As much as he is hated by the GOP establishment – and its mega-donors – Rafael Edward Cruz is starting to get some serious consideration and support from his former foes. Even Sen. Lindsey Graham, a longtime critic of Cruz who famously compared the choice between Trump and Cruz “like being shot or poisoned,” has come around to his fellow senator.

“At the end of the day, I know what I’m getting with Ted Cruz,” Graham said, noting that he would still personally prefer Rubio. “If Ted is the alternative to Trump, at least he’s a conservative Republican.”

To the GOP establishment’s dismay, Marco Rubio is going nowhere fast. Some of his own advisors are counseling him to bow out of the race now before an embarrassing lose in his home state of Florida next week.

Carly Fiorina, another former rival, has also warmed to Cruz, claiming he is the only candidate who can beat Trump.

Calling Cruz a “real constitutional conservative,” Fiorina said, “he is a fearless fighter and reformer, and he didn’t care much whether he got invited to the cocktail parties in Washington, D.C.”

Billionaire GOP mega-donor Stan Hubbard, a Minnesota media mogul who has donated $10,000 to an anti-Trump super PAC, has said “He wasn’t my favorite guy, but I’ll say one thing about Cruz. I don’t think he tells lies. I don’t like liars.”

Hubbard confessed that Trump’s surprising dominance is forcing donors to consider backing candidates they might have otherwise shunned. “Yes, that’s right,” he said. “Well, that’s life.”

Yes, that’s life for today’s GOP … the unenviable choice between the “twin terrors,” Trump or Cruz. Pick your poison, or firing squad.

Unfortunately for the GOP, Graham had it right. No matter which candidate the party goes with, it is marching to its own death.

The only chance the Republican Party has of denying Trump the nomination is if he comes up short in accumulating a majority of the Republican delegates and there is a contested convention.

If that were to happen, and the guy with the most delegates (Trump) does not get the nod, watch for all hell to break loose.

Photo | wbdaily.com

Hold the presses! That Bernie Sanders obituary needs to be saved for another day.

Going into yesterday’s Michigan Democratic primary, polls showed Hillary Clinton with a commanding lead of about 20%. A Clinton win would deal the Sanders camp a devastating defeat and amplify the conventional wisdom that her candidacy for president was inevitable.

But the polls got it wrong. Way wrong. Bernie Sanders pulled off an upset victory in a state most pundits had labeled “Clinton country.” After all, Clinton won Michigan in 2008.

Said pollster Steve Mitchell, of Mitchell Research and Communications, “No one predicted this. And only did we not get it right, no one was less than double digits for Hillary Clinton.”

“I think this changes it dramatically,” continued Mitchell. “This is coming into a major industrial state where Hillary Clinton had a strong network in place, where there is a quarter of the voters that are African American that should’ve been much more strongly in support of Hillary; they weren’t. She only won that vote by a 2:1 margin, according to exit polls. I think this changes it dramatically.”

While the media loves to talk about polls, Sanders’ win in Michigan shows us once again that polling is not voting.

“Polling drives momentum; it drives how people think. We wouldn’t be having this same conversation if we just were looking at the vote yesterday, but it’s such a dramatic thing because all these polls were showing her 25, 27 points up, which, quite frankly, I never believed,” said Michigan Congresswoman Debbie Dingell.

Clinton did have a blowout win in yesterday’s Mississippi Democratic primary, carrying the state 83-17 percent over Sanders. And, at the end of the day, she did secure more delegates than Sanders, adding 84, compared with a net gain of 67 for Sanders. But that is not the big news. The takeaway from yesterday’s stunning Michigan victory is that the Sanders momentum cannot be blunted by the continued talk in the media of Sanders’ demise.

As George W. Bush once said, “You can’t listen to the polls. What do the Polish people know about American democracy anyway?”

Next up on March 15th, the big primary contests in Florida, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina.

Let the pollsters poll. Let the voters vote. And never the Twain shall meet.

Photo | cnbc.com

At last night’s CNN Democratic presidential debate in Flint, Michigan, a feisty Bernie Sanders went mano-a-mano with his opponent, Hillary Clinton. When interrupted by Clinton during his answer criticizing her support of disastrous trade agreements, Sanders turned towards Clinton, with raised hand, and forcefully said, “Excuse me, I’m talking.”

While the crowd seemed to be with Bernie, and some punches were landed, he did not deliver the knockout punch many pundits said he needed to turn around his prospects for a Michigan primary win this coming Tuesday.

RealClearPolitics.com’s most recent report of polling within Michigan shows Clinton leading Sanders by an average of 20%. While Michigan’s 148 delegates will be allocated proportionally, a loss of that magnitude would be devastating for Bernie.

Enthusiasm may get a candidate votes; the right number of delegates gets a candidate the party nomination.

Including superdelegates (the party insiders who can choose any candidate,) Hillary Clinton has a total of least 1,121 delegates, compared with at least 481 for Sanders. It takes 2,383 delegates to win the nomination.

The math does not look good for the Vermont senator.

Sanders has vowed to stay in the race until the Democratic convention in July. “I still think we have that path toward victory,” he said.

As I have said previously, short of a new scandal or the worsening of an already existing scandal, Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee.

But here is something to consider… the wild card in the Democratic presidential race, Elizabeth Warren, is still undecided as to which candidate she will support. If Bernie were to snag the Massachusetts Senator’s endorsement, it could be a game changer. And if this were to happen sooner rather than later, it may not be too late for Sanders to derail Hillary’s delegate-laden freight train.

A Sanders – Warren ticket, … every Progressive Democrat’s dream.

Photo | cnn.com

Ted Cruz is on a roll. After impressive wins in Kansas and Maine in yesterday’s “Super Saturday” contests, the most despised politician in Washington DC declared this was “a manifestation of a real shift in momentum.” Even though Trump also won two states, Kentucky and Louisiana, he won those states by margins smaller than Cruz won his states. As a result, Cruz took home more delegates on the night.

While Trump still has a significant lead in the delegate count, 382 to 300, it is possible neither candidate will have the number of delegates needed, 1237, to win the party’s nomination outright.

It remains a toss up as to which of the two candidates, Trump or Cruz, is hated more by the party establishment. Their new favorite son, Marco Rubio, seems to be going nowhere. He is a distant third in the delegate count with 128, followed by Kasich’s dismal 35 delegates.

Political analysts are divided as to which candidate, Trump or Cruz, would be the least electable in a general election, or in other words, which candidate Democrats should be rooting for.

For my money, I am pulling for Senor Rafael Edward Cruz. He is the more radical ideologue of the two. Trump is a chameleon who, after securing his parity’s nomination, could very well track more moderate in his positions (whatever they many be!) thereby gaining support of independents and even some Democrats.

But what would be the most fun for Democrats with a Cruz nomination is the basic issue of his eligibility to seek the presidency. The topic has been pushed to the background for now but it will surely rear its Canadian-head if Republicans pick Cruz as their standard-bearer.

And, just as much fun, would Donald Trump run as a third party candidate?

For Democrats, it still looks as if Clinton will be their nominee… that is, short of a new or worsening-of-an-existing Clinton scandal.

Folks, politics doesn’t get more fun than this (if only the consequences weren’t so scary.)

Photo |brixcms.org

For those too young to remember, years ago the words “college” and “university” meant institutions of higher learning; physical structures with buildings, classrooms and professors. You attended these mostly four years schools in the hopes of acquiring the knowledge necessary for becoming a thinking, responsible member of society.

Today the words have no meaning. What used to be called beauty schools are now “colleges” and auto mechanic schools are called “universities.”

If you Google “cheap college degrees and diplomas,” you will come up with 195,000,000 search results. You’ll find sites offering college degrees in seven days. One website, instantdegrees.com, offers a degree in 24hrs! And the best part? You can get one of these “diplomas” with “No Attendance. No Study or Testing. No Exams.” All you need is life experience… and money.

Donald Trump established Trump University in New York on May 23, 2005. Students were lured into taking a free introductory course, and then signed-up for three-day seminars at a cost of $1,495. They were then encouraged to buy advanced training programs for about $35,000.

When Trump University was founded, the New York State Education Department warned that it was in violation of state law for operating without a license. Trump ignored the warnings until 2010 when the “university” changed its name to the Trump Entrepreneur Initiative.

Three class action lawsuits are currently pending against Trump and his now-defunct school: one in New York and two in California. The billionaire is accused of misleading thousands of “students” who allege that the materials, seminars, and mentoring programs they paid for ultimately provided little-to-no value.

Prosecutors have labeled the educational enterprise, which closed in 2010, “a scam”; a “classic bait-and-switch scheme,” in the words of Eric Schneiderman, New York Attorney General.

On Super Tuesday primary day, Trump got some great news and some not so great news. The good news was that he won a majority of the state primaries. The bad news is that a New York appeals court gave the green light to the civil fraud lawsuit filed against the GOP front-runner and his Trump University.

Trump has sought to dismiss the lawsuits against him as bogus. In true Trumpian fashion, he accused a judge presiding over one of the cases as biased because he is Hispanic.

“I could’ve settled this suit numerous times,” Trump has said. “Could settle it now. But I don’t like settling suits.”

If Trump goes on to do well in the upcoming primaries and secures enough delegates to be the Republican presidential nominee, look for Trump to settle “these little lawsuits” in a New York minute. After all, he is only being sued for $40 million in New York; pocket change for a multi-billionaire like Trump.

Will these fraud lawsuits against Trump and his university hurt him with his loyal supporters? Fuggetaboutit!

Students who signed up for Trump’s fake university are not completely blameless. Who in his right mind would pay $35,000 to learn Trump’s secrets about real estate investing? Information that some have said is available on Zillow!

Students should have known Trump University was not a real school but a scam. Have you ever heard of a university with no sports team, no team mascot and no cheerleaders?

Photo | money.cnn.com

therightscoop.com

In the early days of Monday Night Football, former football star and color commentator, Don Meredith, was known for singing “Turn out the lights, the party’s over” (a line from a Willie Nelson song) when a game was seemingly out of hand… otherwise known as “garbage time.”

It’s garbage time for the GOP.

With Trump’s big wins throughout the South and Northeast in yesterday’s Super Tuesday primaries, one could almost hear “Dandy Don” breakout into song in that big announcer’s booth in the sky.

“The GOP establishment is apoplectic, but it’s too late,” said Don Sipple, a former GOP strategist turned independent. “If the party acts in an underhanded way to vanquish Trump, they will disenfranchise many voters who have been brought to the party by Trump. They are in deep doo-doo as an institution. They’re powerless right now.”

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton also had a big night. She not only won in those deep southern states she was favored to carry, but also took the grand prize of Massachusetts … a state that had appeared to be in Bernie’s grasp.

With 316 delegates, Donald Trump is on track to win the 1237 delegates needed to secure the Republican nomination. But what is even scarier, with a possible match up against Hillary Clinton in the general election, he might also be poised to win the presidency.

Trump has become the Jim Jones of presidential politics; a man who can do no wrong. His followers are fiercely loyal like those of the 1970’s cult leader of the People’s Temple; a leader so powerful  his disciples willingly drank the Kool-Aid which led to their deaths in the Jonestown massacre.

Clinton supporters are not of the same ilk. While she has her share of loyal enthusiasts, there is an almost equal number of Democrats who despise her. For many, it’s “Bernie or Bust.” They would rather sit out the election … or vote for Trump (who they see as “the lesser of two evils”) … than vote for someone they see as a criminal. This goes beyond Clinton fatigue.

Yes, we may be witnessing a perfect political storm that could sweep Donald Trump to the presidency. Polls have continually shown that Bernie Sanders is the Democrat more likely to defeat Trump in a general election But that does not seem to bother the DNC and its chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who have done everything they could to tilt the playing field for Clinton.

“Dandy Don” and Howard, you are so missed. A little levity is desperately needed at this dark hour in American politics.

Photo | ABC Monday Night Football

It is becoming horrifyingly clearer by the day, Donald Trump will be the Republican presidential nominee. Trump is on a roll having won three of the first four Republican primary contests. If Trump has a good showing on Super Tuesday, March 2, and continues to win afterward — even by small margins — he will most likely win the nomination.

About the only way Trump can be stopped is if he wins most of the delegates but not enough to put him over the 1,237 needed to secure the nomination at the GOP convention in July. In such a case, it’s anybody’s guess what might happen then. Could Mitt Romney be trotted out by the Republican establishment as the Party’s savior? How about Paul Ryan?

Republicans find themselves in this predicament because they underestimated Trump’s staying power. Except for the pathetically inept Jeb Bush, few establishment candidates attacked Trump in any aggressive, sustained way early in the race. Now we have Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz going after the front-runner with guns blazing. But it looks like a case of “too little too late.”

Democrats are salivating over the prospect of facing Trump in the general election. The thinking is their likely nominee, Hillary Clinton, will eat his lunch. Unlike Republican primary voters, Americans will come to their senses and elect the more experienced, and tested, Hillary.

Or will they?

Hillary’s negatives among all voters are just slightly below those of Trump. A large group of Democrats, mostly Progressives, have vowed to sit out the election or vote for Trump if Hillary becomes their party’s nominee. Trump voters are an enthusiastic bunch. They’ve had their fill of politics as usual. They want radical change even if that change borders on anarchy.

Hillary does not engender Trump’s passion among today’s anti-establishment voters. A low Democratic turnout due to a deficit of enthusiasm for their candidate could very well lead to a President Trump.

One-on-one match ups between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders favor Sanders in larger numbers than they do Hillary. Democratic enthusiasm, the kind that brings out voters, is squarely with the Sanders camp.

It’s ironic, the electability argument has nearly always favored Clinton over the democratic socialist Sanders. If Democrats get their wish of a Trump nomination, the electability meme may have to be revisited.

Photo | thetvpage.com

Of all the candidates from either party competing for the presidency, which two have the highest unfavorability ratings? You guessed it … at number one, Donald Trump; number two, Hillary Clinton.

In the latest 10 national polls measuring a candidate’s approval ratings, as compiled by Huffington Post, Donald Trump’s disapproval numbers range from 51% to 61%. Hillary Clinton does slightly better with unfavorability numbers from 50% to 58%.

Just for comparison purposes, Bernie Sanders’ unfavorability numbers clock in at 35% to 43%.

How is it possible that the candidates with the highest unfavorability numbers are each their party’s leading candidate to become their party’s presidential nominee? Do favorability/unfavorability numbers matter anymore? Or are they a thing of the past, just like about ever other bit of conventional wisdom that used to apply in politics?

For Democrats, it has gotten so bad that many Bernie Sanders supporters are flat out refusing to support Hillary if she is their party’s nominee. A good number of Progressives are even willing to support the slightly more hated Trump over Clinton.

We are truly swimming in uncharted waters this election cycle. Yes, it is still early in the game, with many more primaries to go until we get to the nominating conventions. But if all goes according to Hoyle, we will have the two most disliked presidential candidates competing against one another. In an ironic twist, the candidates’ negatives would put them on equal footing, as their unfavorability numbers would cancel each other out.

For the GOP establishment, that their leading candidate for its party’s presidential nomination has the highest unfavorability rating of any presidential candidate ever, can be forgiven. They are not backing him but trying to buck him.

For the Democrats, it’s the opposite. The party establishment has done just about all it could to insure the most hated Democratic candidate is their party’s nominee. (see Debbie Wasserman Schultz)

Followers of American politics around the world must be wondering, “is this the best Americans can do?” Is the American political system so broken that it needs a complete overhaul? Perhaps a revolution, as heralded by Sanders?

Photo | salon.com

Within minutes of Justice Antonin Scalia’s unexpected passing, Republicans implored the president to abdicate his constitutional duty to appoint a new Supreme Court Justice.

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,” said Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell at a time when other political leaders were releasing statements offering condolences to the Justice’s family.

President Obama, in a demonstration of class and respect, offered praise for the conservative who, more than any other justice, had been a thorn in his side.

“He will no doubt be remembered as one of the most consequential judges and thinkers to serve on the Supreme Court,” said Obama. “Justice Scalia dedicated his life to the cornerstone of our democracy: The rule of law. Tonight, we honor his extraordinary service to our nation and remember one of the towering legal figures of our time.”

But the President was having none of the advice coming from all corners of GOP land.

“Obviously, today is a time to remember Justice Scalia’s legacy,” said Obama. “I plan to fulfill my constitutional responsibilities to nominate a successor in due time. There will be plenty of time for me to do so, and for the Senate to fulfill its responsibility to give that person a fair hearing and a timely vote.”

The untimely death of Justice Scalia has put Republicans between a rock and far-right place. If they follow through on their promise to not even consider the President’s eventual nominee, they will show themselves to be the obstructionists they are and not as defenders of the Constitution. If they acquiesce, they will be seen as spineless by their “take no prisoners” base already angry with the Republican governing class.

Democrats have shown themselves to be a respectful bunch following the passing of Scalia. While the late Justice was perhaps the most loathed figure among liberals, they followed the president’s example by not exalting what many secretly believed to be a stroke of good luck.

No matter what the Republican Senate decides to do, the Democrats are in the catbird seat. All they need to do is have their nominee … whichever one it may be … elected president and the direction of the Supreme Court will be changed for decades … much like when Antonin Scalia was appointed to the Court by Ronald Reagan 30 years ago.

Photo | mashable.com

You say you want a revolution, well you know. We all want to change the world -John Lennon

The choice for Democrats has come down to this: vote with your head or vote with your heart? Go with the visionary or go with the pragmatist? Demand a revolution or let evolution take it’s course.

Both Clinton and Sanders believe our political system is broken. Each candidate agrees fundamental change is needed. But where Bernie wants to take down the system, Hillary wants to improve it from the inside out. It’s the difference between one small step or a giant leap.

Voters on the right as well as the left consider Washington paralyzed and corrupt. They want big changes, and they want them now.

Clinton is asking the American voter, especially enthusiastic, young Sanders supporters, to grow up and get practical; to think about electability in swing states, not popularity on campus. She is trying to convince them that revolution isn’t in the cards, but that evolution is possible, and that she’s the candidate who can deliver it.

Sanders argues fundamental change can’t happen because of the power of special interests and the corrupt campaign finance system. He implies Clinton cannot change our corrupt system because she is part of the status quo; she is wedded to Wall Street and other special interests that have donated big money to her campaign and super PAC.

Just as there is a split between mainstream conservatives and far right conservatives in the Republican Party, a divide exists between Progressive and moderate Democrats.

Progressive Democrats agree with Hillary that electability needs to be considered but they believe Bernie is the more electable of the two. They point out Clinton’s high negative ratings among the electorate. Polls have shown Clinton to have unfavorability ratings, nationwide, close to 60%. Nobody wins a general election when close to 60 percent of Americans don’t trust the candidate.

At this point in the contest, the odds are still great that Hillary will be the Democratic presidential nominee. The only thing that could stop her is a new scandal.

It was reported recently the State Department inspector general issued a subpoena last fall targeting the Clinton Foundation and some of the charitable events hosted by the organization. The I.G. is looking into whether some of those events required the permission of the federal government. The investigation could expand beyond such a narrow focus. (Clinton Foundation scandal)

With the Clintons, you never know. As a Bernie supporter might say, “Oy vey!”

Photo | usatoday.com