桑德斯將助特朗普一臂之力?

Remember Florida’s hanging chads? The bitternessin this year’s Democratic race has not yet hit a pointwhere Bernie Sanders is threatening to run as athird-party candidate. But it is getting perilouslyclose. If it had not been for Ralph Nader’s “spoilercandidacy”, Al Gore would almost certainly havewon Florida in 2000 and become president instead ofGeorge W Bush.

還記得佛羅里達(dá)的“懸空票”嗎?今年民主黨的大選角逐還沒(méi)有到達(dá)伯尼•桑德斯(Bernie Sanders)威脅要以第三方候選人參選的地步。但事態(tài)已經(jīng)幾近發(fā)展到那種程度了。如果不是拉爾夫•納德(Ralph Nader)的“攪局參選”，阿爾•戈?duì)?Al Gore)幾乎肯定能夠在2000年贏下佛羅里達(dá)州，由他而不是喬治•W•布什(George W Bush)成為總統(tǒng)。

Mr Sanders could do the same for Donald Trump. The Manhattan billionaire is urging theVermont socialist to run as an independent in November. Hillary Clinton has rigged thesystem, says Mr Trump, which is robbing Mr Sanders of what is rightfully his. He should makeMrs Clinton pay the price in the general election.

桑德斯可能為唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)做同樣的事情。身為曼哈頓億萬(wàn)富翁的后者正力勸這位佛蒙特州的社會(huì)主義者在11月份以獨(dú)立候選人的身份參選。特朗普表示，希拉里•克林頓(Hillary Clinton)操縱了整個(gè)系統(tǒng)，搶走了桑德斯理所應(yīng)得的東西。桑德斯應(yīng)該讓希拉里在大選中付出代價(jià)。

Could Mr Sanders be blind enough to fall for Mr Trump’s ruse? The answer is maybe. Forevidence of that, look at the parallels between Mr Sanders and Mr Nader. The latter, who wasthen 66, ignored calls to drop out of the 2000 race from those who feared he would split thecentre-left vote and hand victory to Mr Bush.

桑德斯會(huì)不會(huì)盲目到落入特朗普的詭計(jì)之中呢?答案是有可能。要找證據(jù)的話，可以看一看桑德斯和納德的相似之處。當(dāng)年66歲的納德無(wú)視那些擔(dān)心他會(huì)分流中間偏左選民的選票、結(jié)果讓布什勝出的呼聲，拒絕退出2000年的大選。

Much like Mr Sanders, 74, he was a child of the 1960s protest culture that saw both politicalparties as offshoots of corporate America. “Tweedledum and Tweedledee” was how he put it.Mr Sanders only joined the Democratic party last year. He has spent most of his life as anindependent socialist. Mr Nader spent most of his as a Green party environmentalist.

和現(xiàn)年74歲的桑德斯很像，納德也是上世紀(jì)60年代抗議文化的產(chǎn)物，按照這種文化的觀點(diǎn)，兩大政黨都是美國(guó)企業(yè)界的代表，用他的話來(lái)說(shuō)是“半斤八兩”。桑德斯去年才加入民主黨，他的大半生都是作為獨(dú)立的社會(huì)主義者度過(guò)的。而納德則將大半生投入綠黨環(huán)保主義者的事業(yè)。

Most of all, however, they share a solipsistic mindset that owes more to the student protests ofhalf a century ago than the calculations of 21st-century politics. That, of course, is part of theirappeal, particularly to students. It is also a source of their stubbornness. The more MrsClinton’s crowd urges Mr Sanders to drop out, the likelier he is to dig in his heels. It could endbadly.

但最重要的是，他們都有一種唯我的心態(tài)，這種心態(tài)更多源于半個(gè)世紀(jì)前的學(xué)生抗議，而非21世紀(jì)政治的種種算計(jì)。當(dāng)然，這正是他們兩人的吸引力的一部分，尤其是對(duì)學(xué)生而言。這也是造成他們兩人的執(zhí)著的一個(gè)原因。希拉里陣營(yíng)越是力勸桑德斯退出大選，他就越有可能拒不退出。這可能會(huì)造成不好的結(jié)果。

The similarities do not end there. Mrs Clinton’s detractors seem to believe she is a uniquelywooden candidate with a frustrating inability to come up with a memorable campaigntheme.

事情的相似之處到這里還未結(jié)束。希拉里的批評(píng)者似乎認(rèn)為她是一個(gè)特別呆板的候選人，令人沮喪地拿不出一個(gè)有號(hào)召力的競(jìng)選主題。

Her political skills are indeed woeful. If full-time politicos are unable to define what Mrs Clintonstands for, the distracted swing voter does not stand a chance. But she is only following in MrGore’s footsteps. Remember his theme of “the people against the powerful?” Neither do I. Thethen vice-president’s belated attempt to present himself as an insurgent against the status quoforeshadowed Mrs Clinton’s -quandary precisely. It is hard to run against an unfair societywhen you have played a leading role in its administration over the previous eight years. Itcan even be paralysing. As Mrs Clinton is discovering, it is even tougher when the climate is sopoisonously anti-establishment.

她的政治技能的確很糟糕。如果連全職的政治人士都無(wú)法界定希拉里的立場(chǎng)，注意力分散的搖擺選民就更沒(méi)有機(jī)會(huì)了。但希拉里只是步了戈?duì)柕暮髩m。還記得戈?duì)柕母?jìng)選主題“人民對(duì)抗強(qiáng)權(quán)”嗎?我也不記得。當(dāng)年，時(shí)任副總統(tǒng)的戈?duì)枈檴檨?lái)遲地試圖把自己包裝成對(duì)抗現(xiàn)狀的反抗者，這預(yù)示了希拉里的窘境。如果你在此前的8年在國(guó)家的行政當(dāng)局擔(dān)任要職，你很難針對(duì)一個(gè)不公的社會(huì)發(fā)起競(jìng)選。這種情況甚至可能讓人無(wú)法行動(dòng)。就像希拉里逐漸發(fā)現(xiàn)的，當(dāng)政治氣候如此毒化地反體制時(shí)，事情就更加困難了。

This is where Mr Sanders’ complaints could become toxic. In reality, there is nothing riggedabout the Democratic contest. If anything, the high number of caucuses that favour candidateswith narrowly ardent bases such as Mr Sanders’ has artificially boosted his delegate tally. Atthe moment Mrs Clinton leads him by nearly 300 pledged delegates. If her share of the voteswere proportionately translated, she would have already crossed the victory line.

這正是奧桑德斯的抱怨可能產(chǎn)生毒害的地方。實(shí)際上，民主黨總統(tǒng)候選人提名過(guò)程中沒(méi)有任何操縱行為。如果說(shuō)有任何異常的話，那也是支持桑德斯這樣擁有狹窄而又死硬的選民基礎(chǔ)的候選人的大量黨團(tuán)會(huì)議，人為地提升了他的選舉人票。此刻，希拉里領(lǐng)先桑德斯近300張選舉人票。如果按比例計(jì)算希拉里獲得的選票份額，她應(yīng)該早已越過(guò)了勝利的終點(diǎn)線。

Nor does Mr Sanders’ complaint about the role of super delegates hold much water. The party’srules give roughly a fifth of all votes to Democratic bigwigs — senators, governors, party chairsand the like. Given that Mr Sanders is barely even a Democrat it is hardly surprising mostprefer Mrs Clinton.

桑德斯對(duì)于超級(jí)代表角色的抱怨也站不住腳。民主黨規(guī)定將所有選票的約五分之一給予黨內(nèi)大佬——參議員、州長(zhǎng)、黨主席等?？紤]到桑德斯勉強(qiáng)算是一名民主黨員，多數(shù)人更喜歡希拉里不足為奇。

If he were leading in either the popular vote, or in pledged delegates, they would be underpressure to switch their support to him, as they did for Barack Obama in 2008, when thefront-runner’s lead was far smaller. But Mr Sanders is not ahead on either count. He wouldneed to win 90 per cent of the delegates in the remaining eight primaries over the next threeweeks to overtake Mrs Clinton. It is not going to happen.

如果桑德斯能在民眾投票或者選舉人票這兩項(xiàng)之一取得領(lǐng)先，超級(jí)代表們將在壓力之下轉(zhuǎn)而支持他，就像他們?cè)?008年為巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)所做的那樣，當(dāng)時(shí)領(lǐng)先者的優(yōu)勢(shì)要小得多。但是桑德斯在這兩方面都不處于領(lǐng)先。在接下來(lái)的3周里，他需要在剩下的8場(chǎng)初選中贏得90%的選舉人票，才能超過(guò)希拉里。這是不可能的。

So why is Mr Sanders upping the ante now? Last week, his supporters did a good imitation ofMr Trump’s when they hurled insults and furniture at the allegedly rigged Democratic process inNevada. The meeting descended into chaos.

那么，桑德斯為何現(xiàn)在加大賭注?上周，桑德斯的支持者們出色地模仿了一次特朗普，他們?cè)趦?nèi)華達(dá)州向據(jù)稱被操縱了的民主黨投票過(guò)程進(jìn)行挑釁并投擲家具，使會(huì)議陷入混亂。

Mr Sanders’ condemnation of the violence was halfhearted. His campaign issued astatement saying “millions of Americans have growing doubts about the Clinton campaign”.That observation was true enough. But these were not the sentiments of a candidatepreparing to bow out graciously. Nor does it seem likely Mr Sanders will be placated by havingsome of his policies — support for a universal healthcare system, say, or campaign financereform — added to the Democratic platform at the Philadelphia convention in July. Everyoneknows the platform is forgotten the moment it is written.

桑德斯對(duì)此次暴力行為的譴責(zé)是半心半意的。他的競(jìng)選團(tuán)隊(duì)發(fā)表了一份聲明，稱“數(shù)以百萬(wàn)計(jì)的美國(guó)人越來(lái)越質(zhì)疑希拉里的競(jìng)選活動(dòng)”。這個(gè)結(jié)論沒(méi)錯(cuò)。但這并非一位準(zhǔn)備優(yōu)雅退出的候選人應(yīng)有的情緒。桑德斯也不大可能以另一種方式自愿讓路：在7月費(fèi)城會(huì)議上把他的某些政策——比如，支持全民醫(yī)療體系或者競(jìng)選融資改革——納入民主黨的政綱。所有人都知道，政綱在寫(xiě)就之后就會(huì)被遺忘。

How about a prime speaking role? That, too, would be seen as a bagatelle. Besides, Mr Sandersis having the time of his life addressing adoring crowds of 20,000. He sees no reason to stopnow. Nor do his core supporters.

給他一個(gè)拋頭露面的美差會(huì)怎么樣?那也將被視為無(wú)足輕重。此外，在競(jìng)選集會(huì)上向2萬(wàn)名崇拜的群眾發(fā)表演講，堪稱桑德斯的人生高潮，他得意得很，看不到有任何理由現(xiàn)在停下。他的核心支持者也沒(méi)有理由停下。

Oddly enough, some of his celebrity backers, such as Susan Sarandon and Michael Moore, alsoegged Mr Nader on in 2000. It seems they have learnt little. Mr Trump, on the other hand, isnothing if not a quick study. The battle between “Crazy Bernie” and “Crooked Hillary” suits himwell. The longer it goes on, the stronger he becomes.

奇怪的是，桑德斯的一些名人支持者——如蘇珊•薩蘭登(Susan Sarandon)和邁克爾•摩爾(Michael Moore)——在2000年也這樣慫恿過(guò)納德。他們似乎并未從中吸取教訓(xùn)。另一方面，特朗普學(xué)得極快。“瘋狂的伯尼”和“不誠(chéng)實(shí)的希拉里”之間的爭(zhēng)斗對(duì)他來(lái)說(shuō)正中下懷。他倆爭(zhēng)斗的時(shí)間越長(zhǎng)，他變得越強(qiáng)大。