Exit polls have their own problems, but if this one's results are accurate, they are pretty interesting. This is (for reasons rational and irrational) the year of the party outsider, the populist, the rage against the political machine.
If we end up with a Trump vs Clinton general election, it will not be merely a difference between the candidates, but between the factions of the electorate. In this scenario, the Trump candidacy will include the non-establishment outsiders on the Right (a Cruz candidacy would have some of the same characteristics), while the Clinton candidacy would be firmly within the Democratic establishment. The issue, from the Left, will be whether the Sanders fringe — centrist and/or further-Leftist (and to the extent that we can posit a single ideological axis in party politics) will vote for a compromise candidate (Clinton) or stay home (which represents a vote for Trump).
Yeah, a lot of commas and parentheses in that paragraph, but it's a complicated situation. If Clinton gets the nomination but the Sanders folk stay home on election day, she will lose — and we'll end up with Trump, or Cruz, or possibly Rubio. Folk in that situation will need to decide if they are more dedicated to their ideal than to the result.
Conversely, if Trump (or Cruz) gets in, the reaction of the GOP establishment will be a significant factor. If they push for their candidate, they will quite possibly win the election, but lose the ideological war. If they hold back, they may live to fight another day, but will concede the election to whomever they face.
Both party establishments face some difficult, but different, decisions this year.
Originally shared by +John Wehrle:
This is a screenshot of one exit poll question of the NV caucus by NBC. The rest are at the link below. I wanted to show just this one because I think it is important for understanding some of this season's dynamics.
Regardless of your candidate preferences, it might behoove us all to notice what "Democratic Establishment" actually means. It turns out that, in general, there are differences between people who hold their noses while voting for Democrats, and, people who proudly proclaim that they are Democrats. The differences are not black and white. Senator Sanders has a lot of support among proud Democrats – though according to this exit poll Secretary Clinton has a nearly 20 point lead among them.
What's really interesting is how popular Senator Sanders is among those in the NV Caucus who don't think of themselves as Democrats.
There's something unreported and unremarked upon going on here.
But if you've been wondering why your liberal friends support one candidate while you support the other, this graph may help explain it.
And if Sanders wins and Clinton supports refuse to vote for him?
+Lauchlin MacGregor Much the same situation, though I hear less noise of that sort from the Clinton supporters. In short, we all hang together or we all hang separately.
+Dave Hill umm, have you forgotten the PUMAs from 2008? We already have the repeat of the Obama Boys sexism charges 2 months earlier than in 2008 (now called Bernie Bros), if the race tightens up you will see the return of the PUMAs as well.
Her plan will be the same as in 2008, stay as right as possible and threaten the left (base of the party) with a GOP presidency if they don't embrace the second coming of Nixon.
If I can not vote for Bernie I will vote for Jill Stein. Tired of the DNC deciding the candidates. Super Delegates should vote for the constituents they are supposed to represent. If it is Hillary or anyone from the other side our policies will not change. Titanic meets Iceberg.
+Stan Pedzick No, I've not forgotten the PUMAs — and if they rear their ugly heads again, I'll be happy to criticize them, too.
And, yes, honestly, I'd take the return of Richard Nixon to a President Trump, Cruz, or Rubio. Not ideal in any fashion, but of that's the choice, I'll take it.
+Philipp Giddings So you're willing to see Trump as president for 4-8 years. Or Cruz. Just to send a message to the DNC leadership. Yeah, that sounds like an amazingly productive way to set ideology above human lives.
+Dave Hill
different party same plan
not involved in red blue color war
No matter who gets elected things will get worse with corporists/banksters
in control
+Dave Hill too be fair, the lesson that the Dems learned in 1968, 1972 & 1980 was to keep following the GOPs movement of the Overton Window farther to the right and to abandon the left…and sadly this is the lesson they (now personified as the DNC) keep learning.
+Philipp Giddings If you really think there is no difference between a Clinton presidency and a Cruz presidency, I think you are mistaken.
You may be correct that in some areas — "corporatists / banksters" as you put it — there's not a lot of difference, or at least not as much as I'd like. In plenty of areas, especially in social issues, there is more.
Or, put a different way, while I think Obama basically and unfortunately transferred over the financial team from the Clinton (and Bush) years, I really think the US would be a significantly different place than it is today if McCain or Romney had won their elections. And 4-8 years of Cruz at the helm, especially with a Republican Congress behind him, is not something I want myself, or my daughter, to face.
+Stan Pedzick I'm not saying I like the lesson, let alone that I think it's a correct one. Whichever Democrat wins the nomination, I'll be voting for them, because even where I disagree with one or another of their approaches, it's still better than any of the GOP alternatives, and, like it or not, those are the two choices this fall.
I say everyone should collectively give the finger to the establishment and vote Libertarian.