As the stakes in the 2016 election get higher, the campaigns and their accompanying coverage get weirder and weirder. I’m not just talking about the big things, like Marco Rubio’s human blue screen of death or Donald Trump calling Ted Cruz a pussy, but the lesser-noticed things that illustrate what’s wrong with everything.
Krugman really hit the nail on the head with his observation of the increasingly noticeable difference between the two parties basic moral and intellectual principles. “When you revisit Democratic debates after what went down Saturday, it doesn’t feel as if you’re watching a different party,” wrote Krugman. “It feels as if you’ve entered a different intellectual and moral universe.”
This isn’t an opinion. It’s math. The thing about reality is that it’s always there and you’re subject to the constraints of it whether you choose to believe in it or not. Barring a political deus ex machina of statistically inexpressible proportions, Bernie Sanders just isn’t going to be president. But given that this election is bigger than any one person — or any one grudge should that person not win — will Sanders’s rabid fanbase vote for someone they’ve spent months utterly demonizing?
On the sizzling heels of Senator Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) victory in Monday night’s Iowa caucuses, there has been a rush by the media to topple the candidacy of Iowa runner-up Donald Trump like some gold-plated, questionably-coiffed Saddam Hussein statue. For Trumpians looking for comfort beyond Microsoft conspiracy theories, history has some hope for them.