桑德斯將助特朗普一臂之力?

Remember Florida’s hanging chads? The bitterness in this year’s Democratic race has not yet hit a point where Bernie Sanders is threatening to run as a third-party candidate. But it is getting perilously close. If it had not been for Ralph Nader’s “spoiler candidacy”, Al Gore would almost certainly have won Florida in 2000 and become president instead of George W Bush.

還記得佛羅里達的“懸空票”嗎?今年民主黨的大選角逐還沒有到達伯尼•桑德斯(Bernie Sanders)威脅要以第三方候選人蔘選的地步。但事態已經幾近發展到那種程度了。如果不是拉爾夫•納德(Ralph Nader)的“攪局參選”，阿爾•戈爾(Al Gore)幾乎肯定能夠在2000年贏下佛羅里達州，由他而不是喬治•W•布什(George W Bush)成爲總統。

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

桑德斯可能爲唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)做同樣的事情。身爲曼哈頓億萬富翁的後者正力勸這位佛蒙特州的社會主義者在11月份以獨立候選人的身份參選。特朗普表示，希拉里•克林頓(Hillary Clinton)操縱了整個系統，搶走了桑德斯理所應得的東西。桑德斯應該讓希拉里在大選中付出代價。

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

桑德斯會不會盲目到落入特朗普的詭計之中呢？答案是有可能。要找證據的話，可以看一看桑德斯和納德的相似之處。當年66歲的納德無視那些擔心他會分流中間偏左選民的選票、結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 political parties 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 an independent socialist. Mr Nader spent most of his as a Green party environmentalist.

和現年74歲的桑德斯很像，納德也是上世紀60年代抗議文化的產物，按照這種文化的觀點，兩大政黨都是美國企業界的代表，用他的話來說是“半斤八兩”。桑德斯去年才加入民主黨，他的大半生都是作爲獨立的社會主義者度過的。而納德則將大半生投入綠黨環保主義者的事業。

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

但最重要的是，他們都有一種唯我的心態，這種心態更多源於半個世紀前的學生抗議，而非21世紀政治的種種算計。當然，這正是他們兩人的吸引力的一部分，尤其是對學生而言。這也是造成他們兩人的執着的一個原因。希拉里陣營越是力勸桑德斯退出大選，他就越有可能拒不退出。這可能會造成不好的結果。

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

事情的相似之處到這裏還未結束。希拉里的批評者似乎認爲她是一個特別呆板的候選人，令人沮喪地拿不出一個有號召力的競選主題。

Her political skills are indeed woeful. If full-time politicos are unable to define what Mrs Clinton stands for, the distracted swing voter does not stand a chance. But she is only following in Mr Gore’s footsteps. Remember his theme of “the people against the powerful?” Neither do I. The then vice-president’s belated attempt to present himself as an insurgent against the status quo foreshadowed Mrs Clinton’s -quandary precisely. It is hard to run against an unfair society when you have played a leading role in its administration over the previous eight years. It can even be paralysing. As Mrs Clinton is discovering, it is even tougher when the climate is so poisonously 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法界定希拉里的立場，注意力分散的搖擺選民就更沒有機會了。但希拉里只是步了戈爾的後塵。還記得戈爾的競選主題“人民對抗強權”嗎？我也不記得。當年，時任副總統的戈爾姍姍來遲地試圖把自己包裝成對抗現狀的反抗者，這預示了希拉里的窘境。如果你在此前的8年在國家的行政當局擔任要職，你很難針對一個不公的社會發起競選。這種情況甚至可能讓人無法行動。就像希拉里逐漸發現的，當政治氣候如此毒化地反體制時，事情就更加困難了。

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

這正是奧桑德斯的抱怨可能產生毒害的地方。實際上，民主黨總統候選人提名過程中沒有任何操縱行爲。如果說有任何異常的話，那也是支持桑德斯這樣擁有狹窄而又死硬的選民基礎的候選人的大量黨團會議，人爲地提升了他的選舉人票。此刻，希拉里領先桑德斯近300張選舉人票。如果按比例計算希拉里獲得的選票份額，她應該早已越過了勝利的終點線。

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

桑德斯對於超級代表角色的抱怨也站不住腳。民主黨規定將所有選票的約五分之一給予黨內大佬——參議員、州長、黨主席等。考慮到桑德斯勉強算是一名民主黨員，多數人更喜歡希拉里不足爲奇。

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

如果桑德斯能在民衆投票或者選舉人票這兩項之一取得領先，超級代表們將在壓力之下轉而支持他，就像他們在2008年爲巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)所做的那樣，當時領先者的優勢要小得多。但是桑德斯在這兩方面都不處於領先。在接下來的3周裏，他需要在剩下的8場初選中贏得90%的選舉人票，才能超過希拉里。這是不可能的。

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

那麼，桑德斯爲何現在加大賭注？上週，桑德斯的支持者們出色地模仿了一次特朗普，他們在內華達州向據稱被操縱了的民主黨投票過程進行挑釁並投擲傢俱，使會議陷入混亂。

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

桑德斯對此次暴力行爲的譴責是半心半意的。他的競選團隊發表了一份聲明，稱“數以百萬計的美國人越來越質疑希拉里的競選活動”。這個結論沒錯。但這並非一位準備優雅退出的候選人應有的情緒。桑德斯也不大可能以另一種方式自願讓路：在7月費城會議上把他的某些政策——比如，支持全民醫療體系或者競選融資改革——納入民主黨的政綱。所有人都知道，政綱在寫就之後就會被遺忘。

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

給他一個拋頭露面的美差會怎麼樣？那也將被視爲無足輕重。此外，在競選集會上向2萬名崇拜的羣衆發表演講，堪稱桑德斯的人生高潮，他得意得很，看不到有任何理由現在停下。他的核心支持者也沒有理由停下。

Oddly enough, some of his celebrity backers, such as Susan Sarandon and Michael Moore, also egged Mr Nader on in 2000. It seems they have learnt little. Mr Trump, on the other hand, is nothing if not a quick study. The battle between “Crazy Bernie” and “Crooked Hillary” suits him well. 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年也這樣慫恿過納德。他們似乎並未從中吸取教訓。另一方面，特朗普學得極快。“瘋狂的伯尼”和“不誠實的希拉里”之間的爭鬥對他來說正中下懷。他倆爭鬥的時間越長，他變得越強大。