Well, if you check the RCP averages, he is poised to do well.

He'll most likely win Massachusetts, Alabama, Oklahoma, Georgia, Virginia, Tennessee, and Vermont. That's 7 out of the 11 states he'll have a good chance of winning. Meanwhile, Minnesota is a toss-up, Arkansas, and Alaska are also toss-ups. The only one he's "sure" to lose is Texas, Cruz's home state. That's a potentially 10 out of 11 states.

Tomorrow could provide a pretty tremendous lead. We're getting close to the point where it will be difficult for anyone else to be nominee.

The only thing to stop Trump now is preventing him from winning the majority of the delegates, leading to a brokered convention where Mitt Romney could actually be selected. Chances of that happening? Practically nil.

President Trump. I do despair.

(Although I don't think he'd be anywhere near as bad as people currently think. Remember, campaigns are rhetoric, he would govern much differently).

I take Trump's radicalism with a grain of salt. No one is that insensitive to that many topics. Mostly it's an act. Mostly.

I do think we'll have a brokered convention. As I said prior, I think Trump will win the most states, but Rubio may have the most delegates.

Rubio's main roadblocks to that goal are two fold. 1. In the polls he is losing badly to Trump. Cruz dropping would bring him near to Trump in the polls. However, that's assuming everyone who supported Cruz would go with Rubio. That's statistically impossible. So let's assume Rubio takes 8% of the 12% that Cruz hold. Well, that still leaves Rubio about 8 points down in the polls.

Secondly, Kasick is still in the race. In Ohio Rubio is a distant fourth. Even if Cruz dropped, Rubio would still be competing for third.

I honestly do not believe either candidate will make the required number of delegates.

The Republican Party could be dead in 20 years.

I, could run on the democratic ticket and win....that's saying something, something about republicans.....

Hillary Clintoñ will win the the next presidential election, I think's it's funny that people even debate it.....

God bless.

"The Republican party could be dead in 20 years."

Nope. They've been the choice of the brain dead for a hundred years now.
As long as there are stupid "adults" in America the Republican party will
thrive. Even the lowest of the low (Harding, McCarthy, Nixon, Reagan,
Bush Jr, Palin, Trump, 2020's nominee) can't kill 'em. America seems to
get dumber every year so the Republicans are here for the duration.

In a word, woe.

The difference is after Bush 43, the Republicans have been sending joke candidates out for President. McCain/Palin (She's the joke), Romney and Trump. GOP will get crushed for 3rd election in a row. Younger voters are going Democrat more and more. The GOP base is becoming ancient and radical. Not a good look for them long term. Obviously the 20 years comment is a joke but it will be some dark times.

I'm going to say something kind of controversial, I don't think Sanders is a very good candidate.

Sure, he's not Trump, and maybe not Clinton. Maybe that's good enough for some people, but his actual voting record scares me. There's this prevailing thought of Saint Bernie, but on social issues, he's not that much different than Clinton, and on National Security, he certainly is weaker. He did vote for the same Crime bill Clinton drafted, he did vote against the Brady Bill, he did vote against DOMA but only on the grounds of states rights and up until 07' didn't support gay rights within his home state. Sure he got to that conclusion a couple years earlier than others, but does he deserve a free pass? He is also completely inept at foreign policy. Sorry, but he is. It's fairly clear he has not even a vision for foreign policy. You may not agree with Obama's foreign policy, but he had a plan at the outset of his first campaign and showed at least some aptitude. Bernie meanwhile speaks in platitudes on a subject that MIGHT just be important.

Also, what Sanders has promised in terms of breaking-up the banks is quite frankly, more illegal than Hillary's e-mail scandal, and ignore several economic mechanisms. Glass-Steagall in the end is a misnomer. Sorry, it is. Yes, repealing Glass-Steagall didn't help the matter, but not repealing it wouldn't have reversed many of the mechanisms already in place for the the 2007 collapse. The main perpetrators were Lehman Bros., Wachovia, and Bear Stearns, who were already taking on a ton a risky loans prior to the repeal, starting in the 80's in fact. The economy still would have probably tumbled out of the control. To liken to an analogy, it's like a guy who was shot five times and Glass-Steagall was the fifth shot. Also, for banks to be broken-up Congress would have to enact legislation to do so, which will never happen, even in a democratic majority. The President does not have such powers and evoking such powers would be illegal. Breaking up the banks and reigning in bankers also ignores the contracts many banks have around the world, and the divide between say investment and commercial banking. Sanders is risking other world economies because he's butt hurt over American banks? Especially considering those banks provide payroll for multiple multinational corporations? Not likely, and it would be reckless of him to do....maybe more than reckless actually. Plain fact of the matter, is that the U.S. government is too entangled in the banking system for Sanders or anyone to do anything about it.

H.W. Bush, Gore, and Bob Dole all have something in common. They're all candidates who in this point in time during their campaigns were projected to sweep their opponent. So I wouldn't pay too much attention to match-up polls at the moment.

And honestly, I'm sorry but America is a center-right country. The idea that the only hope Republicans have is if the Democrats run someone who is closer to that center right isn't bound by any hard facts. Bernie is polling fairly well in match-ups, but that's because people still have big name recognition with Trump and Clinton. In a poll it's very easy for a respondent to give a solid answer toward those two. In fact, that points toward their match-up poll (Trump and Clinton) being more accurate because name recognition is already factored in. The great majority of Americans probably still couldn't tell what Bernie stands for, and the idea that a center-right country is going to vote in someone who is further to the left of a current president who was at great risk of not winning a second term doesn't make any sense.

My sense is that if Bernie became nominee of the democratic party, he would lose against someone like Rubio. Badly. Maybe not Trump, but I don't think it would be a runaway either. I think Trump is fairly intelligent, and I think he would drop his current act and move toward the center and make a race of it. I also think that MOST Americans won't go for many of Bernie's initiatives. In the end, this is a center right country that barely supported health care reform, still barely supports health care reform, and believes that somehow Obama doesn't have the full right to select his next nominee for the supreme court. But people expect these same people to vote for a socialist? Sorry, but you can't say 1+1=2 in this situation, but it equals 3 in another. Bernie's inability to command even the moderate portion of the democratic party has already been proven by the fact that in every primary/caucus so far, Bernie has failed to take the major of those who ascribed themselves to be moderate democrats, ie those who are closer to the center right of the country.

Anyways, it doesn't matter. My sense is that Bernie's campaign will end today. Not that he'll shut down after today, but he's probably going to get the floor wiped by Hillary, and it won't even be close in most states. His path to the nomination will all but be eliminated after today.

The biggest issue facing Democrats right now is that Republicans are coming out to vote a MUCH higher rate than they are. If this continues, November could be interesting.

Also, I'm not sure either party really espouses what their parties "beliefs" are any more. Our system is set up such that it basically necessitates we have two parties, but neither is anything except a title to give themselves.

My dad is completely brainwashed by FOX news, and he won't vote for Donald Trump.

Hillary or Tom Brady in 2016.

Just to calm everyone's fears about Trump (and it's something I've said repeatedly in this thread) I'm quoting the article linked below:

"The prospect that Mr. Trump would govern more soberly than he campaigns is another argument in favor of calming down. Confronted with a Democratic Senate or one with only a slim, non-filibuster-proof Republican majority and with a House of Representatives led by the big-hearted Speaker Paul Ryan, a President Trump would have to adjust to Washington reality.

Recent history, after all, has shown little connection between campaigns and governance. Bill Clinton campaigned on middle class tax cuts and gave us tax increases. George W. Bush campaigned on humility in foreign policy and gave us the Iraq War. Barack Obama campaigned against the individual mandate of Hillary Clinton’s health insurance plan, but ObamaCare wound up including precisely such a mandate. Mr. Obama campaigned as a uniter but wound up as a divisive president. Listen to Mr. Trump, and he’s pretty open about some of his more extreme positions being opening offers for deal-making negotiations."

www.nysun.com/national/fears-of-trump-as-fascist-echo-similar-warnings/89476/

Tonight was a bad night for Rubio.

He needed to do well enough for Ted Cruz to drop before Florida, and I don't think that will happen now.

His hope has to be that Cruz does poorly in the upcoming primaries and caucuses prior to Florida's on the 15th, but I doubt it. Florida is the last stand. IF Trump wins there, it'll be over and he'll be the nominee.