Sanders, Trump Give Voice to Frustrated Voters
After the New Hampshire primary, a new narrative to describe Campaign 2016 has taken shape. It is a narrative of class warfare that, despite the smiles on the candidates' faces, is tearing both parties apart.
Hillary Clinton's loss to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the Democratic contest was stunning, not only in its scale but also in its roots. Sanders won the poor and working class -- voters with income of less than $50,000 -- by two-to-one.
Eight years ago, Clinton repeatedly beat then-Sen. Barack Obama among working-class white voters. Not this time.
Sanders also clobbered Clinton among young voters by almost six-to-one and three to one among independents. Sanders even edged Clinton out among young women voters, a core constituency for her campaign.
Who did she win? Most significantly: voters with incomes of more than $200,000 a year.
That's ironic in light of how billionaire developer and TV showman Donald Trump has become a hero of that group on which Clinton used to rely: white working-class voters.
After Trump lost to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in the Iowa Republican caucuses, it looked as though Trump's ability to turn his high polling numbers into actual votes might be as full of hot air as his windy no-Teleprompter speeches.
But that vision evaporated after Trump won New Hampshire with a decisive 34 percent of the vote -- twice as much as his closest competitor, Ohio Gov. John Kasich.
With other leading hopefuls Cruz and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio slipping down below Kasich, Stop-Trump Republicans were left without a single Trump rival to rally around as the contest moves to South Carolina, where polls show another rock-star reception awaits The Donald.
Why and how did the elites of both parties suddenly lose so much of their traditional ability to steer the nomination process toward their preferred safe, sane and reasonably electable favorites?
...continued
(c) 2016 CLARENCE PAGE DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.
