As Sanders wins yet another primary (the 19th overall), it might be useful to examine what a Sanders-Trump match-up might entail.
It starts with understanding that the 2016 race is fueled primarily with the devastation caused by runaway inequality and the financial strip-mining of the economy by Wall Street.
Americans are fed up with wage stagnation and the ever increasing rise of the pay gap between CEOs and the rest of us. In 1980 an average top 100 CEO received $45 in compensation compared to $1 for the average worker. Today it is an incomprehensible $844 to one, (as in one house for you and 844 houses for a top CEO.)
This system runs on an idealized vision of capitalism called neoliberalism. That model continually calls for tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation of the private sector, and cutbacks/privatization of any and all public services. Both political parties have endorsed this model. But now the American people are in revolt as they see the economy, their communities and their families undermined by Wall Street.
On the right, Trump supporters blame their losses on immigrants, big government and people of color. They revel in the way Trump bashes the established order with his Mexico wall, his ban on Muslim immigrants, and his overall assault on political correctness, meaning his overt appeals to racism, sexism and xenophobia.
Sanders attacks runaway inequality directly by calling for the break up of big banks, new taxes on Wall Street, free higher education and Medicare-for-All. He wants to move money from financial and corporate elites into the real economy so that it benefits working people and the poor.
Meanwhile, Hillary is part and parcel of the runaway inequality regime. Her Wall Street speeches, her Super-PACs, her corporate donors, and her family's new found wealth will make it hard to shed her links to those who have created, and profited by, the rigged economy.
Should Sanders somehow become the nominee, here are ten reasons why he has a much better chance of defeating Trump than Hillary.
1. Integrity:
Trump's character flaws, which are many, will stand out in high relief in comparison to Sanders. From his multiple-marriages, to his personal attacks on women, immigrants and Muslims, Trump appeals most strongly to a very narrow segment of the electorate. He would lose many voters to Sanders just because so clearly Bernie bleeds integrity. Further, it will be impossible for Trump to accuse Sanders of any form of corruption, nor can he claim that Bernie is beholden to special interests. With Hillary, the case is less clear. Whether true or not, there is a widespread sense that she often is not who she says she is, and that she often changes her stance to gain political favor.
2. Super-PACs:
Trump is about to face what Bernie calls the "corrupt campaign finance system." In order to stay competitive, Trump will have to do more than rely on Twitter and at-will media access. To have any chance of success, he must either deplete a good deal of his fortune (which may not be as great as he suggests) or he will have to rely on donor support, especially in the form of Super-PACs. If he faces Hillary, it's a non-issue since she will be inundated with corporate money. But against the Sanders army of small donors and his anti-Super-PAC stance, the claim that Trump can't be bought or influenced by big money will be sorely tested.
3. Financial speculation tax to support free higher education:
It will be interesting to see how Trump dances around this issue. First, he can't possibly support the financial transaction tax on Wall Street without running afoul of what remains of the Republican Party. And free higher education is likely to be viewed by much of his base as another big government giveaway, especially to people of color. That leaves this very popular program all to Bernie and he would make enormous gains by raising it, especially among younger voters. Hillary's opposition to both the financial transaction tax and free higher education puts her in Trump's corner. And her complex policy proposals on student loans will easily be ignored.
4. Young people:
This election could come down to a battle of enthusiasm. The Trump and Sanders supporters appear to have much more energy than do Hillary's, at least for now. While both Sanders and Trump have ardent followers, there is an existential difference. "Make America Great Again" is filled with pathos and self-loathing. Trump's supporters want revenge. They want to take back "their" country which the government has given to immigrants and people of color. They cheer and yell when Trump attacks all comers -- when he expresses their fears, frustration and anger. Bernie, on the other hand, draws on positive enthusiasm. His supporters share his hopefulness, his optimism, his desire for broad universal proposals that will help nearly everyone. In that battle, I'd bet on the hopeful kids of all colors, rather than the angry white men.
5. Independents:
Trump can't come close to winning unless he can carry a solid majority of independents. Sanders seems to have that group firmly in his corner. In Indiana for example, he beat Hillary by 44 percentage points among independent voters. Overall, he's getting about 70 percent of those unaffiliated primary voters. Some suggest that many of them are voting for Bernie because they can't stand Hillary. Those are a treasure trove of potential Trump votes in a race against Clinton. But if the polls for November are any indication, Bernie would swamp Trump among independents.
6. Iraq and Interventionism:
Trump is trying to present himself as an anti-interventionist. He points to his own objections to the war in Iraq as proof of his "America First" stance. But compared to Sanders, the anti-interventionist voice of Trump is muffled. He certainly didn't speak out forcefully against Iraq or any other U.S. interventions. (It's doubtful Trump even knows what happened in Nicaragua.) Sanders, of course, was a leading voice against the Iraq War, and his record against U.S. adventurism does not have to be fabricated. If the American people want to tame U.S. interventionism then they are likely to support the real deal rather than the Donald-come-lately. Hillary, of course, is saddled with her consistent support of regime change. She'll have to hide, triangulate or dump her neo-conservative predilections to ward off Trump.
7. Trade:
Here's another case where Trump's bravado evaporates into hot air in a race against Sanders. Trump can rant and rave all he wants about China, Japan, Mexico and bad trade deals. But Bernie can easily ask, "Hey, where were you when all these deals were done? Why didn't you speak out?" This issue, of course, works for Trump when facing Hillary. But, against Bernie he'll seem second rate.
8. Minimum Wage:
Trump was against a higher minimum wage until he was for it. It's as if he's finally figured out that raising it is enormously popular. Even more than half of all Republicans support a minimum wage of $12.50 or more. Then again he may also have realized how unseemly it is for a billionaire to suggest that low wage workers should make do without any minimum wage at all. On this issue, like most others, Bernie has been straight ahead and consistent in his support for a $15 minimum. He walked the picket lines with fast food workers who were on strike for that cause. Hillary is for $12 or for $15, depending on where she is campaigning.
9. Obamacare:
51 percent of country favors the repeal of Obamacare while 43.8 percent don't. Trump will try to pick up votes with his adamant opposition, which puts him squarely against Hillary who has wrapped herself around Obamacare during the primaries. But this health care system is fatally flawed as it pours money into the coffers of the largest insurance companies and pharmaceutical firms, allows premiums and out-of-pocket costs to rise, while still not covering over 20 million Americans. Sanders wants to replace it with Medicare-for-All which is likely to be more popular than the mush Trump is selling.
10. Crumbling Infrastructure:
Until recently, the American people have been sold on the idea of austerity -- that government can't afford to provide decent services. This, of course plays into the drive to privatize public goods and thereby funnel tax revenues to enrich private entrepreneurs. But more and more Americans are picking up on one of Bernie's most critical questions: How can the richest country in the history of the world, not afford clean water in Flint or decent jobs for the young people in Chicago or bridges that don't collapse in Minneapolis? Trump's phantasmagorical tax cuts and debt reduction plans feed into the austerity message. But this time this issue is likely to work for Sanders who is asking Wall Street to pay for the rebuilding of Main Street, rather than asking Mexico pay for a wall.
What about Bernie's vulnerabilities?
It is never wise to underestimate a carnival barker named Trump. An October surprise in the form of a terrorist attack on U.S. could make him look like the strongman needed to keep us safe.
If Trump faced Bernie it would be all about Bernie the Red. Trump would play his capitalist billionaire success against the socialist who wants to rob Americans of their drive for success and their chance to win big in the capitalist sweepstake, (just like Trump did with only a million dollars of seed money from his Dad.)
But does 1950s red-baiting still work? Bernie proudly admits he's a democratic socialist. No one knows for sure how this would play out, but so far it hasn't cost him very much in the primaries. Further, the latest poll from New Hampshire, a neighboring state that is much more conservative than Vermont and knows all about Sanders, has him up over Trump by 21 percentage points, while Hillary leads Trump by only 5 percent. This suggest that Sanders ages well. The more voters know about him, the more they like him. Bad news for Trump's anti-red attacks.
Big government and big spending are also potential vulnerabilities in a general election. Pro-Hillary think tanks are coming out with study after study to undermine ideas like free higher education and Medicare-for-All. Bernie's response is to ask why so many other developed nations can afford these universal proposals. It's a good question. But, the anti-government sentiment may run deeper in America. This is always a dangerous area for any progressive who calls for more government programs.
And finally, there is good old anti-Semitism. It's possible that about 10 percent of the electorate might not vote for a Jewish candidate. What about a Jewish candidate who isn't entirely in lockstep with everything that Israel does or wants? Well, that could cost him some more votes among Jewish conservatives, and of course, evangelicals who hope that Israel starts Armageddon.
Why raise all these issues when Bernie's chances are so slim?
Because it's not over yet. There's a lot of time between now and the convention and things can happen, especially around her Wall Street speech transcripts.
There's more than enough time for Hillary supporters and super-delegates to take a deep breath and think hard about the frightening scenario of a Clinton versus Trump race. Those who think it's a slam dunk for Hillary should think again.
Clinton is tied to the old established order, to the insider game, and to Wall Street. The Clintons, indeed, are old news. The country may not want to look backwards. Too many voters may either stay away or go with the brash billionaire who is willing to upset the neoliberal financial trough -- the same trough that has been feeding the Clintons these many years.
Bernie is that breath of fresh air that we haven't seen since Gene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy in 1968. Let's hope this time it has a better ending.
(Like Runaway Inequality on Facebook.)
Les Leopold, the director of the Labor Institute in New York is working with unions, worker centers and community organization to build a national economics educational campaign. His latest book, Runaway Inequality: An Activist's Guide to Economic Justice (Oct 2015), is a text for that effort. All proceeds go to support this educational campaign.