Made for TV presidential race

Super Tuesday came and went. If you believe everything you hear, read and see, this thing is practically over. The candidates are almost set. It looks like it will be a Trump v. Clinton race for the presidency of the United States.

Nobody expected Trump, who presents a major quandary for Republicans. Clinton? Heck, she’d been coronated before it started.

Then along came a socialist.

The establishment media has already come to their own self-serving conclusion: it will be a Trump-Clinton race. A heavyweight duel.

They’re salivating: “The money we will make!”, I’m sure the bosses at the networks are screaming. “No reality TV show will compare!” they exclaim.

With Trump there, this thing is made for today’s scandal-driven television.

Hold on a second. Not so fast…

We may agree that Donald Trump is close to a sweep on the Republican side, but even that can be questioned. Still, the Republican ‘establishment’ has mad scientists trying to design ways of getting him out of the race: they thought it might be Marco.

Oops! They’ve now realized that the telegenic and at times charismatic wunderkind from Florida is really a lightweight. Remember New Jersey governor Chris Christie reducing Rubio to a repetitious, whimpering school kid in the New Hampshire debate?

Republicans are so terrified of Trump, in fact, that many are starting to consider Ted Cruz as an option. And they hate Ted Cruz…

But it’s the Hillary factor that bothers me. And yes, I understand; I like and favor Bernie Sanders, so I don’t come to this argument very objectively.

Think about this: Sanders is telling us that “yes we can.” Hillary on the other side says, “Hold on there: NO we can’t!” Yet, Hillary has taken it upon herself to carry the Obama mantel. Nobody has bothered to ask her, though, that if she is to follow the Obama legacy based on “hope” and “yes we can,” why does she insist on fighting Bernie’s message of a higher minimum wage, free college for all Americans, and the next step in the Obamacare ladder of free universal healthcare?

One other problem I have with Hillary: Where’s her passion? She appears to want the presidency so badly, she’s afraid of taking a wrong step. The result is a president-wanna-be automaton.

But I digress.

Like I said, Super Tuesday is over. And based on the math, Hillary Clinton has 577 delegates to her name, Bernie Sanders 386 (these numbers according to The New York Times.) For the Democrats to win the nomination, 2,383 delegates are needed. So why is Hillary already trying on the crown? There are still 35 states to go. Florida, New York, California, and Illinois have yet to vote. And as for Super Tuesday, Hillary won seven states, Bernie garnered only four. Hillary did win Texas – a biggie, I agree – but it’s not like she wiped out Sanders.

Which tells me one thing, even the media wants to see Hillary in the race. Not the 74-year-old socialist.

On the Republican side, a similar argument can be made. Surely, Trump gets the headlines. But look at the results: Trump has 316 delegates and is followed by Cruz with 226. Republicans need 1,237 delegates to win the nomination.

For these reasons I refer you back to my paragraph on reality TV, which leads me to speculate if this may be the first presidential election driven by media types who just want the best show possible in November. One, by the way, that assures that the foundations of our plutocracy are NOT shaken. Or have we forgotten that bosses at ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX, MSNBC and others are part of the one-percent?

One last thought. I know there are many out there who are, by now, convinced Bernie Sanders has no chance of winning. He’s got a very big machine working against him. Understood.

But consider these numbers. And they’re not mine. They were compiled and sent out via Twitter by Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight and formerly The New York Times. He took the case of Trump as example. Then he figured out the share of voting-eligible population to have voted for the Donald in Iowa (2.0%); New Hampshire (9.7%); South Carolina (6.5%); and Nevada (1.8%).

Go back. Take a look at the percentages again. Trump, who people say has created a movement, is winning with less than 10 percent of the vote share.

And what does that tell you?

If you want Bernie to have a chance, you’ve got to vote. But the work is not done once you cast your ballot. You must then get your neighbors to vote. Your brother, sister, cousins and friends to vote. And then you have to convince them, that they must do the same. They’ve got to get their brother and family members and friends to also vote. And so on. It’s a chain.

It’s what Sanders means when he talks about a “political revolution.” That shakeup he talks about must be created by us. He’s simply the mouthpiece.