.
See Link Wapo, National Security 2016/01/25 “How David Petraeus avoided felony charges and possible prison time for mishandling classified information” [I avoided the url, too long, as it will convolute the Thread]
Just before the elections, Obamacare premiums are expected to double. “Major double-digit increases in premium prices.” This will be an issue in the debates.
The Donald has stated his solution to Obamacare. What of Clinton – can she disown Obamacare?
“Obamacare To Unveil “Price Shock” One Week Before The Elections”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-02/obamacare-unveil-price-shock-one-week-elections

Posted by: likklemore | May 4 2016 19:54 utc | 17

Trump will win, he’s been a birther, half a truther, and he’s prepared to pick up stuff off the internet (Cruz’s dad). He’s bound to be aware of the Clinton’s past Mena etc. let alone Benghazi so his attack arsenal is far better equipped. Hilary is past it, although her stamina so far is astounding. Trump will be presented as a family man, his employees love him, and he’s “independently wealthy” and is therefore able to stand up against the machine on behalf of the people. Now more presidential in manner, more reasoned. Personally: what he said about torture writes him off.

Posted by: Nobody | May 4 2016 20:05 utc | 19

Well, likklemore … I think you misread my blog. What I was saying is that the punditocracy has been saying that Killary will be president … as in Trump won’t.
I also said there is a restlessness that few have really understood (including me). My thesis is that the restlessness is little more than hope for a return to the myopia of the 1950’s.
Alas, I happen to agree with Juannie … no one except Killary could avoid assassination. Both Bernie and Trump will have targets on their asses the day they become president. The only questions will be: 1. how long will it take to assassinate them; and, 2. who will become president once they are assassinated? If the VP isn’t correct, we may see a series of assassinations, or simply a coup.
Now, please do have an especially nice day …

Posted by: rg the lg | May 4 2016 20:09 utc | 21

Bad, Bad, Donald Trump
“Trump has been anointed leader of the disaffected and given the task of neutering their threat. I expect he will be elected the next President of the United States.”

Posted by: Berry Friesen | May 4 2016 20:25 utc | 23

But thes idiotic war criminal liars in the MSM have given trump far bigger coverage -BY FAR – then any other candidate. While the media morons were denying him success, they ensured his victory at the same time.
And all the racist, hateful, warmongering, torture loving speeches by Trump, no different from the policies from the status quo, just so how much spin and lies work in covering up for the evil US Empire.
I would predict A certain victory for trump against Hitlery if he wasn’t such a fucking moron attacking women, saying Women who take abortions should be punished criminally etc. notice how after Trump made that despicable statement that he toned down a bit more.
And Sanders is a pathetic coward. There is no one more vulnerable to attack then truly evil and disastrous Hillary Clinton. But Sanders kept his mouth shut like the miserable status quo loving coward that he is.
Sanders was given the perfect opponent and failed awfully.
If Sanders couldn’t attack Hillary Clinton, then what the hell would you do against the CIA in the Pentagon in the reserve bank While president ? A sanders vote is one of the greatest delusional throwaway votes in history. Well, not so much I guess straight after Obama, and a far grander delusion in voting for Hillary.

Posted by: tom | May 4 2016 20:57 utc | 25

There are three questions here: why Trump won the nomination, why the “pundit class” was so wrong, and what next.
One secret of Trumfp (Trump’s triumph) is that for all “Fox and talk-show” propaganda that GOP electorate absorbed, they did not care about the issues that “everybody” assumed that they care about, like the gender or transgender of restroom visitors. (Cruz tried to capitalize on the restroom issue.) In the same time, they cared about jobs “exported to China and Mexico”, and again, it was assumed that not only Trump is totally wrong on that but that GOP electorate is “free market”.
It kind of boils down to the quality of jobs available in USA for those who are neither best, nor brightest, nor sufficiently connected. The pay, the lack of stability, dreadful conditions etc. Industrial jobs (and many service jobs) were outsourced abroad and domestically, increasingly given to illegal (or until recently illegal) workers. Many GOP candidates ignored the issue of illegal competition on the labor market, only Trump addressed in some fashion the loss of outsourced jobs.
With several good issues, Trump became immune to criticism. I do not watch TV, but from editorials etc. I know that the copious coverage that he got included A LOT OF CRITICISM. And most of the followers of MoA found Trump appealing on the basis of that very criticism (I still do not like him, but some articles criticizing Trump almost made me a believier). There is a huge disconnect between the ruling class and hoi polloi here. The better educated part of the public managed to understand the propaganda, but the less educated ones had only sketchy familiarity, so they relied more on their daily experience.
Why pundits got is so wrong. This is a bit complex. If David Brooks got ANYTHING right, that would be an astonishing event in itself. A number of articles explaining why Trump cannot win were transparent wishful thinking, there is a genre of “prognostication” that essentially described the world as it should be (while the world, being material, is not), in other words, it was more of a rhetorical device than a true prediction. But Nate Silver is actually in the narrowly understood forecast business, and ordinarily he was pretty good at it, so something less than usual happened.
Number one, while not obvious back in September 2015, the disconnect between the elite and hoi polloi increased in recent years. Why voters were happy with some pablum in 2010, 2012, 2014 and suddenly are less than happy? It was more an erosion than a sudden event, And the “technical analysis” assumes that if a product had really such an amazing sales potential than it would be successfully marketed already — it is not like Trump made an amazing discovery. Lastly, what I would not predict in the Fall of 2015 is that GOP candidates would refuse to reposition their message to counter Trump, or fail to cooperate. My interpretation is that GOP leadership does not exist. There was no one who could make decisions to change message, cooperate etc. Instead, rich backers of various candidates had their pet causes and the candidates sticked to those causes as long as they were getting money. Until recently, there was leadership that had a web of contacts with so-called bundlers and with political rank and file, but after Citizens United the leadership became dispensable.
Now, the question what next. Hillary Clinton polls in match-ups about 7% below Sanders who capitalized on the core issues where elite became disconnected, while Hillary is very much at the center of that elite. However, on “points of style”, Trump is unacceptable to a large sector of voters. Hillary already started to change some positions, e.g. stop advocating the newest round of “improved trade agreements”. Furthermore, since Democrats are underdogs, they are more prone to strategic adjustments in their positions.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | May 4 2016 21:17 utc | 27

Like I just wrote …
Kerry repeated the United States would never accept a transition that included Assad.
“If Assad’s strategy is to somehow think he’s going to just carve out Aleppo and carve out a section of the country, I got news for you and for him — this war doesn’t end,” Kerry said.
“It is physically impossible for Assad to just carve out an area and pretend he is somehow going to make it safe while the underlying issues are unresolved in this war.”
source – https://news.vice.com/article/the-us-just-told-assad-he-needs-to-start-giving-up-power-in-syria-by-august-or-else

Posted by: ALberto | May 4 2016 21:20 utc | 29

Trump victory in the general election, I would say. Supposed sense and Clinton doesn’t sound very attractive.

Posted by: Laguerre | May 4 2016 21:34 utc | 31

Media coverage good or bad seems to trump all. Happened before, (perhaps not in the US) and it will happen again.
Media coverage wins. Content does not seem to matter. Politician is a politician is a politician. What they say does not matter, because who believes what a politician says?

Posted by: Peter AU | May 4 2016 21:42 utc | 33

As Richard Charnin, the statistician, has documented believably, Bernie was cheated out of enough primaries that he would have won the nimination, not that b*.
As someone on this site pointed out– don’t remember who– why was there apparently no substantial primary fraud against Trump?
I find it difficult to believe that the b* can be Prez for long: Her negatives are so high that instability wd increase & fooling the people on any level wd be that much more difficult.
So keep your eye on her VP. Seems to me they’ve made a point of telling us about her ill health. And I continue to be surprised that Biden didn’t run– unless he had expectation of becoming Prez another way.
I have no predictions– and I don’t really think it matters which person the oligarchs pick for us via the crooked vote-counting. We’re going to have to save ourslves some other way.
One more thought: Soros says the NWO w/b “socialism”. I wd guess pie-in-the-sky promises, in which people own nothing, have no independence, privacy or permitted personal objectives– w digital money of course– perhaps the most pre-eminent controller.

Posted by: Penelope | May 4 2016 22:07 utc | 35

Thank you Piotr @ 27. That was an interesting round-up. I’m not sure I’d agree w your very last point, though. What makes you think Democrats are underdogs? We’ve had a lot of Democrat presidents recently. Also Richard Charnin says that one-third of those who vote are minority & vote 83% Dem. Unless & until Rep’s change their appeal to minorities I’d say Reps are the underdog.

Posted by: Penelope | May 4 2016 22:24 utc | 37

Likkelmore @ 17,
Wouldn’t it be something if Obama doubled the price of ObamaCare, AND went to war against Assad before the election. Is it me, or do the blows seem to be coming faster?

Posted by: Penelope | May 4 2016 22:38 utc | 39

If the TPP and TTIP and the other one passes, corporations will rule over nations; privatization of everything will occur. The burden of proof will be on the consumer to prove he was poisoned. Hillary was for these until she was against them.
Obama’s last assignment is to ram these thru. He must fail. Only Trump or Bernie present the chance to stop these draconian corporate measures.

Posted by: fast freddy | May 4 2016 23:14 utc | 41

I’d say Reps are the underdog.
Posted by: Penelope | May 4, 2016 6:24:56 PM | 37
GOP holds the House and the Senate, and on sub-Presidential races, GOP enjoys a very large money advantage. And while politicians are slow on the uptake, the fact that for a number of months Sanders polls about 7% better than Clinton is something that they notice. I would need to dig for links, but somewhere I have seen that Clinton already lost enthusiasm for trade deals.
However, I was not precise enough. Politicians stick to positions for two possible reasons: to get votes or to get money. When there is discrepancy between the two the trick is to gain votes with positions that the donors do not care much about. Given that, what passes for “leadership” became “money primary”. Here where under-dog/top-dog dynamics is at play. As the majority of fat cats with millions to spare on politics support GOP, they have/had the luxury of making strict demands on the beneficiaries and the latter were inflexible. In part, they were recruited (almost bread) to be like that. Democratic donors, being under-dogs within their own class, would be inclined to be more flexible. And pretty much for the same reasons, liberal politicians are more flexible.
If I were Democratic behind-the-scene mastermind, I would already compile a list of “nicer gentler versions of Bernie Sanders” and some “courageous stands” that Democratic politicians should take in 2016.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | May 4 2016 23:56 utc | 43

Tee hee hee. Thats why they’re called pundits, originally from Sanskrit (pandit – modern day vedic astrologers). They’d also be accurately described as panditammanya – FANCYING oneself leanered or clever, an ignorant and conceited person.

Posted by: Andy V | May 5 2016 0:04 utc | 45

I called Trump getting the Republican nom from the start. He played a brilliant game against the party, its members, and a hostile press. Despite the constant claims, he’s certainly not an idiot.
Hillary is a totally different beast however. I think Hillary will catch more crossover votes than Trump will. The fact is that he alienates many. African Americans that I know, for instance, are almost wholly against him.
I think the election is Hillary’s to lose. Right now her team and the democratic party heads + advisers are hard at work developing a campaign to undermine Trump. It’s going to get very ugly, because that’s what can marginalize Trump the most. Associating his brand with riots and scenes of extreme situations will scare voters away imho

Posted by: aaaa | May 5 2016 0:25 utc | 47

BF @ 23: “Trump has been anointed leader of the disaffected and given the task of neutering their threat.”
Yep, just like Obama.
LXV @ 4: “Either way, it will be a rerun of the old adage “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.
True I’m afraid. Who’ll win the “election”? Doesn’t matter.

Posted by: ben | May 5 2016 0:44 utc | 49

Bad, Bad, Donald Trump
“Donald Trump is like ISIS, launched into leadership by the very people who flamboyantly claim to oppose him.”

Posted by: Berry Friesen | May 5 2016 1:16 utc | 51

@3 chuckvw, ‘This really is the best we can do.’
I agree. This is the best our current system can do.
@4 LXV, ‘Meet the new boss, same as the old boss’
I agree. Meet the new boss … 2008, 2016, …
@27 pb, ‘after Citizens United the leadership became dispensable.’
Yes!
@28 dbo, ‘Trump or Clinton, either way Murica is screwed ‘
Yes, either way we’re screwed …. and it’s been that way for how many years?
@32 perimetr. ‘hose who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything’
Yes, they’ll be flipping the switches in all the ‘vote counting’ gear come November.
@35 pen, ‘We’re going to have to save ourslves some other way.’
amen
@42 ff ‘Obama’s last assignment is to ram these [TTP, TTIP, and the other one] thru.’
The US Congress will pass them in a midnight omnibus heartbeat – our hopes lie witht he countries on the other ens.
@45 denis.
On Kasich … he’s going to be Trump’s VP ? Maybe the assassination ‘artists’ will make him prez, that’s the kind ‘smarts’ the GOP specializes in.
On HRC … who knows, Biden seems in good position if HRC is ‘assassinated’ by the Justice Department. Don’t really see the motivation for it though.
We can either continue to laugh and snark as we all circle the drain or we can act.
I suggest write-in elections. Open to alternatives.

Posted by: jfl | May 5 2016 2:25 utc | 53

It would be interesting to see an election between Trump and Sanders for the “educational” value but it looks unlikely unless Clinton II is taken out by factors above our pay-grade to know.
I see Trump as the “Don’t throw me in the briarpatch” candidate for the global plutocrats. Usually they install dictators like Trump in more backwards countries but they have certainly created a rabid following for him in the US. If elected/annointed, he will speed the move towards a military run world. All your freedoms will only exist in your head until they can find them there.
Pundits are a dime a dozen. It takes honor to speak truth to power like b does. We need to continually appreciate that and be motivated by his example.
I will likely vote for Jill Stein as I could not vote for either Trump nor Clinton II

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 5 2016 4:05 utc | 55

in re 51 —
Let’s not be disingenuous. Why are the states exercising their “right” to secede? To exercise their “right” to own human beings without Federal “interference.”

Posted by: rufus magister | May 5 2016 6:44 utc | 57

This article reminds me of the similar and amusing timeline of events
which chronicled Napoleon Bonapartes escape from exile on island of Elba
to his eventual arrival in Paris.
“The following is a list of Paris newspaper headlines reporting the journey of Napoleon across France, on his return from exile on Elba, March 9 to March 22, 1815:
March 9
THE ANTHROPOPHAGUS HAS QUITTED HIS DEN
March 10
THE CORSICAN OGRE HAS LANDED AT CAPE JUAN
March 11
THE TIGER HAS ARRIVED AT CAP
March 12
THE MONSTER SLEPT AT GRENOBLE
March 13
THE TYRANT HAS PASSED THOUGH LYONS
March 14
THE USURPER IS DIRECTING HIS STEPS TOWARDS DIJON
March 18
BONAPARTE IS ONLY SIXTY LEAGUES FROM THE CAPITAL
He has been fortunate enough to escape his pursuers
March 19
BONAPARTE IS ADVANCING WITH RAPID STEPS, BUT HE WILL NEVER ENTER PARIS
March 20
NAPOLEON WILL, TOMORROW, BE UNDER OUR RAMPARTS
March 21
THE EMPEROR IS AT FONTAINEBLEAU
March 22
HIS IMPERIAL AND ROYAL MAJESTY arrived yesterday evening at the Tuileries, amid the joyful acclamation of his devoted and faithful subjects.
source(http://wrathfuldove.org/2010/01/29/telling-and-amusing-headline-progression/)
courtesy Paris newspapers 1815

Posted by: chris m | May 5 2016 9:42 utc | 59

Which world leaders can be taken seriously? Merkel?, Cameron? Hollande? Just like Obama, Clintons, the Bush Criminals, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson these are also clowns.
Trump is a greater joke – a cartoon in the flesh. He trumps the others. You’re fired!

Posted by: fast freddy | May 5 2016 11:04 utc | 61

Tulsi Gubbard will be the VP pick for many reasons.

Posted by: Jules | May 5 2016 11:36 utc | 63

That was supposed to be a pick.
Trying again.
Tulsi Gubbard

Posted by: Jules | May 5 2016 11:39 utc | 65

Trump doesn’t have to rely on unreliable Secret Service protection, as JFK did. He has hired his own security.

Posted by: lysias | May 5 2016 12:14 utc | 67

Here’s the dream ticket. Trump teaming up with an anti-establishment Democrat anti-Neo Con Terrorist (ISIS) Hawk (work with Russia, not against them).
Trump-Gabbard 2016.
http://www.trump-gabbard.com.
Spread it around.
Cheers.
Suggestions welcome.

Posted by: Jules | May 5 2016 12:36 utc | 69

Let’s try agin on that.
Trump-Gabbard 2016
http://www.trump-gabbard.com

Posted by: Jules | May 5 2016 12:38 utc | 71

Sorry, not sure why it keeps adding in moonofalabama.org etc. into the hyperlink.

Posted by: Jules | May 5 2016 12:41 utc | 73

Is this what you are trying to link to Jules?
I agree Tulsi is a breath of fresh air even compared to Bernie.

Posted by: juannie | May 5 2016 12:55 utc | 75

Re: Posted by: juannie | May 5, 2016 8:55:27 AM | 73
Thanks for trying, same problem!

Posted by: Jules | May 5 2016 13:05 utc | 77

One possibility I see on the horizon (and I don’t see a lot of discussion about it) is the distinct possibility that Obama will declare state of emergency and initiate continuity of government measures to ensure the survival of the nation. This election could very well tear the nation apart and Obama would only have to initiate a decree to keep it from happening. With him retaining the office until such time as is good for the nation to once again have a choice in whom they wish to serve in that capacity. Would this scenario be any worse that the current choice between Trump and Hillbillery?

Posted by: thecelticwithinme | May 5 2016 13:15 utc | 79

Jules;Give it a rest.Gabbard is obviously a ambitious Hindu.and is anti Muslim,and probably too young Constitutionally for VP.And Jill stein?A Jewish female?The most out of touch with reality humans in America?sheesh.
And B Friesen says;The Zionists really wanted Trump in the first place.Hahahaha.No they want the hell bitch.
I just hope Trump is as radical as he appears,Russia,the world and US need it.

Posted by: dahoit | May 5 2016 13:27 utc | 81

Proven Track Record from Hell.
Six reasons not to vote for Zionist Hellory Clinton: Honduras, Haiti, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine.
“The harm she did to each country was not in the interest of the American people, and it was disastrous for the residents there.” – Eric Zuesse

Posted by: fastfreddy | May 5 2016 13:44 utc | 83

Re: Posted by: dahoit | May 5, 2016 9:27:35 AM | 79
In the United States, a person must be at least 35 to be President or Vice President, 30 to be a Senator, or 25 to be a Representative, as specified in the U.S. Constitution. Most states in the U.S. also have age requirements for the offices of Governor, State Senator, and State Representative.[28] Some states have a minimum age requirement to hold any elected office (usually 21 or 18).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsi_Gabbard
For the record Tulsi is 35 (born April 1981), so she is definitely eligible.
As an interesting aside, if she were to be elected as VP to Trump later this year and serve two terms as Trump’s VP Gabbard could then stand for the Presidency in 2024 potentially.
If she were to do that and be elected, at the 2025 inauguration Gabbard would be almost exactly 1 month older than John F Kennedy at his inauguration in 1961. 43 years and 250 odd days.

Posted by: Jules | May 5 2016 13:49 utc | 85

We could start by banning e-voting, but how do we crack the MSM ban on even discussing it?

Posted by: ben | May 5 2016 14:10 utc | 87

Imo, Obama was the Clinton’s third and fourth terms. Same old recycled gang.
— likklemore at 17
Right on. The gang being the Dem. apparatus, which is now broken, by Sanders (left-er-wing popular contender as opposed to some stand-in bozo in it for visibility, status, money, say) – thru Killary being despised as a neo-con in new garb – and indirectly by Trump.
The two-party system has shattered and many are floundering as their lives (jobs, status, influence) and will be seriously affected. That includes Repubs. and not just Dems.
Looking further into media-Trump, re. total media onslaught against Trump (Lacilir at 2) I found this article, a surprise for me.
(re Trump): ” Here is how much was spent to stop him winning the nomination. ”
msm money
In such a situation, bad publicity is equivalent to publicity, which is all great, as Trump certainly knows. E.g. having a petition signed to ban him from England for excluding new entrant muslims to the US is a … triumph.
Piotr at 27: My interpretation is that GOP leadership does not exist. There was no one who could make decisions to change message, cooperate etc. Instead, rich backers of various candidates had their pet causes .. That is about right I reckon. They tried hard after Obama was elected but got nowhere, all their proposals, position papers, etc. were ridiculous.

Posted by: Noirette | May 5 2016 14:56 utc | 89

Denis 45 yeah polling showed Kasich could beat Mrs Clinton but primary election results showed some pretty mixed results for him and could an unheard of republican apparatchik really could do any better than Romney or McCain? I don’t think so.
if Mrs Clinton can’t be the Democratic candidate then write off the democrats chances as it won’t just be Biden, it will be Sanders, the Clinton rump candidate, Warren, the Obama faction candidate etc, etc any number of people.
As for Trump, I still can’t see the Republican apparatchiks accepting him, may just quietly let his campaign wither since its a bit obvious if they toss him out at the Convention and return to battle after 4 years of Mrs Clinton with one of their own.

Posted by: heath | May 5 2016 15:24 utc | 91

There are several issues that Sanders refused to use to attack Clinton as a corrupt and hateful person.
1. The massive explicit corruption of the clinton foundation
2. The decade jail sentence for commoners for mishandling classified information
2a. The info in those e-mails, like her friends directly benefitting from the destruction of Libya
3. The money laundering or fraud of her the clinton victory fund
4. War mongering in Syria, which would have directly benefitted al qaeda and
Trump will attack her constantly, and will make it a good show. There’s also the possibility of her stroking out and Bernie becoming the default nominee, an outcome we can all pray for.

Posted by: Cresty | May 5 2016 16:00 utc | 93

@ Noirette 87 and Bruno Marz @ 88– thanks for expanding
Imho, this is a high recommend read;
Gary Leupp, Professor of History at Tufts University, has compiled this sobering reference piece:
Hillary R. Clinton’s Resume from age 17 – includes Foreign Policy achievements and 2016 Campaign branding
What the record shows:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clintons-foreign-policy-resume-what-the-record-shows/5523276
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
It was a challenge to select from the paragraphs of golden nuggets. I leave it to readers’ selections.
In 1,000 years of Sundays, you can’t make this stuff up!

Posted by: likklemore | May 5 2016 17:18 utc | 95

@94
“…what happens to the delegates previously pledged to Cruz, Kaisch, Fiorina, Rubio?”
I was wondering the same thing. Maybe this helps.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-will-happen-to-ted-cruzs-562-delegates/

Posted by: dh | May 5 2016 17:49 utc | 97

When it becomes Trump against Clinton I expect that some Wall Street guys will be so friendly to help Trump by disclosing details of Clinton’s Wall Street speeches.

Posted by: WWWyning | May 5 2016 18:39 utc | 99