Tuesday’s election result in Wisconsin was a real letdown for Hillary Clinton, and not just because she lost by 14 points to Bernie Sanders. The math stays on her side. She could lose every contest by the same margin from here onward and still probably become the Democratic nominee.
No, the letdown we refer to for Clinton is that Donald Trump failed on the Republican side. Had he won rather than lose the state in a landslide to Ted Cruz, it would have made his quest for the GOP nomination unstoppable, and Clinton would be president-in-waiting.
With negative ratings above 60 percent, Trump is the only candidate she easily defeats, according to available polls. His nomination could give her a historic opportunity to capture both houses of Congress for the Democrats and work her agenda from the Oval Office.
But Trump didn’t drive a stake through the heart of Cruz’s campaign, not by a long shot. And there is a growing sense that he might never make it. Which is bad news for Clinton.
The New York Times recently published a scatter graph showing historical unfavorable ratings for presidential candidates. Trump, if nominated, would be the most unpopular person to win a major party nomination in at least 32 years, and possibly ever.
But if he isn’t nominated, the same chart showed, Clinton herself would attain that same dubious distinction. She is, deservedly, extremely unpopular. She has earned public dislike and distrust because of her habitual dishonesty, notably in putting herself above the rules governing government transparency and the handling of national secrets. She has earned it too for the dealings of the Clinton Foundation, which produces such a stench of corruption that even those who vote for Hillary will do so holding their noses.
But little of this is getting attention because Trump and his bouffant buffoonery are the media’s nearly exclusive focus. This week’s Quinnipiac poll of Pennsylvania made this especially obvious. Clinton leads Trump, as usual, but her unfavorable rating in the Keystone State, at 59 percent, was just one point better than his. The other Republican candidates have substantially lower negatives and Clinton will probably have a tougher general election campaign if Trump is not the opponent chosen for her.
Clinton looks likely to limp into the July convention in Philadelphia. All of her best states are behind her already. Although she has the Democratic nomination sewn up, only three of the remaining 18 races (Maryland, Washington, D.C., and New York) seem likely to be easy wins for her. There are at least seven contests she will almost certainly lose (Wyoming, West Virginia, Kentucky, both Dakotas, Oregon and Montana).
Everywhere else, Sanders is at least competitive and could become more so if he builds momentum. Oddly, the septuagenarian Sanders has a certain rock-star standing. But the truth remains that he is still in the race only because Clinton is such an unattractive candidate.
The worst thing that could happen for Clinton now is that Sanders catches or nearly catches her in his number of pledged delegates. That would create accurate impression that her victory depends on her husband’s standing among Democrats and on her influence on party bosses known as superdelegates — free agents at the convention.
There is every reason to believe that, with a credible nominee, Republicans can win the White House. But that happy possibility is in constant peril. The party is just a few primary votes away from forfeiting the presidential race.
The question all year has been which party is just drunk and which one is ugly — the former condition being, unlike the latter, only temporary. If Republicans get over their temporary delirium about Trump, Democrats could find themselves in some serious trouble.
