US Press: pick of the papers

The ten must-read opinion pieces from today's US papers.

1. We Are the 99.9% (New York Times)

The 99 per cent slogan is great, writes Paul Krugman, but it actually aims too low. A big chunk of the top 1 per cent's gains have gone to an even smaller group, the top 0.1 per cent.

2. Bye Bye Biden? (Wall Street Journal)

Peter Du Point thinks Obama may be eyeing Mrs. Clinton for the 2012 ticket.

3. The GOP contemplates a marriage (Washington Post)

Michael Gerson reports on the GOP's latest choice: Steady Romney or risky Gingrich?

4. Stuffing ourselves on Black Friday (Los Angeles Times)

On the biggest shopping day of the year, Annie Leonard and Rick Ridgeway suggest you think for a moment about the demands our consumption makes on the planet's resources and ask: Does our family need more stuff?

5. Hard drives, hard questions (Boston Globe) ($)

This editorial argues Republican primary voters deserve more give and take from candidate Mitt Romney, who criticizes the Obama administration for a lack of transparency.

6. Congress, don't fail us now (Denver Post)

Not acting on payroll tax cuts, unemployment benefits and Medicare would result in disaster, says this editorial.

7. Prison dysfunction (Chicago Tribune)

Jonah Goldberg describes "why we love all those criminals"

8. History too kind to Puritans' brutal intolerance (Detroit Free Press)

Eric Sharp syas Americans should give a thought to the enduring myth that Thanksgiving perpetuates.

9. Why the 'supercommittee' failed (USA Today)

One reason is political polarization, says this editorial. Another is that party leaders delegated the job to people with less clout.

10. Why We Spend, Why They Save (New York Times)

Europeans save more than Americans do. Sheldon Garon asks: "what can we learn from them?"

Getty
Show Hide image

Donald Trump is the Republican nominee. What now?

So a Clinton-Trump general election is assured – a historically unpopular match-up based on their current favourability ratings.

That’s it. Ted Cruz bowed out of the Republican presidential race last night, effectively handing the nomination to Donald Trump. “From the beginning I’ve said that I would continue on as long as there was a viable path to victory,” Cruz said. “Tonight, I’m sorry to say it appears that path has been foreclosed.”

What foreclosed his path was his sizeable loss to Trump in Indiana. Cruz had bet it all on the Hoosier State, hoping to repeat his previous Midwest victories in Iowa and Wisconsin. He formed a pact with John Kasich, whereby Kasich left the anti-Trump field clear for Cruz in Indiana in return for Cruz not campaigning in Oregon and New Mexico. He announced Carly Fiorina as his vice-presidential nominee last week, hoping the news would give him a late boost.

It didn’t work. Donald Trump won Indiana handily, with 53 per cent of the vote to Cruz’s 37 per cent. Trump won all of the state’s nine congressional districts, and so collected all 57 of the convention delegates on offer. He now has 1,014 delegates bound to him on the convention’s first ballot, plus 34 unbound delegates who’ve said they’ll vote for him (according to Daniel Nichanian’s count).

That leaves Trump needing just 189 more to hit the 1,237 required for the nomination – a number he was very likely to hit in the remaining contests before Cruz dropped out (it’s just 42 per cent of the 445 available), and that he is now certain to achieve. No need to woo more unbound delegates. No contested convention. No scrambling for votes on the second ballot. 

Though Bernie Sanders narrowly won the Democratic primary in Indiana, he’s still 286 pledged delegates short of Hillary Clinton. He isn’t going to win the 65 per cent of remaining delegates he’d need to catch up. Clinton now needs just 183 more delegates to reach the required 2,383. Like Trump, she is certain to reach that target on 7 June when a number of states vote, including the largest: California.

So a Clinton-Trump general election is assured – a historically unpopular match-up based on their current favourability ratings. But while Clinton is viewed favourably by 42 per cent of voters and unfavourably by 55%, Trump is viewed favourably by just 35 per cent and unfavourably by a whopping 61 per cent. In head-to-head polling (which isn’t particularly predictive this far from election day), Clinton leads with 47 per cent to Trump’s 40 per cent. Betting markets make Clinton the heavy favourite, with a 70 per cent chance of winning the presidency in November.

Still, a few questions that remain as we head into the final primaries and towards the party conventions in July: how many Republican officeholders will reluctantly endorse Trump, how many will actively distance themselves from him, and how many will try to remain silent? Will a conservative run as an independent candidate against Trump in the general election? Can Trump really “do presidential” for the next six months, as he boasted recently, and improve on his deep unpopularity?

And on the Democratic side: will Sanders concede gracefully and offer as full-throated an endorsement of Clinton as she did of Barack Obama eight years ago? It was on 7 June 2008 that she told her supporters: “The way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals for which we stand is to take our energy, our passion, our strength, and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama, the next president of the United States.” Will we hear something similar from Sanders next month? 

Jonathan Jones writes for the New Statesman on American politics.