I’ve read so many stories today about delegate math that my eyes are starting to bleed, just a little. Countless pixels were slaughtered to rehash the obvious. After Wisconsin Donald Trump may be in real danger of arriving in Cleveland without a sufficient delegate count to win on the first ballot, in which case all bets are off. This is unless he’s close enough to the magic number that he can persuade some uncommitted delegates to push him over the top, and since institutionalized bribery is okey-dokey at conventions, he might just be able to do it.
Of course, New York is next on the primary schedule and if Trump does really well there, which polls suggest he might, then he could hit the number, etc., etc.
And by most lights, though Sanders did great in Wisconsin, it changes absolutely nothing and Hillary Clinton’s mostly boring march to the Democratic nomination is still a foregone conclusion.
Here’s my best guess on the match-up for the fall: Could be Trump, but maybe not. And it will be Clinton. How do I do it?
In terms of pure enjoyment from a political junky’s perspective, the most captivating story to date is how someone as unqualified as Donald Trump has done so well, no matter what happens by the time it’s all over. Really never seen anything like it. The other story, which I have seen many times, is what is being offered by Democrats: an ideological purist vs. a political pragmatist with the kind of family squabbling that always goes on in such cases. Been there, done that, and it almost always ends the same way.
So, back to Trump. The next act, as a number of media outlets are reporting, is that, in the wake of a couple of really bad weeks and the Wisconsin loss, he is gearing up to deliver a number of policy speeches because, you know, when Donald starts offering specifics, the fun really begins.
Among the topics he will address are how to strengthen the nations military, specific education reforms, and the criteria by which a President Trump would select Supreme Court Justices.
What could go wrong? He did so well when talking about reproductive rights, on each of the three contradictory positions he offered. And then there was that whole thing about how he would force Mexico to pay for his wall, which involves cutting off a stream of cash many experts think is essential to keeping the Mexican economy afloat.
I’m going to agree with Kerry Eleveld at Daily Kos. “Every time he’s forced to talk about anything beyond currrent polling and his precious border wall, the ridiculousness of his campaign is put into relief.”
We all understand Trump has done extremely well by offering platitudes. In fact, one could argue that the lack of sophistication in his statements is a great part of what has made him popular with his base. Simple solutions easily understood though incoherent in the real world has been a formula for success.
As he gets closer to sealing the deal (pun intended), more will be expected of him as he tries to grow his base enough to secure the nomination, but also to compete credibly in the general election should he get that far.
Nothing we have seen so far suggests he will be able to do this, but he’s going to try and we get to watch.