Jinx, you owe me a Coke.
To stop Trump, you must vote Sandersā¦tell your friends in the Media. 
The bookies like him for the nomination, but not the general. OTOH, Silver is damn smart.
I recently started phone banking for Bernie (you can do it from home, too - itās so damn easy) and itās been really interesting hearing the polling thoughts of individuals outside my various social media echo chambers.
Sample from one day: 8 Sanders; 2 Clinton; 2 Trump; 2 undecided Clinton/Trump. I was polling Democrats/Independents in super Tuesday states. Those 2 undecideds are where I think Nate Silver is coming from and I heard the frustration in the voices of the few people I talked to about waffling between the two. A few of the people I called just hadnāt heard anything about Bernie, which to me indicates some responsibility from the media as well.
I didnāt need to be Nate to see the big dimensional gold writing on the green, faux-marble wall.
Out of interest, as a non-USAian:
Re: Clinton
āand some anti-Trump conservatives will conclude that Trump is the lesser of two evils.ā
Why would anyone think that?
well you go wrong where you assume that a lot of USAianās think in the first place.
The GOP is in shambles. Absolute shambles. Write to these people
https://www.gop.com/leaders/national/
and let them know how you feel.
[ Edit - unless youāre not a Democrat who can see into the future and itās Hillary who wins in the 2016 showdown ā in that case just sit tight and this will all be over soon ]
Whatās really depressing about that article is this:
In 1972, for instance, about a third of Democrats voted for Richard Nixon rather than George McGovern
Admittedly, it was before I was born, let alone living here, but from what Iāve read, McGovern is my favourite candidate before Sanders. Iām going to assume that āa third of Democrats are arseholesā is still a good rule of thumb.
So thereās two answers - an emotional one that affects voters, and a more pragmatic one that affects power-brokers in Washington.
The emotional reason is that Hilary isnāt trusted. Her alliances are inscrutable and where they are evident, itās evident that sheās allied with the rich and powerful. Add on a heaping helping of raw misogyny (a powerful, confident woman) and no small history of controversy (her marriage to a philanderer, her involvement in several Republican shenanigans), and youāve got someone who is easy to mistrust. Sheās not the kind of candidate you have a beer with. You could have a beer with Trump. Heād be an asshole, but at least heād be an amusing asshole.
The more nefarious reason is that if youāre a Republican weasel, you can influence Trump. Heās a populist buffoon, unstable and unreliable, certainly, but heās not beholden to anyone. Give him what he wants and you can do whatever you want in turn. This is the Chris Christie angle: Trump isnāt necessarily against us, heās just not a loyalist. So you get into his inner circle and ride this comet until it explodes (and hopefully leaves you out of the blast radius). Hilaryās not going to be good for your career.
So enough weasels with money can sell the first story to enough suspicious, irritated voters and you get a Trump presidency, because Hilary doesnāt seem like an honest player.
Heās going to drop out before then. The White House isnāt palatial enough for him to bear living in.
It doesnāt even have an escalator!
Wouldnāt this make him a poorer choice? If Hilary is untrustworthy she must have built up this reputation, but people now know what the reputation and history is. Trump doesnāt seem to have any political past, beyond running a few times.
It just seemed an odd conclusion from the outside. He or she is going to be the face of the USA internationally as well as all the domestic activities. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
Put another way, Clinton meeting Narendra Modi (as a random example) is likely to result in some back stabbing deal that is actually better for Clinton, rather than the US or India.
Trump will call him āboyā, order a curry and sell him a shit gold watch.
Or a third of Democrats are conservatives who donāt want to be seen voting for the nasty party, unless they donāt have a conservative to vote for in their own party.
Isnāt that the same thing?
I was trying to be diplomatic about it.
