2016 Presidential Horse Race

[irishfan]

Trump: Comments about judge 'misconstrued' - CNNPolitics.com

His statement FWIW.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

The Week's Noah Millman just published an article titled "Why Donald Trump won't stop talking about Judge Curiel":

There he goes again. Just when you thought Donald Trump must be feeling the heat for saying Judge Gonzalo Curiel's "Mexican heritage" should preclude him from ruling on the lawsuits against Trump University, the presumptive GOP nominee reportedly ordered surrogates on a Monday conference call to keep fanning the flames. "Take that order and throw it the hell out," Trump said of a campaign memo asking them not to comment on the controversy.

All of which begs the question: Why is Trump doing everything in his power to keep this terrible story alive?

Way back in March, I argued that Trump would likely lose — badly — in a general election contest with Hillary Clinton, not because he is too divisive or too ignorant or too ideologically unmoored (though all of these posed problems for his candidacy), but for a much more basic reason. As I said then, "Trump — at the very moment that he most obviously needs to begin making a general-election argument — is instead driving the conversation back to himself, and to his peculiar obsessions and insecurities."

The polls won't reflect it for a while yet, but Trump's continuing obsession with Curiel provides strong evidence that I was right.

Many Republicans are increasingly worried that Trump's attacks on Curiel's background — the judge is a natural-born American citizen of Mexican ancestry — will further infuriate Hispanic, immigrant, and non-white voters. And they undoubtedly will.

The more thoughtful among them are also worried for a more principled reason: Trump's point of view is the most dead-end identity politics — the kind of thing principled conservatives, principled liberals, and, indeed, anyone who believes in the rule of law viscerally opposes. Trump's isn't a plea for justice, but a declaration that justice is impossible.

But if you're a purely cynical Republican operative, the main reason to despair is the creeping realization of just why it is that Trump is talking about Curiel, or his lawsuit, at all.

It's not because he's trying to win the lawsuit by getting Curiel to recuse himself. Trump's lawyers surely know that there is clear legal precedent against requiring such recusal on the basis of either ethnic background or overall political alignment. Nor is it an attempt to pressure Curiel in the absence of a strong legal argument; a judge who faced down drug cartels is unlikely to feel threatened by Trump's bluster.

Nor is it a political strategy. If Trump doesn't have the kind of voters who might share his view of Hispanic judges locked up by now, then he's in bigger trouble than the polls suggest. Meanwhile, Trump University is a terrible story for Donald Trump — because it's the perfect story for making the case that Trump is both a con artist and a failure. And when you don't like what people are saying, you're supposed to change the conversation, not whine about it endlessly.

Trump is ranting about Curiel's bias not because doing so is part of any kind of rational political strategy, but because he is going to lose the case. And if he loses, it must be somebody else's fault. He's not just talking about himself instead of something that actually matters to voters. He's talking to himself, telling himself a story of how big a winner he is, no matter how often he loses. And he's doing it in front of the entire country.

In a very basic sense, this is the emotional connection that Trump forged from the beginning of his campaign. Trump sees himself as a winner whose occasional setbacks are the result of other people's unfairness or incompetence. He has connected with a slice of the voting public that sees America's problems in similar terms: the fault of corrupt, incompetent, and disloyal elites. But successful political leaders — whether they operate within established norms or, like Trump, gleefully flout them — use that emotional connection for something larger. It's the ground on which they build loyalty to a political program and organization.

Trump isn't building anything. Indeed, he hasn't built anything in a good long time; for decades, he's been a marketer whose only product is his own mystique. And so it is with his political campaign. The purpose of the emotional connection he has forged is entirely personal: to reaffirm his own greatness, his own winningness. "I've always won and I'm going to continue to win. And that's the way it is," he told supporters on the Monday conference call. The conversation keeps coming back to him because that's where he wants it to go. Because that's all his campaign has ever been about.

Which is why that cynical operative should despair. He's made his peace with Trump, and is now focused on highlighting his distinctive strengths and controlling the damage of his distinctive style of politics, so as to get the best result for the party come November. But Trump isn't interested in getting the best result for the party. He's got a whole host of strategies for convincing himself that he's a winner even when he loses, because the loss is always somebody else's fault. And he's got a whole host of strategies for making sure that, monetarily and psychically speaking, the bulk of his losses hits somebody else's balance sheet rather than his own. Historically, those have been his priorities, and from the look of things, they still are.

So if Trump looks like he's in real trouble after Labor Day, what makes anyone think he's even going to try to win — as opposed to assuring himself (and his supporters) that someone else is to blame for his loss?

And if he does lose, who do you think he's going to make sure gets blamed?

 

[gkIrish]

Trump: Comments about judge 'misconstrued' - CNNPolitics.com

His statement FWIW.

 

[NDinL.A.]

So are we allowed to consider race, or not?

Because we have someone on the Supreme Court right now who was not only chosen because of her sex and race but who further thinks that her race causes her to make better decisions than white judges.

We also know that liberals never criticize juries for being entirely white. Oh...

Sure you can. And when you do it in the manner that Trump did it, people (both liberals and conservatives alike) will rightly call you a racist.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Qqa_s1tP4xM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[kmoose]

You cannot be serious with this. It is 1000% racist. He is not only saying that the judge doesn't like him. He CLEARLY said that the judge cannot do his job fairly because he is a Mexican. That is the very definition of racism. I mean, how much more clear do you have to be?

And the judge is American! Born in Indiana.

If you don't believe me, ask the scores of Republicans, many who have backed Trump, who have come out and condemned his comments, including Paul Ryan who just came out and slammed Trump's comments as clearly racist. C'mon kmoose, this isn't about PC or anything close - this is about as blatant racism as a candidate not named David Duke can get, and if were anyone else that candidate would have been disqualified lonnnng ago. But for Trump, it's just another day at the office. Your comments above allow it to happen. Call a spade a spade man.

I am calling a spade a spade. What you are doing is calling a spade a club. There's nothing racist about saying, "This guy belongs to group X, and most of group X doesn't like me, so they are going to be biased against me. Based on the rulings that he has made, I think he has made it clear that he is biased as well." He's not saying that the guy can't do his job because he is of Hispanic heritage; he is saying that the guy should recuse himself from this case because he is biased (according to Trump). That's simply NOT racist. You can bet your ass that, if the judge in this case had not issued some questionable decisions, Trump would have no issues with his heritage. It couldn't be less racist if Ghandi or MLK were the defendant, and not Trump. You are blinded by your rage at being called names by some of his supporters. I don't blame you, but it doesn't make everything the guy says about race a racist statement.

 

[Legacy]

I doubt the "Rubio" comment refers to ethnicity. I would bet he means people who are like Rubio mentally. Rubio is a UF grad isn't he? We all know Ivy Leaguers would never ever ever make fun of less prestigious university's graduates right?

I see. Trump is more elitist than a racist.

His remarks about Cruz, Rubio and Martinez were not slurring people he considered his opponents - including Judge Curiel - because they were Hispanic. He's an equal opportunity insulter because he insulted Jeb Bush and Ben Carson, too?

For any with a selective memory, Jeb Bush's wife, Columba, who came to the U.S. legally, was the subject of the Donald's tweet that said: "JebBush has to like the Mexican Illegals because of his wife."

In defense of his statements, Trump says that he employs a lot of Mexican and Hispanics and has nothing against them. Just an elitist, right?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Here's an article arguing that Hillary Clinton's Democrats will be tomorrow's Republicans:

They’ve been called the “post-hope” Democrats by Jacobin Magazine, but a more accurate term for many of Hillary Clinton’s supporters would be “New Republicans.” After the primary, and several more election cycles, these voters will likely end up representing America’s conservative party.

Hillary’s Democrats tend to be older and more affluent. Many have decidedly negative views of Bernie Sanders, and the kind of economic populism he is promoting. Not only are they turned off by his class-driven rhetoric — viewing it as too radical, divisive, and disruptive — they are also wary of too much government action. Clinton’s Democrats, consciously or otherwise, hold to some of the main tenets of the Reagan Revolution.

That said, these are not the New Democrats of the 1990’s, though that is where their roots are planted. Socially, they identify as progressives — hypersensitive to privilege and prejudice — but outside those issues, their ideology rests on the belief that nuance dictates moral ambiguity, and is beyond the understanding of common folk. Such sentiment gives deference to authority, and assumes that every side must have a valid argument in the face of impenetrable complexity.

On foreign policy, the New Republicans are no different from the neoliberals. In spite of a history of negative consequences, unprovoked military intervention and nation-building are deemed acceptable for the reasons previously stated.

The New Republicans are creatures of comfort — partly due to the fact, previously stated, that they’re generally older and more established. And so, triangulation against the grassroots progressive left works well on them. They tend to view an incremental approach to change as desirably pragmatic because they only really want to push so far. Many do not like the idea of “handouts,” and the kinds of changes Sanders is proposing frighten them.

This fear and distaste is why, as the years progress, the Democratic Party is going to lose these voters. Though this prediction may seem far-fetched at first glance because Hillary Clinton will likely be the nominee, Bernie Sanders is the future of the party.

The Vermont Senator has started a movement which has seen a massive influx of new voters into the party. Additionally, Bernie’s progressives are following the Tea Party model for insurgency, and running for Congress to unseat incumbent, centrist Democrats in safe districts.

On top of all that, there’s the Elizabeth Warren factor to consider. The Massachusetts Senator has become the darling of the Democratic Party, and her agenda mirrors that of Bernie Sanders more so than it does that of Hillary Clinton.

Warren and Sanders favor an overhaul of financial regulation—specifically, breaking up the big banks —while Clinton has been spreading a narrative that such action is not only unnecessary, but also misguided. Both Warren and Sanders have prioritized reforming campaign finance, but Clinton has not.

Still, both Sanders and Clinton supporters have sought endorsement from the Massachusetts Senator, as well as made cases that their candidate is the true heir to her ideas. Warren’s popularity proves the rising dominance of economic progressivism, and suggests that the Democratic party will hold together at least long enough for the establishment to be forced out over a few election cycles.

As the party transforms, it is likely the rhetoric used will grow sharper, and the candidates more, for lack of a better word, ideological — more class-oriented. That will drive Clinton’s Democrats away — just like how Civil Rights drove away the southern Dixiecrats.

We tend to understand the words “liberal” and “conservative” in terms of the major issues of the times. For the past 50 years social issues have largely defined those classifications, as well as driven political shifts. However, with the Culture War essentially won by the left (though there are still plenty of battles to fight) issues of economic and political inequality are coming to define our modern era. In fact, we are seeing a realignment. These issues will serve as the new lens through which we understand our political spectrum.

As time goes on, Hillary Clinton’s position on campaign finance reform and economic regulation will come to be associated with “conservative” and Bernie Sanders’ agenda with “liberal.” Assuming that the two major political parties maintain their current names and respective sides of the aisle, it is a safe bet to say that Clinton’s Democrats are tomorrow’s Republicans.

 

[Legacy]

Carson warns Trump of 'moral descent' on judge attacks

Ben Carson has a moral lesson for Donald Trump: Don't forget that people are individuals first.

"Every human being is an individual first rather than a member of an identity group. The moment we forget that is the moment we enter into a phase of moral descent," Carson told POLITICO in a statement through business manager Armstrong Williams.

This Muslim Leader Tried To Warn Paul Ryan Against Trump Minutes Before Ryan’s Endorsement

Less than an hour before he endorsed Donald Trump for president, Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan sat down in his office in Janesville, Wisconsin with local Muslim leader Salih Erschen, the founder of the city’s first mosque, and his 21-year-old daughter Sabrina.

Erschen told ThinkProgress that he hoped to impress upon Ryan that Trump and other high profile Republicans have “caused a lot of difficulties for Muslims” in America. “It’s been a hard task to get out there and quell all these fears about Muslims that you’re seeing right now in our society,” said Erschen. “One of the infamous things I’ve been hearing is calls to ‘send those Muslims back where they came from.’ But I’m from southern Wisconsin. I wouldn’t be sent very far.”

“I went to Ryan’s office with my daughter, who is pregnant now, to show that we are three generations of Muslims who are 100 percent American,” he added. “There’s no foreign element to us at all. In fact, any one of us could run for president someday.”

The civil rights group Fellowship of Reconciliation, which organized the meeting between between Erschen and Ryan, slammed the new House Speaker’s hypocrisy, arguing that the Trump endorsement rendered his promises to tackle Islamophobia meaningless.

“We strongly reject the blatantly duplicitous ability of Rep. Ryan to express a commitment to end Islamophobia, while literally at the same time endorsing the most xenophobic, anti-Muslim candidate of modern times,” said Anthony Grimes, the Fellowship of Reconciliation’s director of campaigns and strategy.

Erschen says the anti-Islam rhetoric that many Republican candidates, not just Trump, have offered this election cycle has been damaging to his interfaith outreach efforts.

Before dropping out of the GOP race, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio called for shutting down U.S. mosques and cafes where “radicals are being inspired.” Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal warned that “non-assimilationist Muslims” are “invading” the United States. Neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who is now campaigning for Trump, said Muslims should be disqualified from the presidency. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee asserted that Muslims are the only terrorists. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker opined that there are only a handful of reasonable, moderate Muslims — out of more than a billion worldwide — who don’t follow ISIS ideology. Sen. Ted Cruz called for patrolling and surveilling Muslim neighborhoods across the United States.

They always need an ‘other’ to attack, and we are unfortunately that ‘other’ right now.
Trump, now the presumptive GOP nominee, called for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the United States and expressed support for having all Muslims registered in a database. Just this week, he said he wouldn’t trust a Muslim judge to act in a fair and impartial manner.

“All of the candidates utilized the Muslim card, if you will, to push themselves forward,” said Erschen. “Muslims are an easy target, and the rest of society doesn’t hold them accountable for these comments. They always need an ‘other’ to attack, and we are unfortunately that ‘other’ right now.”

 

[NDgradstudent]

Sure you can. And when you do it in the manner that Trump did it, people (both liberals and conservatives alike) will rightly call you a racist.

So it is okay to say that being a "wise Latina" does make you a better judge than a white person, but it's wrong to suggest that it makes you a worse judge? Because what Sotomayor meant by this is that she would sympathize with favored liberal causes in her decisions. In my view, that makes her a worse judge. Liberals don't want anyone pointing this out, of course, so they do the usual point-and-sputter "racist" routine.

 

[BGIF]

First Returns from NJ Primaries

First Returns from NJ Primaries

NJ Votes Percent Del. (0%)
Trump 310 81.6 0
Kasich 46 12.1 0
Cruz 24 6.3 0


NJ Votes Percent Del. (0%)
Clinton 120 54.3 0
Sanders 101 45.7 0

 

[BGIF]

Trump Wins NJ

Trump Wins NJ

CNN declares Trump the winner with 2% in, 82% of the vote.

 

[BGIF]

Clinton leads in NJ

Clinton leads in NJ

2% In, Clinton at 57%

CNN's John King notes returns from the 6 counties throughout the state has Clinton at better than 54% in all of them.

 

[BGIF]

CNN Gives NJ to Clinton

CNN Gives NJ to Clinton

17% In

Clinton 58.5%
Sanders 41.5%

 

[BGIF]

CNN Gives ND to Sanders

CNN Gives ND to Sanders

No, not the South Bend guys.

With 71% reporting, Sanders has 63%.


Shaping up now as Bernie's only win.

 

[BGIF]

CNN Declares NM for Trump

CNN Declares NM for Trump

status: projected winner
est. % in: 20%

candidate votes % bound delegates unbound delegates
Trump    19,472    72.8%  20    0
Cruz      2,979   11.1%   0     0
Kasich    2,270    8.5%   0     0

 

[BGIF]

CNN Gives SD To Trump

CNN Gives SD To Trump

status: projected winner
est. % in: 48%

candidate votes% bound delegates unbound delegates

Trump    21,032   67.5%    29    0
Cruz      5,105   16.4%     0    0
Kasich    5,012   16.1%     0    0

 

[NDinL.A.]

So it is okay to say that being a "wise Latina" does make you a better judge than a white person, but it's wrong to suggest that it makes you a worse judge? Because what Sotomayor meant by this is that she would sympathize with favored liberal causes in her decisions. In my view, that makes her a worse judge. Liberals don't want anyone pointing this out, of course, so they do the usual point-and-sputter "racist" routine.

I'm talking about Trump. Nothing about liberals (even though Trump is mostly liberal but you Trumpeteers are too blind to see it). Follow along.

And if you think it's only liberals calling Trump's comments racist, well, wake up. Do you really need me to give you a list of conservatives that have condemned Trump's comments and denounced them as racist? It's quite a long list.

Try and spin it all you want and blame it on liberals, but the truth is that his comments were blatantly racist. It's embarrassing that his sheep try and spin it any other way.

 

[NDgradstudent]

I'm talking about Trump. Nothing about liberals (even though Trump is mostly liberal but you Trumpeteers are too blind to see it). Follow along.

And if you think it's only liberals calling Trump's comments racist, well, wake up. Do you really need me to give you a list of conservatives that have condemned Trump's comments and denounced them as racist? It's quite a long list.

Try and spin it all you want and blame it on liberals, but the truth is that his comments were blatantly racist. It's embarrassing that his sheep try and spin it any other way.

People call each other all sorts of things all the time. I'm interested in what is actually true. Your view is that suggesting that one's race/background negatively affects someone's judging is racist, but suggesting that it positively affect's someone's judging is fine. Which makes no sense.

 

[BGIF]

MT To Trump per CNN

MT To Trump per CNN

14% reporting

Trump 72.4%
Cruz 10.5
Kasich 9.5

 

[NDinL.A.]

People call each other all sorts of things all the time. I'm interested in what is actually true. Your view is that suggesting that one's race/background negatively affects someone's judging is racist, but suggesting that it positively affect's someone's judging is fine. Which makes no sense.

What in God's name are you talking about? When did I suggest that?

Look, you're supporting a racist, or at least someone that purposely flames the fires of racism...and this coming from people in his own party, including people who have supported him. You can try and spin it all you want, but like Trump, you aren't making any sense.

 

[NDgradstudent]

What in God's name are you talking about? When did I suggest that?

Look, you're supporting a racist, or at least someone that purposely flames the fires of racism...and this coming from people in his own party, including people who have supported him. You can try and spin it all you want, but like Trump, you aren't making any sense.

As I wrote earlier in this thread:

I don't like Trump very much, and would rather the GOP nominate someone else. I probably won't vote for anyone for President. So I sympathize with your point.

That said, I don't think Trump is a racist. The problem with this particular judge, if there is any, is not that he is Mexican as such, but that he seems to be some sort of Mexican nationalist, a member of race-based Mexican nationalist organizations, etc. Again, liberals make these sort of points all the time about white people- they think that all-white juries are bad. They think that Sotomayor will make better decisions because she is a "wise Latina." Etc. The rules about what constitutes racism change as needed for liberals.

 

[NDgradstudent]

This happened in 1975:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/a6ztGPtD1U0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Ms. Thatcher did not depend upon her husband to achieve political power, but we're supposed to hate her and adore Ms. Clinton because Ms. Thatcher was conservative. Or something.

Does anybody reading this know the name of Ms. Thatcher's husband?

Does anybody reading this not know the name of Ms. Clinton's husband?

That's my point.

(His name is Dennis.)

 

[NDinL.A.]

As I wrote earlier in this thread:



That said, I don't think Trump is a racist. The problem with this particular judge, if there is any, is not that he is Mexican as such, but that he seems to be some sort of Mexican nationalist, a member of race-based Mexican nationalist organizations, etc. Again, liberals make these sort of points all the time about white people- they think that all-white juries are bad. They think that Sotomayor will make better decisions because she is a "wise Latina." Etc. The rules about what constitutes racism change as needed for liberals.

Read slowly: CONSERVATIVES are calling his comments racist. It has zero to do with liberals when his own party is denouncing his comments. C'mon man, do better.

As for him being a "Mexican nationalist"...proof? The fact that he fought against a Mexican drug cartel and had to go into hiding means nothing to you guys? All you're doing is spinning more of Trump's BS that he's telling his surrogates, which have been proven false.

And where does it end with this idiot? He's already said a Muslim judge might be against him, and his surrogates said a woman judge might be inherently against him as well. It's unreal what this egomaniac is trying to do. And I'll ask you what I've asked many Trumpeteers: if this judge is so obviously against Trump, why haven't his lawyers asked for his recusal yet? The answer is simple, and it's not a good look for Trump's "I'm not a racist!" bs...

 

[GATTACA!]

Say what you will about Trump, but I think we can all agree Ivanka is smokin.

 

[BGIF]

Tonight Trump is squarely over the 1237 delegates needed for the Republican nomination on the First Ballot without the Unbound Delegates previously committed to him.

 

[BGIF]

CNN Gives CA To Trump

CNN Gives CA To Trump

status: projected winner
est. % in: 29%
candidate votes% bound delegates unbound delegates
Trump 560,302 77.7% 10 0
Kasich 80,508 11.2% 0 0
Cruz 55,172 7.7% 0 0

 

[BGIF]

Bernie defiant, not rolling over.

Bernie defiant, not rolling over.

Next Tuesday we're containing the fight in Wasington, DC. (the next primary.)

We will fight for every delegate.

We will not let right wing politicians to run this country.

Our mission is more than beating Trump. It's about transforming this country.

Clinton called me. I congratulated Clinton on her victories.

The fight continues.

Young people understand they are the future.

 

[BGIF]

Sanders Wins Montana

Sanders Wins Montana

With 75%In

Sanders 56,452 50.2%

Clinton 50,439 45.1%

 

[Legacy]

Full transcript of Sander's speech tonight

Full transcript of Sander's speech tonight

Bernie Sanders Stays As Defiant As Ever
The Transcript Of Bernie Sanders’ California Speech Is A Rousing & Defiant Call To Action

After many primaries on Tuesday had come to an end, finally around 10:45 p.m. PT, Bernie Sanders gave a speech in California, the transcript of which could move many of his supporters to action. Sanders vowed to continue fighting for the Democratic nomination all the way to the convention in Philadelphia, despite many media outlets having called the race for his opponent Hillary Clinton (who has also accepted her new presumptive nominee status).

Sanders took the stage in Los Angeles to a raucous crowd that would hardly let him speak when he arrived at the podium. Cheers lasted for minutes at a time, and Sanders gave that classic grin as he laughed at the audience's sheer enthusiasm at his presence. Though the attendees stayed positive throughout the speech, there were several boos when Sanders mentioned that he had received a call from Clinton and congratulated on her victories Tuesday night.

In her speech, Clinton praised Sanders and his campaign in a way that made it seem like she's sure it's over, but that's something Sanders, in his usual style, refuses to accept. While he's playing nice for now, he's made it very clear he's not going to concede this race until he's sure the superdelegates won't give their support to him. And that means staying in until July.

Bernie:

Thank you. Thank you, LA! Thank you all.

Thank you. Let me … Let me thank … Let me thank … Let me thank [laughs].

Let me thank all of you for being here tonight. And let me thank all of you for being part of the political revolution. I especially want to thank the tens of thousands of volunteers here in the state of California. And I want to thank the people of California for their incredible hospitality. It has been one of the most moving moments of my life to be out throughout this state in beautiful evenings and seeing thousands and thousands of people coming out. People who are prepared to stand up and fight for real change in this country.

All of you know, all of you know, that when we began this campaign a little over a year ago we were considered to be a fringe campaign. But over the last year, I think that has changed, just a little bit. By the end of tonight, we’ll have won, I believe 22 state primaries and caucuses. We will have received well over 10 million votes. And what is most extraordinary to me is that in virtually every single state, we have won in big numbers, the votes of young people. Young people understand that they are the future of America, and they intend to help shape that future. And I am enormously optimistic about the future of our country when so many young people have come on board and understand that our vision, a vision of social justice, economic justice, racial justice, and environmental justice, must be the future of America. Our vision will be the future of America.

Our campaign from Day 1 has understood some very basic points, and that is first, we will not allow right-wing Republicans to control our government. And that is especially true with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate. The American people in my view will never support a candidate whose major theme is bigotry. Who insults Mexicans, who insults Muslims and women and African Americans. We will not allow Donald Trump to become president of the United States.

But we understand that our mission is more than just defeating Trump, it is transforming our country. The vast majority of the American people know that it is not acceptable that the top tenth of 1 percent owns as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent; we’re going to change that. And when millions of Americans are working longer hours for lower wages, we will not allow 57 percent of all new income to go to the top 1 percent. And we will end a corrupt campaign finance system.

Democracy is not about billionaires buying elections. And we will end a broken criminal justice system. And we will break up the major banks on Wall Street. And we will join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee health care to all people as a right. And we will bring about real immigration reform and a path toward citizenship. And we will tell the billionaire class and corporate America that they will start paying their fair share of taxes. And what we understand, and what every one of us has always understood, is that real change never occurs from the top on down, always from the bottom on up.

That is the history of America, whether it is the creation of the trade union movement, the civil rights movement, the women’s movement, the gay movement. And that is what OUR movement is about.

But you all know it is more than Bernie. It is all of us together. It is what this movement is about. Is millions of people from coast to coast standing up and looking around them and knowing that we can do much, much better as a nation. That whether Wall Street likes it, whether corporate America likes it, whether wealthy campaign contributors like it, whether the corporate media likes it, we, together, together we know what our job is. And that is to bring the American people together to create a government that works for us, not the 1 percent.

Next Tuesday, we continue the fight in the last primary in Washington, D.C. We are going, we are going, we are going to fight hard, we are going to fight hard to win the primary in Washington, D.C. And then we take our fight for social, economic, racial, and environmental justice to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania!

I am pretty good at arithmetic, and I know that the fight in front of us is a very, very steep fight, but we will continue to fight for every vote and every delegate we can get. Tonight I had a very kind call from President Obama and I look forward to working with him to ensure that we move this country forward. And tonight, I had a very gracious call from Secretary Clinton and congratulated her on her victories tonight. Our fight is to transform our country and to understand that we are in this together. To understand that all of what we believe is what the majority of the American people believe. And to understand that the struggle continues.

I want to thank the people of North Dakota. It appears that we will likely win Montana as well. I don’t think anybody knows where we’ll end up in California, but I suspect the gap will significantly diminish. And if this campaign has proven anything, it has proven that millions of Americans who love this country are prepared to stand up and fight to make this country a much better place.

Thank you all, the struggle continues.