Unconventional #23: Is Sanders really going to ‘fight’ Clinton in Philly? Does Scott Walker want to replace Trump in Cleveland? (and more!)

Unconventional is Yahoo News’ complete guide to what could be the craziest presidential conventions in decades. Here’s what you need to know today.

1. Decoding Bernie: what Sanders really means when he says “the struggle continues”

LOS ANGELES — In her speech last night at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, Hillary Clinton accused Donald Trump of speaking in “code.”

She could have said the same thing about her Democratic rival Bernie Sanders.

After making thousands of his supporters wait until nearly 11:00 p.m. local time, the Vermont senator finally stepped on stage in a cavernous hangar at the Santa Monica Airport to deliver his post-primary remarks.

The day’s results had been disappointing. Despite wins in North Dakota and Montana, Sanders had not been able to overtake Clinton elsewhere. Not in South Dakota, where he had a real shot. Not in New Mexico, where he had thought that young Latinos might boost him to victory. Not in New Jersey, which Clinton won by more than 26 percentage points. And, worst of all, not in delegate-rich California, where Sanders had spent the last two weeks campaigning his heart out in the hopes that an upset would weaken Clinton’s superdelegate support and propel him to Philadelphia with the wind at his back.

Instead, by the time Bernie took to the podium, it was already clear that Clinton was headed toward a bigger romp in the Golden State than the polls or pundits had predicted. (With 69 percent of ballots counted, she currently leads Sanders 56 percent to 43 percent.)

In Santa Monica, Sanders’ fans were anxious. Would their candidate continue to insist — as he had insisted from one end of California to the other in the days before Tuesday’s primary — that Philadelphia would be “contested” and that “our job from now until the convention” is to convince superdelegates to swing the nomination to him? Or would he concede that Clinton had clobbered him in his make-or-break state; defeated him by nearly 4 million votes nationwide; and finally earned a majority of pledged delegates, thereby by removing any incentive for the superdelegates to switch sides?

Would Bernie bow out?

At first, it seemed as if he might. “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,” Sanders said, sounding elegiac. “Let me thank all of you for being part of the political revolution.”

The crowd held its collective breath. But then, suddenly, Sanders shifted gears — and announced that his campaign was not, in fact, coming to an end.

“Next Tuesday, we continue the fight in the last primary in Washington, D.C.,” he said. The room erupted; the cheers were deafening. “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.”

More cheering.

“And then, we take our fight for social, economic, racial and environmental justice to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.”

Even more cheering.

“I am — I am pretty good at arithmetic, and I know that the fight in front of us is a very, very steep fight,” Sanders added. “But we will continue to fight for every vote and every delegate we can get.”

In Santa Monica, supporters were heartened to hear that, as Sanders put it in the final line of his speech, “the struggle continues.” In the press, journalists marveled at Sanders’ “defiant” tone in the face such daunting delegate math. Some even described him as delusional.

“There’s reality,” tweeted FiveThirtyEight’s Harry Enten, “and then there’s whatever world Sanders is in.”

But Sanders isn’t delusional; he’s negotiating. And the proof was right there in his remarks.

You simply have to decipher his code. Anyone paying close attention Tuesday night would have noticed, for instance, that when Sanders said that he would “continue to fight,” he didn’t say he would continue to fight for the nomination. He said he would continue to fight “for every vote and every delegate we can get.”

Where do you get votes and delegates? In the primaries. And there’s only one primary left — next Tuesday’s contest in Washington, D.C. Yes, Sanders said he would “fight hard” to win it. But he specifically did not say anything about superdelegates or “continuing to fight” for them after the D.C. primary — which is what he was saying before Tuesday night.

When Sanders did look beyond next Tuesday — to the convention in particular — he made sure to choose his language carefully. Yes, he promised to “take our fight” to “Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.” But he also specified which fight he meant: the one for “social, economic, racial and environmental justice.” In other words, the campaign for Sanders’ goals — his policy prescriptions — heads to the City of Brotherly Love. His campaign for the nomination? Probably not.

Speaking in code means saying one thing that different listeners can interpret in different ways. That’s likely what Sanders meant to do Tuesday night. In order to maximize his influence over the Democratic platform and reform the primary process in Philadelphia — his real objectives at this point — Sanders needs leverage. He needs something that Clinton and the rest of the Democratic establishment wants. And what do Clinton & Co. want? Sanders’ supporters. To keep them in his corner — and to scare Clinton into thinking they might never come around — Sanders rhapsodized about the “struggle” and how it “continues.”

In short, he probably wants everyone to think he’s a little delusional. That’s the point. That’s how you negotiate from a position of strength.

But Sanders also doesn’t want to deceive his supporters. So he hedged his language to signal his true intentions and to lay the groundwork for the end of his campaign.

When will that campaign end? Only Sanders — who has allegedly been defying his top aides for weeks now — knows for sure. Its final act, however, will likely begin later this week when Sanders travels to Washington, D.C. Over the weekend, President Obama reportedly told Sanders that he would be endorsing Clinton as early as Wednesday; Sanders apparently asked Obama to wait and requested a meeting Thursday at the White House.

Obama is not only the most powerful person in the Democratic Party; he’s also been an officially neutral figure, having refused, until now, to endorse either candidate. If anyone can broker a deal to bring the party together, it’s the president.

And make no mistake: a deal is what Sanders wants. Now he just has to name his price. Our guess is that he’s heading to the Oval Office Thursday to do just that.

_____

2. Republicans are talking about replacing Trump in Cleveland — and Scott Walker is interested

By Jon Ward

There is growing talk on the right of replacing Donald Trump as the Republican Party’s nominee for president, and even about a possible choice to do so.

As Trump has floundered over the past week after attacking a federal judge’s judgment because he has Mexican ancestry, anti-Trump conservatives who have been trying for months to recruit an independent candidate have begun looking more closely at attempting to persuade delegates at the GOP’s national convention next month in Cleveland to nominate someone other than Trump.

“There is a rapidly moving train toward the convention to try to obstruct it at the convention. Trump in the last 72 hours has given hope to people who think it’s now possible,” said Erick Erickson, a conservative radio talk show host who has been one of Trump’s most resolute critics.

“He’s starting to give everybody hope that he [can] be stopped at the convention,” Erickson said, though he cautioned that “if he cleans up his act, then I think that hope will go away.”

(Read the full version of this story here.)

One of the central players inside the conservative independent candidate movement said Monday that anti-Trump group was “actively recruiting and setting a convention strategy.”

And David French, a conservative writer who considered running as an independent candidate, told Yahoo News that “if Trump continues to be cocky, saying, ‘I can do whatever I want and do whatever I want because I own these people, there’s a limit to that. I’m sorry, but there is.”

Public calls for Republicans to replace Trump grew Wednesday.

“I want to support the nominee of the party, but I think the party ought to change the nominee. Because we’re going to get killed with this nominee,” Hugh Hewitt, a nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host, said. “They ought to get together and let the convention decide. And if Donald Trump pulls over a makeover in the next four to five weeks, great, they can keep him.”

And Steve Deace, a conservative activist and radio talk show host from Iowa, reviewed Trump’s most recent missteps on his radio show and urged the 2,500 delegates to the Republican convention to “make this stop.”

“History is calling you to step up to the plate. You have not a choice but an obligation. You must save the country,” Deace said to the delegates.

A.J. Spiker, a former Iowa Republican Party chairman, tweeted on Tuesday, “The Republican Party needs a patriot to step forward, challenge Trump, work delegates and win the GOP nomination for president in Cleveland.”

Amidst this agitation for an alternative, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s name has been increasingly mentioned as a possible replacement.

Walker on Tuesday backed away from supporting Trump, and said pointedly, “He’s not yet the nominee. … Officially, that won’t happen until the middle of July.”

Redstate.com reported Wednesday that there are “rumors” that Walker is “open” to such an outcome. And one source who has been involved in the effort to recruit an independent candidate said Walker has told those working to find an alternative that he would be willing to serve as an alternative at the convention if Trump continues to implode.

Rick Wilson, a Florida-based Republican operative involved in the stop-Trump effort, said a Walker bombshell was “speculative but widely discussed.”

Walker, in a statement to Yahoo News, said, “Let me be clear: I am focused entirely on being governor. If there’s any campaign in the future, it’s going to be running for re-election in 2018, which is a decision that we’ll make in the months ahead following the next state budget.”

Not every anti-Trump conservative thinks the convention discussion is wise. “People have scenarios of the convention. I think they are a waste of time,” said Michael P. Farris, president of Patrick Henry College. “Not that I wouldn’t wish it. I wish it every day.”

Nevertheless, many have argued that the delegates to the convention are technically free to nominate whoever they want, despite the impression that they are bound by the results of the primary votes in each state. Every convention votes on its own rules, so if this year’s GOP delegates wanted to unbind themselves, the argument goes, nothing would be stopping them. Numerous judicial rulings have found that even state laws, which purport to bind approximately one-third of the delegates, cannot govern to the internal affairs of a national political party — such as how delegates vote at a convention.

Deace wrote in a column on Saturday that the rules allowing delegates to follow their conscience “are in place to protect the system from just such a leader” as Trump.

“See, this is how a republican form of government works. The popular vote puts a check-and-balance on the political class, but elected representatives (in this case delegates) put a check-and-balance on the unbridled passions of a wayward electorate. It’s why the Founding Fathers gave us mechanisms such as juries and the Electoral College in the first place,” Deace wrote.

French pointed out that many of the delegates to the convention are “people who loathe [Trump], and that hasn’t changed.”

_____

3. Does anyone still want to be Trump’s running mate? Anyone? Bueller?

Bob Corker was supposed to be one of Donald Trump’s most promising veep possibilities. Like Trump, the Tennessee senator was a rich builder before he entered the political arena; unlike Trump, he also has some real legislative experience under his belt. To top it off, Corker was saying nice things about Trump way back when the rest of the GOP still thought the Manhattan mogul was a joke. The two men even met at Trump Tower in May to, you know, get acquainted.

Then came Trump’s comments about how Indiana-born Judge Gonzalo Curiel is unfit to preside over a class-action lawsuit against Trump University because he is “a Mexican” — and Corker’s decision to fan the flames of criticism that followed.

At first, all Corker would say was that he did not “condone” Trump’s repeated remarks about Curiel. But in an interview Tuesday with Yahoo News Chief White House Correspondent Olivier Knox, Corker went further, asserting that with his attacks on Curiel, Trump has “100 percent” squandered any goodwill he’d recently generated among Republican leaders — and that the nominee may be on the verge of dooming his chances in November as a result.

“He’s obviously stepped in it,” Corker told Knox. “He’s got this defining period that’s over the next two or three weeks where he could pivot, can pivot, hopefully will pivot to a place where he becomes a true general election candidate. … [But] if he keeps moving towards the convention with similar types of weeks like the last one, I just fear that he’s going to be in a position that doesn’t really allow him to fully take advantage of this incredible opportunity.”

Corker wasn’t the only conservative to criticize Trump over the Curiel controversy. In fact, very few Republicans of any real stature have defended Trump’s remarks, and some have even characterized them as “racist” — which is an unusual position for any Republican standard-bearer to find himself in. But Corker’s condemnation was especially revealing because it came, along with several other similar rebukes, from precisely the sort of politician who, in a normal election cycle, would be least inclined to publicly castigate his or her own party’s presumptive presidential nominee: the Potential Running Mate.

Which raises an interesting question — and one that’s indicative of just how odd the relationship between the GOP and its latest nominee really is. Trump has promised that he will attract record television audiences by revealing his vice-presidential pick, reality-show style, at the Republican convention in Cleveland. But at the rate he’s going, will anyone want the job by then?

These days, a running mate’s most important role is to serve as the nominee’s top surrogate. To speak on his behalf whenever necessary. To brag about the good news. To spin the bad. To stay on message. And to defend the boss no matter what.

Seen in that light, the Curiel episode was a trial run of sorts. Trump just stumbled into his first big first controversy as the Republican nominee. Which vice-presidential wannabes would rush to his rescue?

The answer? Not many.

Quite the opposite, in fact.

Let’s tally them up. Based on media reports and Trump’s own remarks, a loose VP long list has emerged in recent weeks: Corker; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie; Florida Sen. Marco Rubio; Ohio Gov. John Kasich; Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst; Indiana Gov. Mike Pence; former presidential candidate Ben Carson; Florida Gov. Rick Scott; Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin; and former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer.

Most of these sidekicks-in-waiting joined Corker in condemning Trump outright.

“It was one of the worst mistakes Trump has made,” Gingrich told Fox News. “Inexcusable.”

“Every American is entitled to a fair trial and an impartial judge, but of course I think those comments were inappropriate,” Pence said Tuesday at the Indiana Statehouse. “I don’t think it’s ever appropriate to question the partiality of the judge based on their ethnic background.”

“I think it’s wrong,” Rubio told WFTV’s Christopher Heath. “He needs to stop saying it. That man is an American.”

“Every human being is an individual first rather than a member of an identity group,” Carson said in a statement. “The moment we forget that is the moment we enter into a phase of moral descent.”

“Attacking judges based on their race &/or religion is another tactic that divides our country,” Kasich tweeted. “More importantly, it is flat out wrong. @RealDonaldTrump should apologize to Judge Curiel.”

As for the rest of Trump’s veep contenders? They may not have attacked him in public — but they didn’t seem particularly eager to stand up for him either.

“I can tell you what’s important to me is that all the candidates get their message out,” Scott told Florida reporters during a press conference about Tropical Storm Colin. “But right now I want to talk about the tropical storm.”

“I am on my way to the office,” Ernst replied when questioned by ABC News at the Capitol. “Thank you.”

Fallin hasn’t said a word about Curiel. So far, Brewer has merely reprimanded the Trump campaign for its lack of message discipline, snapping, “You all better get on the [same] page.”

Only Christie has actually attempted to shield his would-be boss from incoming fire, telling reporters in New Jersey that “I am not going to get into critiquing a campaign that we’re in the middle of.”

“Donald Trump is not a racist,” Christie added. “The allegations that he is are absolutely contrary to any experience I’ve had with him over the last 14 years.”

Politicians are self-interested creatures. The reason they always accept the VP job when offered — despite the fact that, in John Garner Nance’s famous formulation, it isn’t “worth a bucket” of something euphemized as “warm spit” — is that they’ve calculated that it’s better for their careers to be a heartbeat away from the presidency than to keep doing whatever else it is they’re doing.

But Trump scrambled the usual calculus with his Curiel comments. For people like Corker, denouncing Trump suddenly became more advantageous than defending him. If this continues, Trump could become the first presidential nominee in recent memory who forces most respectable members of his party to conclude that the unusual costs of joining the current presidential ticket outweigh the usual benefits — leaving a leader who values loyalty above all else with few unsullied contenders left to choose from in Cleveland.

Or so Chris Christie hopes.

_____

4. VIDEO: Sanders supporters in California sound off on the ‘rigged’ system — and say what it would take for Clinton to earn their votes

By Brian Goldsmith

SANTA MONICA, Calif. — At Sanders’ election night rally here Tuesday night, his supporters reflected the stubborn sensibility of their candidate. Most of those interviewed by Yahoo News refused to acknowledge that Clinton had earned the nomination and instead attributed Sanders’ loss to a rigged system. Given a choice between Clinton and the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump, very few entertained supporting Trump. However, several said they might vote for a third-party Green or Libertarian candidate, depending on whether Clinton embraces elements of Sanders’ agenda.

Sanders’ base — as represented in that room — identified opponents in many quarters: “the establishment,” the Democratic National Committee, “ignorant voters” and, perhaps most of all, the mainstream media. When TV screens showed Clinton leading, the crowd shouted, “CNN sucks.” Uniting the Democratic Party may be a greater challenge than Clinton had imagined at the beginning of this long campaign for the White House.

_____

5. The best of the rest

_____

History lesson

If Bernie Sanders pushes the Democratic Party to revise its primary process at the convention in Philadelphia — he has repeatedly called for open primaries, the elimination of the superdelegates and a revised calendar — he wouldn’t be the first runner-up to do so.

In 1984, Jesse Jackson — who was in many ways the Sanders of his day, and whom Sanders himself would endorse in the next presidential election — won 20 percent of the popular vote. But at the convention in San Francisco, he wound up with only 12 percent of the delegates. Jackson claimed the rules had been “stacked” against him by organized labor and Democrats aligned with former vice president Walter Mondale, the eventual nominee.

Something similar happened when Jackson ran again in 1988, and again Jackson railed against the system. This time, however, with nearly 30 percent of the popular vote, he managed to force some changes at the Democratic convention in Atlanta despite bitter opposition.

As Jackson’s son, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., wrote in 2008, winner-take-all and “bonus” primaries (in which an extra delegate was awarded the winner of each congressional district) were unfair to African-American voters, who, as a result of gerrymandering and de-facto neighborhood segregation, were largely concentrated in their own congressional districts. The new “Jackson Rules” replaced these methods with the system of proportional representation that the Democratic Party still uses today.

Another Jackson reform, however, didn’t last for long. Arguing that superdelegates suppressed the voice of grassroots voters, Jackson pushed through a rule change blocking DNC members from joining their ranks. This would have reduced the total number of superdelegates by roughly 250 and sapped party elites of at least some of their influence.

A few months later, however, the DNC met and reversed the new rule, reinstating its members’ superdelegate privileges. Which just goes to show: you can fight the establishment, but the establishment will fight back.

_____

Countdown

For the latest data, make sure to check the Yahoo News delegate scorecard and primary calendar.

(Cover tile photo: John Locher/AP)