She Laughed

Published in La Presse
(Canada) on 24 April 2016
by Alexandre Sirois (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Nathanael Milien. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
“Victory is in sight,” Hillary Clinton exclaimed late Tuesday evening, with a big, bright smile on her face. She dominated her rival Bernie Sanders in New York.

It is impossible to prove her wrong. By winning in one of the country’s most populous states, she has interrupted her rival's momentum. She also proved, beyond any doubt, that her lead among Democrats is now nearly insurmountable.

And undeniable. For at least three reasons:

• Since January, she has received the support of some 10 million voters, about 2.6 million more than Bernie Sanders, from one end of the country to the next;

• She has won more primaries than her rival since the beginning of the primary and caucus season: 21 to 17; and

• She has taken a commanding delegate lead, which, in this nomination contest, represents the main ingredient. At the end of the polling in New York, she held 1428 delegates, about 300 more than her rival. To this total, it's necessary to add more than 500 superdelegates, representatives of the Democratic Party establishment who support her. She's approaching the magic number. One needs at least 2383 delegates to win.

We can thus predict today that, unless a miracle happens, Bernie Sanders’ hopes will be crushed.

We have already reported on the Vermont senator’s essential contribution to the debates at the beginning of the race. Let's now highlight how Democratic voters, by throwing their support behind Hillary Clinton, have made a good choice.

Because, despite certain apparent flaws and her slight baggage, the former secretary of state is still more likely than Sanders to win in a race against the Republican nominee during the general presidential election.

This is what a large number of Democrats seem to believe, according to voter surveys on Tuesday. In New York, 85 percent of voters who ultimately were voting for the candidate they thought could win the presidential bid in November chose Clinton.

Republicans are not yelling it from the rooftops, but they share that opinion. Strategists have admitted that they would happily face Sanders, this “socialist who went to the USSR for his honeymoon,” as one of them recently declared. His ideas are definitely more progressive than those of the average American, and his lack of experience in foreign affairs is also perceived as a major handicap.

Among Republicans, the game is not yet over. But if the rules of the game do not change before the July convention, the party candidate will be an unpredictable and bitter demagogue (Donald Trump) or a super conservative with old traditional values (Ted Cruz).*

Neither the United States nor the rest of the world can run the risk of having either of these two Republicans in the White House. That's why Clinton's likely victory over Sanders is encouraging news for things to come.

*Editor’s note: Sen. Ted Cruz suspended his campaign for the presidency on May 3, 2016.


Elle a ri

« La victoire est en vue », s'est exclamée Hillary Clinton tard mardi soir, un large sourire éclairant son visage. Elle avait fait mordre la poussière à son rival, Bernie Sanders, dans l'État de New York.

Impossible de la contredire. En triomphant dans l'un des États les plus peuplés du pays, elle a brisé l'élan de son rival. Elle a aussi prouvé hors de tout doute que son avance, chez les démocrates, est maintenant presque insurmontable.

Et incontestable. Pour au moins trois raisons.

- Elle a récolté l'appui, depuis janvier, de quelque 10 millions d'électeurs, soit environ 2,6 millions de plus que Bernie Sanders, d'un bout à l'autre du pays.

- Elle gagné plus d'étapes que son rival depuis le début de la saison des primaires et des caucus : 21 contre 17.

- Elle a pris une solide avance pour ce qui est des délégués qui représentent, dans cette course à l'investiture, le nerf de la guerre. À l'issue du scrutin de New York, elle en a 1428, soit près de 300 de plus que son rival. Il faut ajouter à ce total plus de 500 superdélégués - des représentants de l'establishment du Parti démocrate - qui la soutiennent. Elle se rapproche donc du chiffre magique. Il en faut au moins 2383 pour gagner.


On peut donc aujourd'hui prédire qu'à moins d'un miracle, les espoirs de Bernie Sanders seront déçus.

Nous avons déjà fait état de la contribution essentielle du sénateur du Vermont aux débats depuis le début de la course. Soulignons maintenant que les électeurs démocrates, en jetant leur dévolu sur Hillary Clinton, font le bon choix.

Car malgré certains défauts apparents et les quelques casseroles qu'elle traîne, l'ex-secrétaire d'État demeure plus susceptible de l'emporter que Bernie Sanders face au candidat républicain lors de l'élection présidentielle.

C'est d'ailleurs ce que semblent croire bon nombre de démocrates, selon les sondages effectués auprès des électeurs mardi. À New York, 85 % de ceux qui ont dit avoir voté avant tout pour le candidat qui peut gagner le scrutin présidentiel en novembre ont choisi Hillary Clinton.

Les républicains ne le crient pas sur tous les toits, mais ils partagent cet avis. Des stratèges ont admis qu'ils seraient ravis d'affronter Bernie Sanders, ce « socialiste qui est allé en URSS pour sa lune de miel », a récemment affirmé l'un d'eux. Ses idées nettement plus progressistes que celles de l'Américain moyen et son manque d'expérience en politique étrangère sont aussi perçus comme des handicaps majeurs.

Chez les républicains, les jeux ne sont pas faits. Mais si les règles du jeu ne changent pas d'ici la convention du mois de juillet, le candidat du parti sera un démagogue imprévisible et fielleux (Donald Trump) ou un ultraconservateur aux valeurs rétrogrades (Ted Cruz).

Ni les États-Unis ni le reste du monde ne peuvent courir le risque de voir l'un de ces deux républicains à la Maison-Blanche. C'est pourquoi la victoire probable d'Hillary Clinton sur Bernie Sanders est une nouvelle encourageante pour la suite des choses.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Turkey: Conflicting Messages to Syria: US Supports Integrity while Israel Attacks

Indonesia: Trump’s 19% Tariffs: How Should We Respond?

Australia: Donald Trump Made MAGA a Promise on the Epstein Files. They Are Holding Him to It

Germany: Trump Is Capable of Learning

Australia: What’s Behind Donald Trump’s Latest Crypto Adventure?

Topics

Spain: Another Threat from Trump

Canada: Negotiating a Business Deal without Trust

Taiwan: Tariff Showdown Doesn’t Shake Confidence

Australia: Donald Trump Made MAGA a Promise on the Epstein Files. They Are Holding Him to It

Australia: What’s Behind Donald Trump’s Latest Crypto Adventure?

Ireland: Donald Trump Could Be Swallowed Up by an Epstein Conspiracy He Helped Create

China: Blind Faith in US ‘Security Commitments’ Is Short-Sighted

Thailand: Donald Trump Buys Time with Weapons for Kyiv

Related Articles

Turkey: Musk versus the Machine: Disrupting the 2-Party System

Canada: How To Avoid ICE? Follow the Rules

Canada: Trump Doesn’t Hold All the Cards on International Trade

Germany: Musk Helps the Democrats

Canada: Canada Must Match the Tax Incentives in Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’

1 COMMENT

  1. I would suggest sources other than the US mainstream media would provide a more nuanced view of the current status of the Democratic Party primary. Sen. Sanders has stated unequivocally he intends to continue his campaign through to the party convention in July, and the level of support he has among the disenfranchised continues to soar. Furthermore, it has become more and more apparent there have been irregularities in the previous elections. As for his alleged lack of experience in foreign affairs, I can assure you his many years in the US Congress is quite adequate, since it equals that of many previous presidents.

    I will also note that if you’re concerned about having Mr. Trump in the White House, you might also want to be concerned with having Ms. Clinton there as well, given her history of militant response.