The economy ranked high on the list of concerns for voters in Michigan and Mississippi. At least 8 in 10 in each party's primary said they were worried about where the American economy is heading, according to exit polls conducted by Edison Research for The Associated Press and television networks.
Among Democrats, 8 in 10 voters in both states said the country's economic system benefits the wealthy, not all Americans.
Sanders has sought to tap into that concern, energizing young people and white, blue-collar voters with his calls for breaking up Wall Street banks and making tuition free at public colleges and universities. Michigan, with big college towns and a sizeable population of working-class voters, was a good fit for him, though something of a surprise victory given that Clinton had led in polls heading into Tuesday's voting.
Still, Sanders has struggled mightily with black voters who are crucial to Democrats in the general election. In Mississippi, black voters comprised about two-thirds of the Democratic electorate and nearly 9 in 10 backed Clinton.
After Tuesday's results, Clinton has accumulated 1,214 delegates and Sanders 566, including superdelegates. Democrats need 2,383 delegates to win the nomination.
Well Bernie consistently over his career has been for helping the citizens of the nation against "the country's economic system" which "benefits the wealthy, not all Americans." And he does not take Wall Street nor Big Pharma money, and knowing his genuineness, Wall Street and Big Pharma have not even bothered offering. Clinton sacks get filled with outside money.
 |
| outside money = Clinton =Cruz, and that's not fiction |
Also get specific. Look who's biggest on the take from lawyers/lobbyists. Readers, how many DC law firms and K-Street lobbyists are you funding so that your concerns are heard? Clinton and Cruz are the presidential wannabes getting top level Defense sugar. UnitedHealth and Big Pharma, who's their favorite? Their way ahead of anybody else favorite, and how does that square with the Affordable Health Act having been jiggered together to favor health insurance and pharmaceutical interests - who do fund big DC law firms and K-Street. And the money taker, she will tell you, Obamacare incrementalism, not universal healthcare, is the way to go for the U.S. of A. Bernie instead tells the truth.
The Goldman Sachs money-taker is a late arrival to the "Among Democrats, 8 in 10 voters in both states said the country's economic system benefits the wealthy, not all Americans" issue, and says the accumulated fortune via interested party offer/accept will not be a biasing factor in what she'd do if elected. Sure.
Pigs fly. Goldman is in business making money off investments, and what do you figure the speech stipends - all $675,000 or so was? Charity? Unfocused judgment? An institutional brain fart? Get real.
And yes, the Clintons have southern black voters committed, and those states every election go Republican, so it's part of the stacked deck delegate counting charade the inner party imposes to frustrate popular nationwide populism.
And MSNBC had a big prime time slot given yesterday to the Clinton candidate over Mississippi, deep South and such, and Bernie took the popular majority in the populous state, our neighbor, and it is almost stuck into coverage edgewise.
It stinks, how the media is dumping on the Sanders candidacy and the Trump candidacy, yet the people have differing viewpoints; aside from deep Dixie Dem machines being for the money-taking candidate.
And the superdelegate thumb-on-the-scale stuff is obscene; there being no other more fitting word.
Party hacks vs. the people. What a party. Don't care a hoot about the young. That's the nation's "seed corn" and giving them a bad dose of screw-you-we-don't-care politics this cycle is both unwise and very inartful.
And blacks don't like Bernie? They feel no Bern? Ellison backs the populist, not the money taker, and what other black official in DC have we?
And unlike the South which in general presidential elections goes for the likes of George W. Bush, Minnesota caucus going DFL people seem to have felt the Bern.
So Strib, as headlined at the top of this post, is blowing smoke.
Voters in Michigan. Caucus turnout in Minnesota. Both favored Sanders. We ain't the South. End of story.
____________UPDATE____________
In fairness to Strib/AP, the item headline was: "Sanders is surprise victor in Michigan; Trump keeps winning."
That is not burying the gist, however: "Surprise" is a superfluous word to the story, "Sanders is victor ...".
To whatever extent polling was used to cast Sanders as less popular before voting than the money taker, it was unreliable polling and was given preelection hype as push polling. As if suggesting if you favor Sanders, don't bother, the other candidate will win, polls show that. The story was nearly universally played that way in anticipation of a vote; as if a widely held hope rather than much else.
Push polling should be given only the credibility it earns. Reporters are lazy when using it in place of finding real news fact. One has to ask how much of the Trump insurgency's success has been based on his and the press's constant saying, "Polls show ..."? Has it pushed people toward the result, or simply been a barometer of actual voter pressures?