In the Face of Trump's Nomination, Democrats Remain Split

On Tuesday, after a disappointing showing in Indiana, Ted Cruz dropped out of the presidential primary. In his concession speech, Cruz stated, "We gave it everything we've got. But the voters chose another path." Though John Kasich promised to continue running that same evening, he dropped out Wednesday afternoon. Reince Preibus, the current chair of the Republican National Committee, has declared Donald Trump the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, as he is currently the only candidate that remains.

Republican Party members have been torn in dealing with the reality of a Trump nomination. There are those who viciously oppose him, starting a #NeverTrump campaign and lamenting the death of the Republican Party. Numerous individuals have chosen to burn their voter identification cards and change their party affiliation, oftentimes to the "libertarian" party or choosing no party affiliation at all. Prominent Republicans such as Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are refusing to support Trump, going so far as to tweet, "If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed.......and we will deserve it." Mark Salter, who had been the senior advisor to Republican candidate John McCain back in 2008, was just one of many Republicans who have publicly come out in favor of Hillary Clinton. Trump, they argue, makes a mockery out of politics. Just yesterday, on Cinco de Mayo, Trump posted an image of himself eating a taco bowl with the caption, "Happy #CincoDeMayo! The best taco bowls are made in Trump Tower Grill. I love Hispanics!" This was likely an attempt to counter his inflammatory quotes in a speech from June of 2015, in which he stated: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Trump's supporters, however, should not be underestimated. Despite his often offensive remarks, lack of substantive political plans, and child-like debate tactics, Trump has won twenty-five states so far, oftentimes in landslide victories. There has also been a substantial mobilization of supporters flocking around Trump who desire to side with the party regardless of whether or not they genuinely support his ideology: Trump, they argue, would be far better than any Democrat.

What is perhaps the most baffling, however, are the supporters of Bernie Sanders, who argue that should he not receive the nomination, they would write Sanders' name in on the ballot, vote for Green Party candidate Jill Stein, or vote for Trump over Hillary Clinton. On the Democratic side of the election, it seems increasingly more likely that Clinton will receive the nomination, despite Sanders' winning Indiana and polling well in the next several primaries. In order to win the nomination, Sanders would need to win the remaining states by a margin of over sixty percent, or, should he not get the 2,383 delegates he needs, would need to prevent Clinton from reaching that number as well, bringing the nomination to a contested convention in July. Between twenty-five and thirty-three percent of Sanders' supporters refuse to vote for Clinton; these "Bernie or Bust" voters argue that supporting Clinton would be to go against everything they have fought for thus far. Both Sanders' supporters and Republicans have been utilizing the hashtag #NeverClinton to express their lack of support for the candidate.

Democrats are alarmed by this split within the party--this fear has only multiplied in the face of Trump's nomination. Many have begun drawing parallels between the 2016 election and that of 2000, in which Green Party candidate Ralph Nader split the Democratic vote, ultimately resulting in the election of George W. Bush. Political righteousness, they argue, is not worth creating factions within the party. While not voting for Clinton would, in some ways, be symbolic, one must consider whether the risk of having Trump win the presidential election is truly worth it.