The 2016 presidential race is shaping up to be one for the history books. Both the Republicans and the Democrats are all fired up and excited about busting up the status quo, with Donald Trump on one side and Bernie Sanders on the other. This, despite attempts by the establishment to make sure that neither a Trump presidency nor a Sanders presidency will ever see the light of day. Although the overall look and feel of the Trump and Sanders campaigns couldn’t be more different, the general sentiment that is fueling them is pretty much the same.
There is a feeling on both sides of the aisle that the mainstream candidates do not speak for the people, but rather for corporate and special interests. Both Sanders and Trump can say whatever they want to say without fear of alienating big-money donors. The same cannot be said for Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton. Although she has not directly accepted money from the oil and fossil fuel industry, she has accepted money from people who work for the industry, and foundations linked to Clinton have accepted large donations from corporations like Exxon Mobil and Chevron. With this in mind, is it any wonder why Hillary has flip-flopped on issues such as fracking?
Shortly before the Iowa caucuses, Clinton attended a fundraiser at the headquarters of pro-fracking advocate and major fossil fuel industry contributor Franklin Square Capital Partners. This should come as no surprise to anyone, though. Rubbing noses with corporate interests is nothing new to Hillary Clinton, nor is it any coincidence that she was in favor of bailing out Wall Street and the big banks, and three of the top contributors to her campaign just so happen to be Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Lehman Brothers and the like.
The rise of Bernie Sanders on the left and Donald Trump on the right is the collective voice of the American people saying, “Enough, already.” However, it seems as though Trump supporters aren’t so much against their candidate taking money from special interests. For them it is much more visceral, a sense that something has gone wrong in America and that Trump, with his faux working-man appeal, can “make America great again.” How he is going to do that (other than deporting immigrants and building a wall to keep Mexicans out) is unclear, but it doesn’t matter. Trump is the voice of the angry white mob who are fed up after eight years of Barack Obama.
One thing holds true for both Republicans and Democrats, and that is that neither party is going to make it easy for a Trump or Sanders presidency to happen. The anti-Trump sentiment is palpable in the GOP, with most of the establishment rallying around Ted Cruz. As for Sanders, while he may be shaping up to be the more popular candidate, the Democrats have an army of superdelegates who support Hillary Clinton. These superdelegates are not elected in primaries, but are appointed by party heads and usually support whichever candidate the establishment deems more electable. In the end, it’s going to take a massive turnout by Democrats for Sanders to win the nomination. Trump, on the other hand, is becoming more and more of a shoo-in every day. However, once he clinches the nomination, will Trump’s brash behavior be a bane or a boon in the general election? At this point the 2016 political betting odds tell us that the primary wont be much of an issue for Trump but his odds go down a great bit in the general election.