Senator Bernie Sanders campaigning as the lone outsider in a presidential race dominated by billionaires and political insiders was rewarded with winning the Indiana primary. Realistically the win does little to alter the final outcome of the Democratic primary season. The win
motivates Senator Sanders to remain in the race until
the convention, and he has promised to make it a contested one. Whether
a possible indictment of Clinton for her handling of classified
information prior to the Democratic convention would be enough to
convince super-delegates to abandon their support of her remains to be
seen,
but is unlikely. Hillary Clinton has an almost insurmountable lead in pledged delegates (~300). So the 2016 race for President will be between two historically unpopular candidates
(69-59), Trump versus Clinton, forcing disappointed supporters of other candidates to give their votes to
a nominee they dislike or stay home and not participate in what remains of American democracy. Too bad for
US that the 'Merican electorate bases its political choices on cultural superficialities instead of
economic realities*:
 |
credit: Nate Beeler, Columbus Post Dispatch
Wackydoodle sez: My card jis sez "Don't pass GO" | | |
* The exhaustive study by French economist Thomas Picketty, Capital in the 21st Century, shows that in the United States there is an extreme concentration of national wealth in the hands of the top 10% of the population (the upper class). They own 70% of the nation's wealth compared to the bottom 50% (the lower class) that owns only 5% of capital. If the population of the US is about 300 million that means 3,000,000 wealthy people own more than 10 times what the poorest 150 million American's own. The ownership figure for the top decile is probably closer to 72% since wealth is self-reported. If the capital accumulation trend continues, by 2030 the rich could own upwards of 90% of capital, a level of inequality not seen since the Belle Epoch of Europe.
