2016

Here’s The Pros And Cons Of All Of Trump’s Potential Running Mates

Donald Trump is in need of a running mate who can help him win the White House.

But who should he pick?

On July 4, Breitbart, perhaps the most well-known and most popular pro-Donald Trump news media website, launched a straw poll for users to state their first, second, and third choices for Donald Trump’s running mate.

The choices distilled from that online poll are listed in the below chart, as are the potential pros and cons.

Information courtesy of The Atlantic, other cited sources, and personal knowledge I have known for a long time.

Candidate Name Pros Cons
Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona Joe Arpaio Is well-known for his hardline stances on illegal immigration. Brings virtually nothing else to the table. Would also be by far the oldest vice president ever elected, being 84 years old on Election Day (the current record-holder is Alben Barkley, Harry Truman’s Vice President, who was elected at age 70).
 

Representative from Tennessee Marsha Blackburn

Is a woman. Is experienced with the legislative process, and therefore fits the profile of a VP who could, in Trump’s words, “get things done” with passing legislative agendas. Was a member of House leadership during the John Boehner era, which is derided by many conservatives as being one of the most, if not the most ineffective Republican congressional leadership in the history of the party.
Neurosurgeon from Florida Ben Carson Is well-liked due to his friendly personality. Is popular with social conservatives. Is African American. Is very inexperienced in politics; would bring little to the table if Trump wants a VP that would help him with policy, which he does.
Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie Is experienced in politics, being a two-term governor and a former U.S. attorney. Is a very dynamic campaigner. Is very similar to Trump personality-wise. Is deeply unpopular in his home state.  Is despised by social conservatives. Has been accused of covering for members of Hamas by prominent conservative activists. His support of a state-level version of the DREAM Act goes against one of Trump’s biggest campaign positions.  And of course, Bridgegate.
 

Senator from Tennessee Bob Corker

Like Trump, is a real estate businessman who entered politics and has bragged about “the art of the deal.” As chair of the Senate Foreign Relations committee and a member of the banking committee, he could help Trump in those areas of policy. Is not well-known, and is despised by hardliners who do know him.
 

Senator from Arkansas Tom Cotton

Is a military veteran who could assist Trump on foreign policy matters. Is young and well-known. Is highly inexperienced with the legislative process, as he has only been in the Senate for a year and a half.
Senator from Texas Ted Cruz Would end the Trump-Cruz schism that has divided the party. Is Hispanic. Would turn off moderates, who find him too extreme on social issues. Is despised by the Republican Senate leadership, and this would be a problem for Trump’s efforts to pass legislative agendas.
Senator from Iowa Joni Ernst Is a woman. Is a former lieutenant colonel in the National Guard. Is young and charismatic. Has name recognition. Is inexperienced as a politician, having served only a year and a half in Washington. Would turn off some fiscal conservatives due to her positions on trade.
Governor of Oklahoma Mary Fallin Is a woman. Is experienced in the political process. Does not bring much else to the table due to low name recognition. Would also turn off some social conservatives.
 

Former Lieutenant General Mike Flynn

Is a military man; would give Trump defense credentials. Is a registered Democrat, despite being an adviser to the Trump campaign. Would turn off social conservatives with his positions on same-sex marriage and abortion. Some say he’s too extreme on Islam even by Trump standards.
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich His intellect and experience as former Speaker of the House fits the profile of a VP who could, in Trump’s words, “get things done” with passing legislative agendas. “Has been known to say wacky things on his own part, in addition to Trump’s statements.” Is despised by some social conservatives over his two divorces, Brings little to the table for demographic reasons as well as a lack of foreign policy experience. NAFTA, a free trade agreement despised by many Trump supporters, was passed under his watch as House Speaker.
Governor of Ohio John Kasich Is experienced in politics as a two-term governor and former Congressman, and therefore fits the profile of a VP who could, in Trump’s words, “get things done” with passing legislative agendas. Has a temperament that would balance Trump. His presidential campaign results have indicated that he has not capable of bringing much to the table.
Former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin Would increase Trump’s appeal with women and social conservatives. Is a woman. Would turn off Republicans who were alienated by her being on the ticked in 2008.
 

Governor of Indiana Mike Pence

Is experienced with the legislative process, and therefore fits the profile of a VP who could, in Trump’s words, “get things done” with passing legislative agendas. Is very popular with social conservatives. Has recently run afoul of some social conservatives over a controversial religious liberty bill. Would be forced to immediately resign his office if he decides to run with Trump, as per Indiana law.
Senator from Florida Marco Rubio Is young and charismatic. Is a Hispanic, and could increase Trump’s appeal among that ethnic group. Is experienced with foreign policy. Is Hispanic. He and Trump did not get along well during the primaries, and Rubio has expressed a lack of interest for that reason. Also was a sponsor of the Gang of Eight immigration bill, which is despised by most Trump supporters.
 

Senator from South Carolina Tim Scott

Is African American. Is well-liked by conservatives who know about him. Is relatively inexperienced, only having been in Washington since 2011. Has low name recognition. His main focus as a legislator has been on education, which is not a core issue of Trump’s campaign.
 

Senator from Alabama Jeff Sessions

Is well-known among die-hard Trump supporters. Is widely viewed as being in lock-step with Trump on immigration. Is disliked by libertarian-leaning Republicnas due to his positions on the PATRIOT Act and government spying.
Governor of Wisconsin Scott Walker Has high name recognition due to his hard-line positions on taxes and spending and his infamous 2011 standoff with Democrats over a budget bill that sparked a walkout of Democratic legislators. Is weak on immigration, and is hated by some Trump supporters over this. His disastrous debate performances during the primaries cannot be overlooked.
 

Representative from Montana Ryan Zinke

Is very socially liberal; could appeal to moderates. Is inexperienced, having served in the House for only a year in a half. Is despised by social conservatives.

 

Regardless of your political positions, which of the above candidates do you think would help Trump the most in the long run?

Feel free to comment below!

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Trump Continues His Alienation Of His Support Base

A few weeks back I posted an article talking about Trump potentially alienating his own base of support through his endorsement of a congressional candidate whose positions on immigration were virtually the polar opposite of his own.

Now, he has made a statement that could have a similar effect, as it can easily be construed as insulting soldiers who participated in the Iraq War.

According to PoliticoTrump made the following statement (reconstructed using both the video and the text on the article):`

“When we got out, we should’ve taken the oil. I’ll never forget some of the pundits — most of them don’t have the brains they were born with — they said: ‘They’re talking about a sovereign country.’ Iraq, crooked as hell. How about bringing baskets of money — millions and millions of dollars — and handing it out?,” Trump said at an evening rally. “I want to know who were the soldiers that had that job, because I think they’re living very well right now, whoever they may be.”

Read More: Forget the Judge Curiel Comments. This Is What Could Hurt Donald Trump In The Long Run

Now, as previously stated, this statement could easily be construed as insulting American soldiers, but it is not a guarantee.

This is because after reading the statement and listening to the audio over and over again, I came to two conclusions:

1) It was a jarbled mess. This is especially evident if you listen to the audio, where it is difficult to tell when he is beginning or ending a sentence because he is rushing to get to whatever point he is trying to make. It is difficult to tell if he is talking about US soldiers or someone else (possibly Iraqi soldiers, as Trump has claimed in a subsequent statement without providing hard evidence) for this reason.

2) If you thought Trump’s statement was properly structured, then it sounds like he is saying that the soldiers did have the job of bringing money and handing it out, but didn’t do that job.

Only time will tell whether or not Trump’s statement, along with his endorsement of pro-amnesty North Carolina representative Renee Ellmers in her failed bid to win the Republican nomination in her bid for re-election, will hurt his numbers in the general election.

After all, what else would you expect when you make statements contrary to the beliefs of the GOP base, which is unabashedly pro-military?

If you support Trump, you should be very worried right now, as you probably don’t want to take time to make sure he doesn’t stray from your positions after all this time.

If you oppose him, you should be crossing your fingers and hoping that the Trump supporters don’t take action even if they are very worried.

Regardless, the Trump Saga continues…

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: IoSonoUnaFotoCamera/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

New Numbers Show Why Bernie Sanders Really Could Swing The Election To Trump

Back in May, I posted an article here on RISE NEWS discussing whether or nor Bernie Sanders could spoil the election for Hillary Clinton.

But things have changed from May to now.

In the May article, I stated the following:

“According to a poll jointly conducted by the Washington Post and ABC News that was published on Tuesday, 31% of Sanders supporters say they may not or will not support Clinton in the general election. 64.5% of that 31% (or 20% of all Sanders supporters) say that they will vote for Trump.

When you take into account that 43.4% of all Democrats support Sanders (according to the latest RealClearPolitics average), this translates into 13.5% of all Democrats refusing to vote for Clinton, and 8.7% of all Democrats voting for Trump.

And remember, this poll was taken before the convention, whose outcome is now going to be determined by superdelegates, because of how close the race has been.”

The above information was posted prior to a series of developments that have since taken place, and are likely to make Clinton’s problems with Sanders supporters worse, despite the fact that all the primaries are finished and Sanders is reportedly expected to endorse Clinton prior to the convention despite being within range of clinching the nomination through superdelegates.

There are three developments in particular that stand out for me.

It is still an open question as to whether young voters who supported Sanders will  come around to Clinton. Photo Credit: Phil Roeder/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

It is still an open question as to whether young voters who supported Sanders will come around to Clinton. Photo Credit: Phil Roeder/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

The first is the leak of a memo from the servers of the Democratic National Committee by a hacker called “Gufficer 2.0,” which points to the idea that the DNC had been secretly backing Clinton all along, as Sanders has previously claimed.

Since this leak took place, Clinton’s standing among Sanders supporters have only worsened.

As of June 22, the percentage of Sanders supporters that may not or will not support Clinton has shot up from 31% to 45%. 48.9% of that 45% (or 22% of all Sanders supporters) say that they will vote for Donald Trump.

40% of that 45% (or 18% of all Sanders supporters) say that they will vote for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson.

When you take into account that 41.4% of all Democrats support Sanders (according to the latest RealClearPolitics average), this translates into 18.6% of all Democrats refusing to vote for Clinton, 9.1% of all Democrats voting for Trump, and 7.5% of all Democrats voting for Johnson.

The second development is the recent decisions by the FBI and the Department of Justice to not indict Hillary Clinton over her alleged mishandling of government emails while serving as Secretary of State.

Given that the announcements were made just after former President Bill Clinton met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, accusations of a rigged system have increased.

Notable and influential Sanders supporters such as Rosario Dawson, Shaun King, and Mark Ruffalo have openly denounced the outcome of the FBI’s investigation of Clinton on Twitter, and I have seen friends of mine do the same on social media.

Photo Credit: Phil Roeder/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Photo Credit: Phil Roeder/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

This development actually took place after the most recent poll on Sanders supporters was released, so expect the percentage of supporters who are disillusioned to go up further.

The third development is the alleged report that presumptive Green Party nominee Jill Stein is considering allowing Sanders to take her place and continuing his run after the Democratic National Convention.

Although it is not yet known how much such a move (Sanders still hasn’t endorsed Clinton yet, so anything can still happen until he does) would affect Clinton’s presidential chances, it would be wise for Clinton to make sure she doesn’t find out, especially given other recent events.

At the end of my May article, I stated that an opportunity awaits for both Clinton and Trump to make something out of a scenario that could make or break them. I reaffirm that belief, and say that it is now more apparent than ever.

If you are politically active, I suggest that you work to make sure the best is made out of this situation for your candidate.

After all, good candidates listen to their bases!

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: Phil Roeder/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Forget the Judge Curiel Comments. This Is What Could Hurt Donald Trump In The Long Run.

As many of you may know, over the last few days Donald Trump has been the subject of media scrutiny after he claimed that federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel’s Mexican ancestry will result in him having a bias against Trump when he presides over a case related to Trump University this fall.

Regardless of what your opinion is on this issue, it may not matter in the coming months.

I’m saying this because it won’t change Trump’s overall reputation (which was established well before those comments were made).

I’m also saying this because right around the same time, Trump made another decision that could well damage his reputation with his own support base (something that his “Judge Curiel” comments will not and never do).

On June 4, Trump made his first Congressional endorsement, and it was for Republican Congresswoman from North Carolina Renee Ellmers, who was facing a serious primary challenge in her district.

Why would this damage Trump’s reputation among his support base?

Well, let’s take a look at Ellmers’ background.

Per Conservative Review, a website that keeps track of votes cast by members of Congress to show how conservative or liberal they are:

WHAT YOU DON’T SEE ON ELLMERS’ SCORECARD

Budget, Spending, & Debt

  • Ellmers has voted to raise the debt ceiling two times for a total of $2.405 trillion. One of those votes was in favor of the largest increase in the debt ceiling in American history. (House.gov)
  • Ellmers not only supported the Budget Control Act of 2011 that increased the debt limit, she also helped whip support for the deal, saying “It’s not 100 percent of what many of our very conservative colleagues want, but it is about 70-75 percent. This is not about who’s the most conservative. This is about common sense.” (Modesto Bee)
  • Ellmers defended raising the debt ceiling without sufficient corresponding cuts by saying, “Sure we added to the deficit … But that vote was all about getting our bills paid.” (The Daily Haymaker)

Like this? You can write for us too

Foreign Policy & Defense

  • Ellmers supported U.S. military intervention in Libya. “The violence against the people of Libya by Muammar Qadhafi is unacceptable, and it must end. The United States stands with those who seek freedom in that country and around the world.” (Politico)

Free Market

  • Ellmers supports reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank, claiming the Bank helps to “create American jobs and expand our trade. The Export-Import Bank is a key driver in re-building the US workforce in industries such as manufacturing, oil and gas, aerospace, agriculture machinery and mining … It would be foolish to discontinue the US Export-Import Bank when our economy needs all of the help it can get. Our foreign competitors would simply fill the void and use their own rapidly expanding export import banks to finance deals for their own industries, putting our companies at competitive disadvantage and jeopardizing American jobs. I will continue to fight for free market policies that protect our job creators and protect American taxpayers from unnecessary burdens.” (Ellmers.House.gov)

Health Care & Entitlements

  • Ellmers has given up on the fight to repeal Obamacare, focusing instead on reforming the law. She claims her shift is due to people getting used to the law. “I don’t want to make it seem as if we’re just taking it away and there’s not going to be something there to replace it.” (CQ)
  • In 2013, Ellmers opposed the defund Obamacare strategy, claiming it wouldn’t achieve the stated goals. “Should we stop #Obamacare? YES! But @Heritage_Action’s strategy w/ Continuing Resolution is WRONG … Common Sense says defunding 3 months of HHS admin costs will not kill this impending economic disaster of a law.” (Twitter) In 2011, Ellmers was an enthusiastic supporter of the maneuver (National Journal).
  • During the 2013 government shutdown, Ellmers charged conservative groups like Heritage Action for America with using the defund Obamacare fight as a fundraising tool, without having the best interests of the Republican Party at heart. “Those groups only care about raising money, they want Reps back in the minority in the House.” (Twitter)
  • Ellmers supported a move by leadership to sidestep concerns over a “doc fix” bill, which would have exploded Medicare spending. Leadership brought the bill to a vote on the House floor without warning, allowing it to pass by voice vote with only a few members present. In their defense, Ellmers said, “I do believe that leadership was just as frustrated as members were on this issue. It was just a bad situation. I just hope that moving forward we can do a better job.” (Roll Call)

Immigration

  • Ellmers favors legalizing illegal immigrants already in the U.S. “If an individual wants to come to this country to work, to provide for his family and contribute to his community, he should be allowed to do so. Our focus should be on his intent, not his circumstance … We must also acknowledge that these people have lived in our communities for years and are a vital part of many farms and businesses right here in the 2nd District … The best course of action is one that provides an earned legal work status that would not be given indiscriminately. Instead, it would be contingent on some combination of paying a penalty, admitting to violating the law, and verifying identity. Only after this legal work status is obtained can individuals have the opportunity to begin the naturalization process … This is about solving a problem that can be fixed only through a responsible and realistic approach.” (Fayetteville Observer)
  • Ellmers opposes the idea of self-deportation, saying, “It is not practical, it is not common sense, to assume that 11 or 12 … million people are simply going to pick up and leave our country. It is not possible because they have built their lives here, they have built their families here.” (News & Observer)

Moral Issues

  • Ellmers opposed a 2011 state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions, calling the legislation too broad by including civil unions. Ellmers supports civil unions between same-sex couples. (The Hill)
  • Ellmers led the opposition to the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would have banned abortions after 20 weeks (Washington Post). After removing her name as a cosponsor of the bill, Ellmers whipped opposition to its passage, claiming her change of heart was politically motivated. “I have urged leadership to reconsider bringing it up next week … We got into trouble last year, and I think we need to be careful again; we need to be smart about how we’re moving forward. The first vote we take, or the second vote, or the fifth vote, shouldn’t be on an issue where we know that millennials — social issues just aren’t as important [to them].” (National Journal)
  • Ellmers has said that her male colleagues are better equipped to discuss certain policy issues, and that they should be mindful of making sure to speak on a level that woman will understand. “Men do tend to talk about things on a much higher level. Many of my male colleagues, when they go to the House floor, you know, they’ve got some pie chart or graph behind them and they’re talking about trillions of dollars and how, you know, the debt is awful and, you know, we all agree with that … We need our male colleagues to understand that if you can bring it down to a woman’s level and what everything that she is balancing in her life — that’s the way to go.” (MSNBC)
  • Ellmers is at the center of rumors swirling around Washington alleging she carried on a years-long affair with Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). Many suspect the letter pushed McCarthy to withdraw from the race for Speaker of the House. (Roll Call)

Political & Electoral

        • Ellmers is a loyal defender of John Boehner’s (R-OH) bona fides as a conservative. She has said that before coming to Washington she believed Speaker Boehner and his leadership team did nothing to stand up to Democrats, but “when I got here I realized that wasn’t the case at all. I was told he wasn’t conservative. He is conservative. And that’s what I tell other people in our discussion.” (The New York Times)
        • Speaker Boehner has returned the favor, singing Ellmers’s praises: “Renee has made quite an impact in our conference and in her freshman class because she speaks her mind and doesn’t get bogged down in the political games that often grip Washington. I am proud of the work she has done and know that because of her conservative, commonsense values, she will continue to play a leadership role.” (The New York Times)
        • Ellmers has also claimed self-preservation as rationale for her support for Speaker Boehner, telling constituents back home, “Look. He’s [Speaker Boehner] my boss. How successful am I going to be at work if I am always causing problems for the boss?” Upon realizing her misstep, Ellmers attempted to explain. “Actually, you folks are my boss. Still — we have a lot of important issues facing the country. How are we going to get ANYTHING done in Washington without working together?” (The Daily Haymaker)”These positions make her sound fairly liberal for a Republican, don’t they? Many Trump supporters seem to think so. I know, because I have read the comment sections in articles on the matter on conservative websites such as Breitbart. Ellmers’ positions on immigration in particular sound like they would repulse Trump supporters. So, why did Trump endorse her? Trump himself has stated that he needs her help to pass his agenda through Congress, but some believe the real reason may be related to the fact that she was the first woman in Congress to endorse him.

In that case, Trump apparently endorsed a politician who doesn’t share his political views in order to help his campaign. For a candidat who rails against the political class, he doesn’t sound too much different than them here. But the question is, will it help is campaign? Looking at the comments in articles on the matter on sites such as Breitbart, I highly doubt it.

Some supporters have even gone as far as saying that he has lost their vote over this.

If you are a Trump supporter, you should be hoping that Trump does not repeat this move in the future.Considering that Ellmers lost the primary, it is now apparent that Trump’s endorsement does not guarantee a win.

He is not infallible, and if he expects to win, he needs to learn his lessons fast.

Conversely, if you oppose Trump, you should be crossing your fingers that he does repeat this move. This can be a game changer, whether he realizes it or not.

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

So What Exactly Does The Libertarian Party Stand For Anyway?

Let’s face it. Donald Trump is a very unpopular guy.

As of last week, 55% of Americans have a negative view of him. 40% of Republicans say they will not vote for him, and 19% would vote for Hillary Clinton.

However, what about the remaining 21% of Republicans who would not vote for Trump or Clinton? Would they vote at all? Some, if not many, will not.

Others, however, are contemplating third party options.

The same logic applies to the 31% of Bernie Sanders supporters who may or will not cote for Clinton, and the 20% who would vote for Trump.

Perhaps the most frequently discussed of those options is that of voting for the Libertarian Party, whose online search results have reportedly surged since Ted Cruz dropped out of the Republican primary on May 3.

On Sunday, the Libertarian Party nominated former Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson for President, and former Governor of Massachusetts William Weld as his running mate.

Like this? You can write for us too

In an era where it seems that the Republican and Democratic parties are the only political parties around, and where dissatisfaction with them is near historical highs, it seems only fitting that additional options be shown to and discussed with the general public. Therefore, this article will be dedicated to doing so with the Libertarian Party.

Former Gov. Gary Johnson is the Libertarian Party nominee for President. Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Former Gov. Gary Johnson is the Libertarian Party nominee for President. Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Like all political parties, the Libertarian party determines its platform at its national convention. The result of this convention (aside from the nominees) are as follows:

-The Libertarian Party places emphasis over individual sovereignty over all else. It criticizes both the Democratic and Republican parties as being too regulating and authoritarian. It demands that the government not deny the right life, liberty, and property for the sake of itself or others.

-Under this philosophy, the following policy positions are advocated:

1. Individuals should be able do whatever they want to their bodies (appeals to liberals).
2. The government should not control the internet of mass media (appeals to elements of both sides).
3. The government should not spy on everybody (appeals to elements of both sides).
4. The government should not classify anybody by sexual preference (appeals to liberals).
5. The government should not regulate abortion (appeals to liberals).
6. Criminal laws should be limited to those involving person-to-person interaction (appeals to liberals).
7. The government should not regulate guns (appeals to conservatives).
8. The government should not interfere in property ownership (appeals to conservatives).
9. The government should not interfere in pollution regulation, for it is less trustworthy and effective than innovative civilians who seek to do the same (appeals to conservatives).
10. The government should not interfere with the energy market (appeals to conservatives).

11. The government should not rely on income taxes to produce a balanced budget, which should be mandatory (appeals to conservatives).

12. The government should not interfere in non-fraudulent banking practices (appeals to conservatives).

13. The government should not interfere in the free market (appeals to conservatives).

14. The government should not interfere in worker-employer relations (appeals to conservatives).

15. The government should not interfere in education, which should be determined by parents (appeals to conservatives).

16. The health care market should serve as any other market that operates across state lines, and not be subjected to government intervention (appeals to conservatives).

17. Social Security should be replaced with private retirement planning (appeals to conservatives).

18. Military service should be limited to voluntary defense of the country’s territory (appeals to elements of both sides)

19. Internal security should not trump individual liberty (appeals to elements of both sides).

20. All foreign aid should be ended (appeals to elements of both sides, but mostly to paleoconservatives).

21. Trade and immigration should not be restricted unless there is a threat to national security (appeals to elements of both sides, but mostly to liberals).

22. The government should not interfere in private practices of discrimination (appeals to conservatives).

23. The government should not try to rig electoral systems to create a party system with a limited number of parties (appeals to elements of both sides).

24. The people have the inherent right to self-determination (appeals to conservatives).

At the end of the day, this party is very socially liberal but very fiscally conservative.

This unique platform has the potential to either attract or repulse people on both sides of the political spectrum.

If the party wants a chance of growing to substantial polling numbers, it may have to target single issue voters.

Given that single-issue voters appear to be significant in numbers, as indicated by Gallup polls on the level of priority voters have on issues such as abortion and gun control, perhaps that may be all it needs to do, especially if it succeeds in attracting protest votes from disillusioned Republicans and Democrats.

Do you wish this party good luck in its quest? Feel free to comment and share your opinion below!

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Could Bernie Sanders Determine Who Wins In November?

The war between Donald Trump and Ted Cruz is over.

The former has unofficially clinched the Republican nomination, and Cruz is back in the Senate, preparing his 2018 bid for re-election. However, as one war ends, another one begins.

No, I am not speaking about the war between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, who is very likely to be the Democratic nominee.

I’m speaking about the war between Hillary Clinton and a still-defiant Bernie Sanders, who is fighting to the death to gain the upper hand as the last few primaries, notably the critical California primary, emerges.

This war has reached levels as to where Sanders has now officially endorsed Tim Canova, DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s opponent in the Democratic primary for Florida’s 23rd Congressional District, in response to Schultz’s perceived bias in favor of the Clinton campaign.

However, it is not the Debbie Wasserman Schultz issue that should be of concern if you are a Democrat and/or a liberal.

What should be of concern, in this case, is if Bernie Sanders could end up giving the White House to Donald Trump, because some of his supporters declined to vote for Clinton out of spite.

Like this? You can write for us too

This does not seem like a far-fetched scenario here.

According to a poll jointly conducted by the Washington Post and ABC News that was published on Tuesday, 31% of Sanders supporters say they may not or will not support Clinton in the general election. 64.5% of that 31% (or 20% of all Sanders supporters) say that they will vote for Trump.

When you take into account that 43.4% of all Democrats support Sanders (according to the latest RealClearPolitics average), this translates into 13.5% of all Democrats refusing to vote for Clinton, and 8.7% of all Democrats voting for Trump.

And remember, this poll was taken before the convention, whose outcome is now going to be determined by superdelegates, because of how close the race has been.

Many Democrats may not know this, so if they see the convention fight play out on national television, these numbers are likely to go up.

In response to this development, I ran a theoretical scenario where Trump manages to unite the Republicans, but the disgruntled Sanders supporters carry out their threats at the above rates in every state.

Here’s what plays out, based on the latest RCP averages in individual states (and assuming that the RCP averages assume that Clinton unites the party):

-Trump wins every swing state, except possibly Nevada (which has no recent poll data on the site).

He also wins Connecticut, a state that is normally considered to be a Democratic-leaning one, and comes within two points of winning New Jersey, Oregon, and Wisconsin, three other Democratic-leaning states.

He may also win New Mexico, another Democratic-leaning state that could come into play in this scenario, but does not have recent poll data on RCP.

This leaves him with as many as 349 electoral votes (assuming he wins Nevada and New Mexico), and Clinton with as few as 189.

In the process, New Hampshire votes Republican for the first time since 2000; Connecticut, Michigan, and Pennsylvania vote Republican for the first time since 1988; and Minnesota votes Republican for the first time since 1972.

In other words, Clinton would be blown out of the water.

If you are a Democrat and/or a liberal, this should be a wake up call for you.

If you are a Republican and/or a conservative, this should be a wake up call for you.

Sanders is becoming the spoiler that may determine the election. It is time for the candidates who want to win to go after his voters.

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in public affairs. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: Phil Roeder/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Scroll to top