Market rebounding. It's not because of Joe Biden

The reason the DJIA is rebounding again (up 500 as I write) this morning in the face of coronavirus fears, is not because anyone is enthused about Biden winning, it's about Sanders losing.

The markets are scared of Sanders, and rightfully so.  He's not a Democratic Socialist.  He's a Socialist and pretty much a communist if you look closely enough.  He's a destroyer of capitalism.  No one is thrilled about Joe Biden winning and looking like the nominee this morning, except perhaps president Trump.

Bloomberg drops out

ROFL

So Bloomberg has dropped out and endorsed Biden.  Clearly he was the Democrat Establishment Plan B, and appears to be no longer necessary.   More strikingly, he appears to know it.  It's odd given his speech last night seemingly geared to carrying on.  So he was never a wildcard, he was always a Plan B.  It proves that the Democrat Establishment wants to court socialist voters but doesn't want them to share in the power.

They view socialists, youth, Hispanics, labor, African Americans, women all as useful idiots that they can trick into supporting them so they can continue to consolidate their power.  They have no interest in maintaining America.  They are entirely, ENTIRELY, about self-interest.  American workers, their supporters, indeed all Americans be damned.  Cheap labor in China or Vietnam or through illegal immigrants all serve their desire for profit.  It is a distorted version of capitalism that ultimately will kill itself as they buy their way to power with free handouts and eventually socialism wins not just in America, but everywhere.  They feed the beast to serve their own interests and they end up being eaten by the beast they have nurtured.

But I digress.

It seems like, as I mentioned earlier, that Bloomberg dropping out serves Biden quite well.  Don't expect Warren to drop out if it is indeed an Establishment play to go all in on Biden.  They want Sanders out, she siphons voters from him.  Although if it becomes too transparent and they risk alienating the Sanders voters she may be prodded to leave as well.  She's an Establishment type masquerading as a progressive.  At least it seems so.  It's either that or she truly believes the ridiculous platform positions she's taken.  She may actually believe she's American Indian - so there's that.

In any case, Sanders route to the nomination just got more difficult, but no matter what, Democrats are still the underdog to win back the White House.

Really Democrat establishment? This guy?

It looks like going into Super Tuesday the Democratic Establishment has decided to circle the wagons around Joe Biden in order to put a stop to Bernie Sanders (and possibly also Bloomberg).

But why Biden?  His campaign is already going down in flames thanks to... Joe Biden:

Viability is a real thing but it seems like the Democrats are fresh out. It's hard to know whether Sanders, Biden or Bloomberg would be the easiest candidate for president Trump to defeat but right now it's looking like any one of them will lose to the president. That leaves Elizabeth Warren. Although it looks like voters have already left her so that's a no-go too.

Are the Obamacare price increase an October surprise for Hillary - from Obama

First of all, just...wow, America:

Seriously though - why was this announced right before the election instead of afterwards if president Obama didn't want to kneecap Hillary Clinton in her run for the White House. This is not something Democrats can swing in their favor at all.

Perhaps Obama preferred Sanders all along.

Sanders picks up the pieces and goes home

So Bernie Sanders has left the Democratic party.  Weird, since he just told all of his national supporters to support Hillary Clinton.

Sellout? Fake?  Confused , old man?

The nomination was barely sealed up at the Democratic National Convention before Bernie Sanders, who had campaigned against Hillary Clinton for the party’s nod, went back to being an Independent.

Sanders, who considers himself, officially, an Independent in Congress because his views lean further left than the Democratic party’s platform, caucuses with Democrats. But until declaring an intention to run for the presidency in 2015, he had rarely, if ever, identified as a member of the Democratic Party (he’s been in politics since 1979).

And now, despite pleading with his base to support Hillary, even though they’re concerned that she’s too moderate, Sanders will return to Vermont and to his seat in the Senate, and he’ll do it with no official party affiliation.

The same article tries to defend Debbie Wasserman Schultz as having done her job.  No.  You can't prove Sanders didn't leave because of the DNC's cheating to help Hillary win.  Why would Sanders stick around after that?

Sanders did the right thing.  His mistake was trying to convince people to support Hillary.  There was no reason for that unless he was hoping for a senior spot in her cabinet and was subsequently told he was not going to get it.

Sanders sells out, supporters don't

This, is karma for corrupt Hillary:

PHILADELPHIA — Sen. Bernie Sanders sent a text message to the leaders of his delegation pleading with them not to protest on the Democratic convention floor Monday night.

“I ask you as a personal courtesy to me to not engage in any kind of protest on the floor,” he wrote in the text message to his delegate whips. “Its of utmost importance you explain this to your delegations.”

He signed the text, “Bernie.”

Many of his delegates did not heed his warning, as some Sanders supporters interrupted the convention’s opening prayer with chants of “Bernie!” DNC Chair Rep. Marcia Fudge reprimanded the delegates for interrupting her opening remarks when she said she was “excited” to help elect Hillary Clinton and Sen. Tim Kaine. “Excuse me!” she pleaded, as Sanders delegates interrupted her with boos and chants of “Bernie.”

She may have reached her tipping point.  We can only hope at this moment.

Thursday Hillary Bash - Election Fraud

Fraud comes easy when you are a Clinton or the DNC wing of Clinton Inc.  During the primaries a lot of funny (aka likely illegal) stuff went on during the primaries that swung voters magically away from Bernie Sanders and/or towards Hillary Clinton.

Man sites have reported on it but Heavy describes it in a nutshell, interestingly, and not truly surprisingly, the subterfuge is all on the Democratic side:

Huge voter registration problems are plaguing states with closed primaries, leading to allegations of election fraud around the country. People who said they were previously registered Democrat or Republican suddenly found their registrations inactive or their party affiliations dropped, and now they can’t vote in their primary. These problems were a big issue in Arizona, and now they’re being seen in New York, California, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and more.

Many people are concerned election fraud is happening, but others think it could be widespread clerical errors. Either way, the problem is affecting people’s ability to vote. Is your voter registration affected, too?

Don't expect these sort of hijinx to disappear in the general election. If Trump is within whistling distance of Clinton in the polls, the dirty tricks will be in full effect. If he's actually leading, watch for dead voters, illegal immigrant voters, phantom voters and any other sort of phony voter the DNC can muster to bury Hillary's rival using as many fictional people as necessary.

Addendum:  Let's not forget hacking voting machines as a Clintonista option.  There's a good article about it here.

Sanders supporters still unconvinced about Hillary?

Sour puss.

Via RCP, this tasty morsel today:

Although the delegates Hillary Clinton earned in primaries and caucuses, coupled with superdelegate endorsements, put her over the top for the Democratic nomination mathematically, the YouGov survey (and other polls) show that she has made little headway in converting the last big chunk of Sanders loyalists to her cause. In fact, the reconnect poll shows that since February the number of Sanders voters willing to support her in the general election has actually dropped slightly, from 68 percent to 66 percent.

Make of it what you will - either she has room for growth within her Democratic base, or she can't make the sale to what should be a locked up portion of her constituency.

Why Trump will win (or lose), pure and simple

On the same day that Obama endorses Hillary Clinton for president (no real surprise), the FBI confirms that it is conducting a criminal investigation of her. Obama has become the status quo.  Endorsing Hillary is more of the same status quo.  And the status quo is apparently criminal.  This at a time that people are fed up with the status quo.

Is it any wonder Trump is surging even while he's crude, abrasive and often is a hard listen?  Even Latinos are not so radically opposed to him.

It's seeming more and more like Trump is going to win and the reason is clear: people are willing to put aside their distaste for him because the country is in dire straits. Clinton is more of the same failed approach and Trump is promising to fix things.  Clinton fundamentally believes things are on track.  Maybe for her and her million dollar speeches they are, but voters don't see it that way.

Voters see trouble.  they feel it personally in millions of cases.  Bernie Sanders gets that and is the socialist man in the right place at the right time.  The GOP, for all their supposed understanding that the country is sick, did not field a candidate capable of embracing the unrest and unease - except for Trump.  Those voters have no place to go in a head-to-head Hillary-Trump match except for Trump.

Trump could win a lot more electoral votes than the 270 necessary to win.  Unless..

There's a third party spoiler (think Johnson or Romney) or maybe if Hillary in a transparent bid to get his supporters on board selects Sanders as her running mate.  Either or both of those scenarios could derail Trump.  Trump could derail Trump, but evidence so far suggests he won't.  Then again, he's trying to attract more moderate supporters and a new tone might help there. I doubt it. His track record of bombast has generated his success, so he's not likely to change.  And indeed softening his image might look like capitulation to the status quo. That likely will hurt as much as it will help.

Trump is likely to continue and will attract incrementally smaller increases in support.  But barring the impact of either scenario mentioned above, it's likely to prove enough for him to win.  So all things being equal, assuming he does, let's hope he can actually deliver on some of the important things he's promised that will help make America great again.

What's wrong with this post?

The title of the Politico article says it all, "Can Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama save the establishment?"

Hillary Clinton stepped into the 2016 presidential race hoping voters would effortlessly pass the torch from President Barack Obama to her, yet found herself surrounded by a raging anti-establishment inferno. “Burn it down” was the unofficial slogan of the Republican primary. And Bernie Sanders gave her a run for her money by metaphorically lighting all her Wall Street speaking fee money on fire.

Today, as she is unofficially crowned the “presumptive nominee,” Clinton has officially done what Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham could not: survive the populist wave while being perceived as an insider. Now, as Donald Trump tries to assemble a potent pitchfork brigade to seize Washington, the establishment’s lonely eyes are turning to Hillary Clinton.

...she and Obama have begun crafting arguments more associated with establishment politics than populism.

Make no mistake: this is nothing less than a political high-wire act being attempted by a meticulous but not always agile candidate. Many Sanders voters say they don’t trust her when she claims to be a “progressive,” and any new rightward lean will only confirm their suspicions.

And there's what's wrong - the establishment is not worth saving because the establishment has twisted itself into a self-serving mass of bloat and avarice. The establishment are not benign overlords looking to do the best for the most as they claim.  They seek power for the sake of power and the hell with everyone else.  All that they offer is the pretense of concern.

Trump blows that apart as does Sanders, whereas Clinton is the embodiment of the self-serving establishment seeking the status quo.  Even asking the question, shows what side you are on.  I was never impressed with Politico, this only reinforces the reason why.

After Puerto Rico, Hillary has her artificial win

Add in the Superdelegate party insiders who pre-backed Hillary Clinton, and regardless of whether Bernie Sanders sweeps the vote in California and other states today, Clinton has "won" the "Democratic" party nomination for president;

SAN FRANCISCO — Unbridled fury about the media and the Democratic establishment rippled through a crowd of Bernie Sanders supporters here Monday after reports that Hillary Clinton had clinched the Democratic presidential nomination...

Turning toward the Democratic superdelegates who do not formally vote until the convention, Sanders said they should look hard at polling data and argued that he is best positioned to take on Trump in the fall campaign.

Bernie Sanders will continue on, in the hope only rto drag the party further left.  I would have laughed at the conundrum for the party as Hillary would need to keep moving left and moving out of contention versus Trump (or any Republican nominee who might have won for that matter), but now I'm actually concerned.  Because as Hillary tacks leftward, even after clinching the nomination the thought of her winning is that much scarier.  So I'm currently a bit perplexed.  There should be some clarity once we reach the Democratic and Republican conventions.  At least I hope that will be the case.

Looking past Indiana

Trump is poised to win Indiana, and Hillary Clinton likewise.  The Republican nomination is looking less and less like it will be a contested one, and Bernie Sanders is not going to upset the Hillary Clinton rotten apple cart.

It's going to be Trump versus Clinton.  #NeverTrumpers are going to stamp their feet, hell they might stay home come November, but they are not going to change the primary at all. Trump will get 1237 delegates prior to the convention.  Ted Cruz is becoming, not unhinged, but seemingly desperate to shake up the situation and is looking more desperate and less presidential in doing so.  Kasich will continue his delusional ways and strip off some delegates.  Just not enough.

On the Democrat side, it's not a question of if but rather when Hillary passes the threshold to secure the nomination.  Sanders will in fact speak emphatically on her behalf at the Democratic convention, trying to rouse his supporters on her moribund behalf.  Simultaneously he'll be angling for a key position on team Hillary - perhaps even a VP nod.

Hillary is facing eroding favorables, thanks to Sanders.

The nosedive Mrs. Clinton’s rating has taken among independents suggests she has a lot of work to do to win those voters over in a general election. Her campaign has already begun fretting about the lasting damage Mr. Sanders’s criticism of her could have in the general election, and has publicly encouraged the senator to rally his supporters behind her for the sake of the Democratic Party.

Already, Republican front-runner Donald Trump has begun crediting some of his attacks on Mrs. Clinton to her rival. At a rally in Indiana on Monday, the real-estate developer criticized Mrs. Clinton’s “bad judgment” and thanked Mr. Sanders for similarly targeting her.

Trump of course has his own troubles in a general election. Predominant among them are the self-inflicted-wound #NeverTrumpers whose opposition to the Donald seems so strong, they'd rather see 8 years of Hillary Clinton at the helm than bring themselves to consider voting for him. Independents are not happy with him in probably less numbers than with Hillary, and Democrat voters are as opposed to him as Republicans are to Hillary Clinton. That's probably a wash. A strong GOP turnout would possibly be enough to push Trump over the top. So far it looks like that's not going to happen. You think the primaries are ugly?The general election is going to be a brawl and there are going to be more than just two sides.

UPDATE:  It looks like Bernie might upset Hillary Clinton in Indiana.  That's what happens when you start looking too far ahead- you make mistakes in the present.  My mistake. It's ironic given the post I have scheduled for tomorrow (which I still stand behind, 100%).  That said, regardless of an upset in Indiana, Bernie is only delaying the inevitable.  Clinton will still win.  But he will manage to stay in the race and do more damage to Hillary Clinton and that's a good thing.  Unless he actually wins.  The potential for America to go full-on socialist is a nightmare beyond belief.

Two contested conventions?

Back about six weeks ago, I tried to do the calculus on who would win what state for both the Democratic primaries.  I even posted about some of it.  I need to dig out my Excel tables and see how I did on a state-by-state basis.  But from the perspective of now, the races both are a lot more interesting than they were a week ago.

Ted Cruz trounced Trump in Wisconsin and Bernie Sanders has bested Clinton in a impressively growing string of contests too.  It's becoming more and more possible (the unDemocratic super-delegates aside) that both parties end up having contested conventions if recent trends hold.  I doubt many people would have guessed that a week ago.

Buckle your seat belts. 

And as an unrelated aside R.I.P. Merle Haggard.

Sanders - not the Comeback Kid, rather a symptom

Bernie Sanders won three caucuses over the weekend - Washington, Alaska and Hawaii. He's still not going to win, but he's a symptom of the underlying problem for Democrats just like Donald Trump is embodying on the Republican side during this election cycle.  The problem for Democrats is on the horizon but not that far off.  

Sanders made up delegate ground and in a high percentage way.  But in terms of total delegates, and Superdelegates, Sanders merely did that which was incumbent upon him to not have to shut down his campaign.

To say Sanders has an uphill battle is an understatement.  It's more like up-a-mountain.  That is not to say it's an impossible task, but if I had to lay odds on the eventual nominee I'd say it's 99% likely that it's going to be Hillary Clinton.

The Democrats have not yet gone through a full blown anti-establishment house cleaning like the Republicans are currently experiencing. They probably thought Obama was it back in 2008.  By now there's perhaps a comfort level given that they've had the White House for 8 years and they think they are the establishment so the status quo is okay.

Not so.

The Democratic party is seeing some of its own grass roots revolt in the support of Bernie Sanders.  Here's the problem (for them).  If they ignore the situation the way the GOP did, they will allow the vacuum of solutions to the discontent to be filled with the likes of Bernie Sanders and fellow socialists.  They'll become an overtly socialist political party.  

That's potentially good for Republicans who would fill the vacuum everywhere right of far left progressivism.  But it's also very worrisome for the country.  What if they become a successful socialist Democratic party?  That ends American exceptionalism.  Both parties have had the chance to clean up their acts before open revolts have happened.  Democrats need to wake up and realize that their status quo day of reckoning is coming and just like the Republicans, and that not being ready for it will lead to chaos.

Election poker hands

It's interesting to see how various parties are playing their hands this primary season. It's as if this were a long poker game.

Hillary Clinton is trying to bluff her way through emailgate even as another technician has pleaded the 5th amendment right to not self incriminate in her server scandal. With one already given immunity and another seemingly on the same course, it's starting to look like it's not Hillary's word against a single technician with a grudge, but rather at a minimum, two voices and some potential eventual email evidence. Should she bluff her way through the primaries, then get indicted, does she have to fold her hand?  On the other hand if the FBI cannot compile enough evidence, she can fall back to her stale argument of a "vast right wing conspiracy" to indict her and her bluff might actually succeed.

Everybody is wrong

Donald Trump is wrong.  His bluster and uncouth campaign for the Republican nomination is looking more and more like a winning formula - but not so in the general election against Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.  In order to win there, he's going to have to start, immediately, looking presidential, sounding knowledgeable on a myriad of issues by actually having some details at the ready.

Polls indicate that Trump will get decimated in the general election.  Except the polls are wrong.  Before yesterday polls had Hillary Clinton trouncing Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary in Michigan. By not a little, but by A LOT  Except she didn't. She lost.

People in the 'anybody but Trump' camp are wrong too.  Not that he should be the nominee.  I personally trust him about as far as I could throw the GOP elephant.  He's not my first choice.  He could fundamentally screw up the Supreme Court for decades. He really could.  But people wanting Trump to go away, are using the vs. Hillary polling as their latest reason that Trump should not be the nominee.  Their timing could not be worse as the latest evidence shows that polls on Hillary aren't as rock solid as liberals believe Hillary's chances are.  Angry Trump voters are not blind.  Trump very well could be the most beatable general election Republican in the field but six months ago people thought he was the most beatable Republican in the primaries. Current evidence supports their mistrust for polls not the the reverse - polls are not going to repudiate Trump supporters' faith.

Wanting Trump to falter in his quest for the nomination is not a bad thing, but the latest set of tactics are as wrong as the previous ones.

Then again, I could be wrong.

Sucker play

In looking at the RealClearPolitics head to head polls lately, I'm having trouble reconciling what I'm seeing.  Every candidate except for Donald Trump in poll after poll beats Hillary Clinton.  Even Trump beats her in some of the polls.  On the other hand, Bernie Sanders seems to beat every Republican in most polls in head-to-head contests. Not all.

But we're continually told that it's inevitable that Clinton wins the nomination and that she beats the Republican no matter who it might be.  

I'm struck by the fact that middle of the road voters who won't vote for Clinton would turn out for Bernie Sanders should he bee the nominee.  Or perhaps more of the very liberal voters would turn out for Sanders than moderates who would sit out should he win than the reverse case for Hillary.  The conclusion, as someone pulling for a conservative president, is that we're supposed to be cheering for Hillary to beat Sanders.  I don't buy that.

America is not a socialist, and for moderates or conservatives, I'd expect people to be pressed to turn out against Sanders as much as for his eventual Republican opponent.  Cheering for Hillary is a sucker play as a Republican.  She's the harder candidate to beat.

So why do the polls say otherwise?  Are pollsters like PPP secretly trying to get out the vote for Hillary on the Democrat side?  Are they trying to entice independent voters into Democrat primaries and caucuses to boost Hillary's chances in the primaries and after she's won the polls will turn in her favor once again?  Is she going to be billed as Comeback Kid 2?

I'm not suggesting voters are misleading pollsters, or that the pollsters are off.  What I'm suggesting is that the polling is skewed in such a way as to show that Sanders would be a harder opponent for Cruz/Trump/Rubio than would Clinton.  And in the case of some pollsters, it's deliberate.  The only other possibility that I can come up with is that the pollsters are talking to younger voters than in previous cycles thanks to changing technology. But pollsters can oversample various demographics to account for that potential bias. I'd expect they would.  I haven't taken detailed looks a the individual polls yet.  It's too early for that.  But I don't believe they'd overlook sample bias.  Like I said - as a conservative cheering for Hillary as a general election opponent for the Republican is a sucker play.

Fearless predictions about Iowa caucus results

My predictions can best be qualified as "wonky".  That's on a good day. But what the heck, I might as well take a stab at what is going to happen in the Iowa caucuses today/tonight.

2016 seems to be shaping up as the year of the outsiders on both sides.  My predictions are being made in light of that assumption. So they should be relatively obvious. 

Bernie Sanders is trailing Clinton in the latest polling but has rapidly been gaining ground.  I think his momentum will carry him across the finish line first. It'll be close, but I think he's going to win.

On the GOP side, weather impacts aside (snow is expected), I think Trump is going to win.  It'll be a test of how deep his support runs, rather than how wide.  How loyal will his caucus-goers be if the weather is bad, or if the caucus gets heated?  We'll see.  But I think he'll pull it out.  What will be more interesting is to see how the rest of the rank ordering plays out. I think Cruz, Christie and Rubio fare the best and Jeb Bush will do decidedly poorly.

Let's see if I'm right tonight.  Tomorrow is Ground Hog Day, so maybe I'll get to be Bill Murray and get a do-over.

Trump, you're losing my interest

So far I've been willing to give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt. He doesn't know things, but he's going to hire the smartest people.  That's believable. He's not long on specifics - that's just campaigning.  He's rude - that's appealing to voters who are sick of Washington BAU (business as usual) and political correctness.  He says outrageous things that are not plausible - that's going to appeal to a lot of low information voters. He might not really turn out to be a conservative and at best deliver or push a moderate agenda.  That's a small price to pay for restoring fiscal sanity and using common sense in trade deals. No doubt budget and trade deals will play into his wheelhouse.  He might not appoint conservative justices. Hey, Neither Bush did a great job at that either.

BUT...

I'm overlooking so many things, I'm starting to feel like a Hillary or an Obama supporter.  It's starting to become unpalatable.

Don't get me wrong - I was never actually a Trump supporter, I was just more open to having a conversation about his pros and cons, and waiting to see what he did and said, and how he handled himself than a lot of people who just jumped straight to 'NO'.  Quick to judge is not my style, I prefer to analyze - and the more data there is the better.  But the data coming in is pointing out two things - his growing popularity and his declining sense of invincibility.  Other candidates don't seem willing to take a proper run at him and whoever the Democrat nominee ends up being, they will not be so skittish. He has not been tested in any major way as far as political combat.  It's been like spring training.

In addition, the Trump persona is wearing thin.  It's getting harder and hard to overlook the negatives associated with it, in addition to all of the other justifications I listed above.  And they are becoming more and more justifications rather than counterpoints.

I'm not dismissing him entirely, but my tolerance is wearing thin.  What he needs to be doing is getting more serious, not more outlandish.  I'm not suggesting he ditch all the trappings, but he needs to seem more presidential now - not as he suggested recently, after he's elected.

He's not the worst candidate, but he's not the best.  He would not make the worst president (that'd be Hillary or Bernie) but he wouldn't be the best either.  A Chris Christie, or a Marco Rubio, both accused of being RINOs, merit a second look.  After all, a RINO is often a compromise specialist, and if the GOP hold the Congress and Senate, who would they have to compromise with? Republicans. That's not such a bad thing for conservatives.  Let's hope that's not what Jeb Bush is banking on to refill his sails. Of course a more conservative candidate would be nice, but we also have to consider electability, and as much as I like so many positions of Ted Cruz, I don't think he's ultimately electable. 

Ultimately not much is new, I was undecided before and I still am.  But as we get closer I'm using a much more critical lens for every candidate.  I'm sure I'm not alone on that. A Trump travelling roadshow/carnival is simply not enough.  Attacking rivals is not enough.  We need a platform.  If you want to win - hire those smartest people now.

Have we moved into We-Know-The-Nominees Territory yet?

Iowa has not caucused. New Hampshire hasn't had it's primary yet. Is Trump already unbeatable as the GOP nominee? He has a commanding lead in the polls in both states. Time is running short and Trump very well could win both states.  And that could prove a commanding lead, by consolidating the public's impression of a sure fire winner.

On the Democratic side, there's a rising sentiment that Hillary is bland.  Bernie Sanders is not pulling Obama 2008 numbers just yet, but he is clearly gaining momentum at Hillary's expense.  And beyond the right's absolute distaste for her,  every single hiccup, or cough from her campaign portends more trouble. She may toast; walking, talking, campaigning toast.

The Donald versus Socialist Bernie.  We're done except for the general election.  Then again...                    

There's not a single vote been cast yet. But it would not be hard to bet on that outcome, or for that matter Donald versus Hillary as the 1B scenario.  Still - no one has voted yet. A lot can happen between now and Super Tuesday. 

My suspicion is that it will.  Trump seems as unbeatable on the Republican side as Hillary did in 2008.  Something will happen to shake up the GOP race.  At this point I'd say it's only 25% likely Trump will be the nominee.  That's a better chance than I'd give anyone else.  But it also means there's a 75% chance it won't be Trump.  It's not just voter perception - ultimately it is - but there's GOP establishment rallying around anyone but Trump or Cruz, there's SuperPAC bombardments, there's candidate consolidation, more debates and a lot of other factors too.

It's not done, and Trump supporters and detractors would do well to remember that, because at the end of the day, the nominee that emerges will need a unified base against either Sanders or Clinton.  It won't be a cakewalk to the White House.  It's going to be a vicious fight against a rabidly liberal media establishment. In fighting is different than debate, and it will be problematic if it continues to escalate.  It may shake up the race but it also may fracture the party. The reward is not worth the risk.  Civility, is still critical.