If He Wins

This article appears in the May 27, 2024 Time magazine

In exclusive interviews, the former President lays out a second-term agenda that would reshape America and its role in the world.

Donald Trump thinks he’s identified a crucial mistake of his first term: He was too nice.

We’ve been talking for more than an hour on April 12 at his fever-dream palace in Palm Beach. Aides lurk around the perimeter of a gilded dining room overlooking the manicured lawn. When one nudges me to wrap up the interview, I bring up the many former Cabinet officials who refuse to endorse Trump this time. Some have publicly warned that he poses a danger to the Republic. Why should voters trust you, I ask, when some of the people who observed you most closely do not?

As always, Trump punches back, denigrating his former top advisers. But beneath the typical torrent of invective, there is a larger lesson he has taken away. “I let them quit because I have a heart. I don’t want to embarrass anybody,” Trump says. “I don’t think I’ll do that again. From now on, I’ll fire.” 

Six months from the 2024 presidential election, Trump is better positioned to win the White House than at any point in either of his previous campaigns. He leads Joe Biden by slim margins in most polls, including in several of the seven swing states likely to determine the outcome. But I had not come to ask about the election, the disgrace that followed the last one, or how he has become the first former—and perhaps future—American President to face a criminal trial. I wanted to know what Trump would do if he wins a second term, to hear his vision for the nation, in his own words.

What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.

Trump remains the same guy, with the same goals and grievances. But in person, if anything, he appears more assertive and confident. “When I first got to Washington, I knew very few people,” he says. “I had to rely on people.” Now he is in charge. The arranged marriage with the timorous Republican Party stalwarts is over; the old guard is vanquished, and the people who remain are his people. Trump would enter a second term backed by a slew of policy shops staffed by loyalists who have drawn up detailed plans in service of his agenda, which would concentrate the powers of the state in the hands of a man whose appetite for power appears all but insatiable. “I don’t think it’s a big mystery what his agenda would be,” says his close adviser Kellyanne Conway. “But I think people will be surprised at the alacrity with which he will take action.”

The courts, the Constitution, and a Congress of unknown composition would all have a say in whether Trump’s objectives come to pass. The machinery of Washington has a range of defenses: leaks to a free press, whistle-blower protections, the oversight of inspectors general. The same deficiencies of temperament and judgment that hindered him in the past remain present. If he wins, Trump would be a lame duck—contrary to the suggestions of some supporters, he tells TIME he would not seek to overturn or ignore the Constitution’s prohibition on a third term. Public opinion would also be a powerful check. Amid a popular outcry, Trump was forced to scale back some of his most draconian first-term initiatives, including the policy of separating migrant families. As George Orwell wrote in 1945, the ability of governments to carry out their designs “depends on the general temper in the country.”

Every election is billed as a national turning point. This time that rings true. To supporters, the prospect of Trump 2.0, unconstrained and backed by a disciplined movement of true believers, offers revolutionary promise. To much of the rest of the nation and the world, it represents an alarming risk. A second Trump term could bring “the end of our democracy,” says presidential historian Douglas Brinkley, “and the birth of a new kind of authoritarian presidential order.”


Trump steps onto the patio at Mar-a-Lago near dusk. The well-heeled crowd eating Wagyu steaks and grilled branzino pauses to applaud as he takes his seat. On this gorgeous evening, the club is a MAGA mecca. Billionaire donor Steve Wynn is here. So is Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, who is dining with the former President after a joint press conference proposing legislation to prevent noncitizens from voting. Their voting in federal elections is already illegal, and extremely rare, but remains a Trumpian fixation that the embattled Speaker appeared happy to co-sign in exchange for the political cover that standing with Trump provides.

At the moment, though, Trump’s attention is elsewhere. With an index finger, he swipes through an iPad on the table to curate the restaurant’s soundtrack. The playlist veers from Sinead O’Connor to James Brown to The Phantom of the Opera. And there’s a uniquely Trump choice: a rendition of “The Star-Spangled Banner” sung by a choir of defendants imprisoned for attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, interspersed with a recording of Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. This has become a staple of his rallies, converting the ultimate symbol of national unity into a weapon of factional devotion. 

The spectacle picks up where his first term left off. The events of Jan. 6, during which a pro-Trump mob attacked the center of American democracy in an effort to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, was a profound stain on his legacy. Trump has sought to recast an insurrectionist riot as an act of patriotism. “I call them the J-6 patriots,” he says. When I ask whether he would consider pardoning every one of them, he says, “Yes, absolutely.” As Trump faces dozens of felony charges, including for election interference, conspiracy to defraud the United States, willful retention of national-security secrets, and falsifying business records to conceal hush-money payments, he has tried to turn legal peril into a badge of honor.

In a second term, Trump’s influence on American democracy would extend far beyond pardoning powers. Allies are laying the groundwork to restructure the presidency in line with a doctrine called the unitary executive theory, which holds that many of the constraints imposed on the White House by legislators and the courts should be swept away in favor of a more powerful Commander in Chief.

Nowhere would that power be more momentous than at the Department of Justice. Since the nation’s earliest days, Presidents have generally kept a respectful distance from Senate-confirmed law-enforcement officials to avoid exploiting for personal ends their enormous ability to curtail Americans’ freedoms. But Trump, burned in his first term by multiple investigations directed by his own appointees, is ever more vocal about imposing his will directly on the department and its far-flung investigators and prosecutors.

Nowhere would that power be more momentous than at the Department of Justice. Since the nation’s earliest days, Presidents have generally kept a respectful distance from Senate-confirmed law-enforcement officials to avoid exploiting for personal ends their enormous ability to curtail Americans’ freedoms. But Trump, burned in his first term by multiple investigations directed by his own appointees, is ever more vocal about imposing his will directly on the department and its far-flung investigators and prosecutors.

Such moves would be potentially catastrophic for the credibility of American law enforcement, scholars and former Justice Department leaders from both parties say. “If he ordered an improper prosecution, I would expect any respectable U.S. Attorney to say no,” says Michael McConnell, a former U.S. appellate judge appointed by President George W. Bush. “If the President fired the U.S. Attorney, it would be an enormous firestorm.” McConnell, now a Stanford law professor, says the dismissal could have a cascading effect similar to the Saturday Night Massacre, when President Richard Nixon ordered top DOJ officials to remove the special counsel investigating Watergate. Presidents have the constitutional right to fire U.S. Attorneys, and typically replace their predecessors’ appointees upon taking office. But discharging one specifically for refusing a President’s order would be all but unprecedented.

Trump’s radical designs for presidential power would be felt throughout the country. A main focus is the southern border. Trump says he plans to sign orders to reinstall many of the same policies from his first term, such as the Remain in Mexico program, which requires that non-Mexican asylum seekers be sent south of the border until their court dates, and Title 42, which allows border officials to expel migrants without letting them apply for asylum. Advisers say he plans to cite record border crossings and fentanyl- and child-trafficking as justification for reimposing the emergency measures. He would direct federal funding to resume construction of the border wall, likely by allocating money from the military budget without congressional approval. The capstone of this program, advisers say, would be a massive deportation operation that would target millions of people. Trump made similar pledges in his first term, but says he plans to be more aggressive in a second. “People need to be deported,” says Tom Homan, a top Trump adviser and former acting head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “No one should be off the table.”

For an operation of that scale, Trump says he would rely mostly on the National Guard to round up and remove undocumented migrants throughout the country. “If they weren’t able to, then I’d use [other parts of] the military,” he says. When I ask if that means he would override the Posse Comitatus Act—an 1878 law that prohibits the use of military force on civilians—Trump seems unmoved by the weight of the statute. “Well, these aren’t civilians,” he says. “These are people that aren’t legally in our country.” He would also seek help from local police and says he would deny funding for jurisdictions that decline to adopt his policies. “There’s a possibility that some won’t want to participate,” Trump says, “and they won’t partake in the riches.”

As President, Trump nominated three Supreme Court Justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, and he claims credit for his role in ending a constitutional right to an abortion. At the same time, he has sought to defuse a potent campaign issue for the Democrats by saying he wouldn’t sign a federal ban. In our interview at Mar-a-Lago, he declines to commit to vetoing any additional federal restrictions if they came to his desk. More than 20 states now have full or partial abortion bans, and Trump says those policies should be left to the states to do what they want, including monitoring women’s pregnancies. “I think they might do that,” he says. When I ask whether he would be comfortable with states prosecuting women for having abortions beyond the point the laws permit, he says, “It’s irrelevant whether I’m comfortable or not. It’s totally irrelevant, because the states are going to make those decisions.” President Biden has said he would fight state anti-abortion measures in court and with regulation.

Trump’s allies don’t plan to be passive on abortion if he returns to power. The Heritage Foundation has called for enforcement of a 19th century statute that would outlaw the mailing of abortion pills. The Republican Study Committee (RSC), which includes more than 80% of the House GOP conference, included in its 2025 budget proposal the Life at Conception Act, which says the right to life extends to “the moment of fertilization.” I ask Trump if he would veto that bill if it came to his desk. “I don’t have to do anything about vetoes,” Trump says, “because we now have it back in the states.”

Presidents typically have a narrow window to pass major legislation. Trump’s team is eyeing two bills to kick off a second term: a border-security and immigration package, and an extension of his 2017 tax cuts. Many of the latter’s provisions expire early in 2025: the tax cuts on individual income brackets, 100% business expensing, the doubling of the estate-tax deduction. Trump is planning to intensify his protectionist agenda, telling me he’s considering a tariff of more than 10% on all imports, and perhaps even a 100% tariff on some Chinese goods. Trump says the tariffs will liberate the U.S. economy from being at the mercy of foreign manufacturing and spur an industrial renaissance in the U.S. When I point out that independent analysts estimate Trump’s first term tariffs on thousands of products, including steel and aluminum, solar panels, and washing machines, may have cost the U.S. $316 billion and more than 300,000 jobs, by one account, he dismisses these experts out of hand. His advisers argue that the average yearly inflation rate in his first term—under 2%—is evidence that his tariffs won’t raise prices.

Since leaving office, Trump has tried to engineer a caucus of the compliant, clearing primary fields in Senate and House races. His hope is that GOP majorities replete with MAGA diehards could rubber-stamp his legislative agenda and nominees. Representative Jim Banks of Indiana, a former RSC chairman and the GOP nominee for the state’s open Senate seat, recalls an August 2022 RSC planning meeting with Trump at his residence in Bedminster, N.J. As the group arrived, Banks recalls, news broke that Mar-a-Lago had been raided by the FBI. Banks was sure the meeting would be canceled. Moments later, Trump walked through the doors, defiant and pledging to run again. “I need allies there when I’m elected,” Banks recalls Trump saying. The difference in a second Trump term, Banks says now, “is he’s going to have the backup in Congress that he didn’t have before.”

President Joe Biden has a Problem

I previously predicted that Joe Biden will not run for re-election. My reasons revolved around the economy.  Today young people are opposed to America’s support of Israel.  

The turmoil we’re seeing on campuses today brings back memories of the widespread student protests of 1968 — a comparison that won’t be lost given that the Democratic National Convention this year will take place in Chicago. The 1968 Democratic Party convention was also held in Chicago.

On March 31, 1968, following the New Hampshire primary and Robert Kennedy’s entry into the election, the president made a televised speech to the nation and said that he was suspending all bombing of North Vietnam in favor of peace talks.

After concluding his speech, Johnson announced,

“With America’s sons in the fields far away, with America’s future under challenge right here at home, with our hopes and the world’s hopes for peace in the balance every day, I do not believe that I should devote an hour or a day of my time to any personal partisan causes or to any duties, other than the awesome duties of this office — the presidency of your country. Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President.”

After President Lyndon Johnson announced that he would not run for reelection, the party nominated his vice president, Hubert Humphrey. But Humphrey’s moment of coronation quickly turned into a moment of chaos. As Chicago police, unleashed by Mayor Richard Daley, confronted anti-Vietnam War protesters with tear gas and batons on the streets outside the convention, the televised images of violence greatly harmed Humphrey’s prospects in November.

President Joe Biden knows this history. The anti-war protests in the 1960s went on for years. Now, it remains unclear whether the protests — which are not yet nearly as large in scale or scope as were the anti-Vietnam protests — will continue to intensify or start to dissipate, especially as school lets out for the summer months. And in one recent Harvard Kennedy poll surveying young people between the ages of 18 and 29 in March, the findings showed the Israel/Palestine conflict ranked second-lowest in importance, coming in below gun violence as well as bread-and-butter issues such as inflation, health care and housing.

Will Biden’s belief that a Trump victory mean the end of the American democracy continue his run for re-election?  I hope so when Trump says he will be a dictator on day one.

Biden projected a vision of strength that’s been missing from his presidency but will be needed in 2024 campaign

“Sleepy Joe” is no more. At the State of the Union address on Thursday night, the 81-year-old president set out to defuse his biggest liability: deep-seated fears among millions of Americans that he’s too old to serve a second term.

The New York Times reported “Verbal swings at Donald Trump, though not by name. A spirited back-and-forth with G.O.P. lawmakers. And a loud and feisty delivery.”

Reuters reported “President Joe Biden on Thursday laid out his case for re-election in a fiery State of the Union speech”

Associated Press reported “President Joe Biden delivered a defiant argument for a second term in his State of the Union speech”

CBS posted “In defiant 2024 State of the Union, Biden fires opening salvo in likely rematch with Trump”

Can the president keep up this start of the campaign in the defiant and feisty way he started all the way to November 5? He will have to if he hopes to win.

Is it time to remove President Joe Biden from Office?

Special Counsel Robert Hur was appointed to oversee the investigation of President Biden’s alleged mishandling of classified documents during his time as Vice-President.

Hur described President Biden as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” and said he would bring no criminal charges against the president after a months-long investigation into his improper retention of classified documents related to national security. 

Hur’s report was made public Thursday afternoon. 

Hur has been investigating Biden’s improper retention of classified records since last year. Those records included classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, among other records related to national security and foreign policy which Hur said implicated “sensitive intelligence sources and methods.” 

Hur, in the report, said the special counsel’s team “also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” 

“Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone from whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt,” the report states. “It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him—by then a former president well into his eighties—of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

Biden’s “memory also appeared to have significant limitations” according to the report, and during conversations with his ghostwriter, recorded in 2017, his conversations were “painfully slow, with Mr. Biden struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries”

Hur’s report pointed out that Biden’s memory was “worse” during an interview with the Special Counsel’s office.

During the interview, Biden “did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (‘if it was 2013 – when did I stop being Vice President?’), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (‘in 2009, am I still Vice President?’)” 

“He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died. And his memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he ‘had a real difference’ of opinion with General Karl Eikenberry, when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden cited approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to President Obama,” Hur’s report said.

During hastily scheduled remarks at the White House, Biden blasted special prosecutor Robert Hur for saying he did not remember when his son Beau died. But minutes after defending his memory, he mistakenly referred to Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi as the president of Mexico.

One GOP representative Rep. Claudia Tenney is calling for the Cabinet to “explore” the use of the Constitution’s 25th Amendment to remove President Biden from office, following Special Counsel Robert Hur’s “alarming” report.

Of course Democrats will rally around the president. But should they?

President Joe Biden’s Malarkey

In his interview with “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley, President Biden said that the COVID-19 pandemic “is over.” 
(Eric Kerchner / 60 Minutes / CBS)

In what world does Joe Biden live in? This president and his administration told us the border is secure, inflation is transitory and the pandemic is over. Sadly, the truth is that more than 400 Americans are dying every day from COVID-19, more than 2 million migrants have been arrested entering the U.S. from its southern border in fiscal year 2022, and inflation is still raging.

You can call it malarkey or baloney or any other word but I call it a stream of lies. Biden is not the first president to feed the Americans a stream of nonsense.

Donald Trump fed Americans a daily dose of COVID baloney that included inhaling bleach and taking anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine. There was also the suggestion that Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic medicine for both humans and animals promoted as a covid treatment despite a lack of evidence.

Big stories like the A-bomb stayed out of the news until after the war ended. The main focus of the media was high morale and support for the war effort.

Malarkey and baloney are not a new thing. George Washington did not cut down a cherry tree.

 

The Wile Politician – Joe Biden

The wile politician never sustains his positions very long. He says what is necessary to keep his constituents happy for the next election. After all it is his job that provides pay and perks that are outstanding. No one really knows his positions on issues.

That is my best description of Joe Biden. He is the empathetic politician who plays his part well enough to win an Oscar.

The contradictions in his life are publicly known.

Starting with his religion. He is a Catholic who attends services frequently. The Roman Catholic Church – opposes abortion in all circumstances. So how can he support abortion rights?

This summary of his position on school busing in the New York Times is worth your consideration.

In 1974 Mr. Biden, who was then a senator for Delaware, voted two times to protect court-ordered busing to achieve desegregation, including the decisive vote on an amendment that would have effectively done away with it.

But months after an angry crowd in a school auditorium criticized him for that vote, Mr. Biden said in a speech on the Senate floor that he had become “more and more disenchanted with busing as a remedy.”

In a television interview in 1975, Mr. Biden called busing an “asinine concept” and said he had “gotten to the point where I think our only recourse to eliminate busing may be a constitutional amendment.”

Mr. Biden is a supporter of Free Trade agreements despite his denials. In the Senate, Biden voted for the North American Free Trade Agreement and permanent normal trade relations with China. As then-President Barack Obama’s No. 2, he supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership. But today he says he is opposed to those agreements.

The controversial 1994 crime law that Joe Biden helped write is explained at this site, Vox. The summary:

The 1994 crime law passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, which was meant to reverse decades of rising crime, was one of the key contributors to mass incarceration in the 1990s. They say it led to more prison sentences, more prison cells, and more aggressive policing — especially hurting black and brown Americans, who are disproportionately likely to be incarcerated.

The law imposed tougher prison sentences at the federal level and encouraged states to do the same. It provided funds for states to build more prisons, aimed to fund 100,000 more cops, and backed grant programs that encouraged police officers to carry out more drug-related arrests — an escalation of the war on drugs.

From the Detroit News. To be fair to Biden, he was an exceptionally incompetent and indecisive chairman (of the Senate Judiciary Committee), easily cowed and unable to control the hearings. After promising to support Bork, he switched his vote. After promising to afford Thomas some semblance of due process, he presided over what the future justice famously called a “high-tech lynching.”

Biden now claims to regret that he “couldn’t come up with a way” to give Hill “the kind of hearing she deserved.” What does Biden think Hill deserved? Without any supporting evidence, the Senate gave her the opportunity to make her case. She was given enormous coverage by the media when her allegations emerged — leaked to the press, most likely by Democrats — despite the obvious problems with her story from the start. No one ever stopped Hill from telling that story. Hill still tells her story. Hill wrote a book telling her story. There are hagiographic movies and documentaries about her story. Even today, journalists interview her without a hint of journalistic skepticism.

The Senate confirmed Thomas by a vote of 52 to 48 on Oct. 15, 1991.

From a Doyle McManus column in the Los Angeles Times: Richard A. Harpootlian, a South Carolina state senator who’s long been a Biden supporter, “You can’t judge people by what they did 50 years ago,” Harpootlian argued. “To measure what they said then by today’s standards is just wrong.”

I am not a politician but I have held the same views on critical issues all of my life. Why can’t politicians? I answered that question in the second sentence of this posting.

Growing List of Leading Republicans that oppose Donald Trump

A growing list of Republicans are now supporting the Joe Biden for president campaign. They know that our democracy is in danger if Trump is re-elected.

The shocker this August is the list of former and current Republican office holders who have publicly stepped forward to support Joe Biden.

Past President George W. Bush

Former Ohio Gov. John Kasich

Former New Jersey Republican Gov. Christine Todd Whitman

Former Hewlett Packard CEO Meg Whitman

Former New York Republican Rep. Susan Molinari

Former senior Trump administration official Miles Taylor

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell

Former Pennsylvania Rep. Charlie Dent

Former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel

Current Senator Mitt Romney

Former Republican National Security Officials for Biden

The group, Former Republican National Security Officials for Biden, includes former NSA and CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden, former Deputy Secretary of State and Director of National Intelligence Amb. John Negroponte, former CIA and FBI Director William Webster, and former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff under President Trump, Miles Taylor.

John F. KellyUnited States Secretary of Homeland Security (2017), White House Chief of Staff (2017–2019)

James Norman Mattis (born September 8, 1950) is a retired United States Marine Corps general who served as the 26th US secretary of defense from January 2017 through January 2019.

The list is so long that it now has its own page on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Republicans_who_oppose_the_2020_Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign

Has Donald Trump received the message? Probably not!

Why Trump’s enthusiasm edge over Biden could matter

Vice President Joe Biden speaks at the Easter Prayer Breakfast in the East Room of the White House, Wednesday, April 4, 2012, in Washington. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Are you enthusiastic about Joe Biden as the Democratic Party nominee for the November election? I am not.

Former Vice President Joe Biden has a serious problem winning in November.  He leads President Donald Trump in pretty much every single national poll. Yet the same polls find that Trump’s supporters are much more enthusiastic about voting for their candidate than Biden’s supporters are voting for theirs.

This split is potentially a good sign for Trump because the candidate who has led on enthusiasm (or a closely related question) has won every presidential election since 1988, though there are reasons to think Biden could break this streak.

Importantly for Trump, the leader on enthusiasm has gone on to win in close elections as well as ones with wider margins.

One of those close elections was four years ago. Trump had a consistent edge over Hillary Clinton in enthusiasm. His voters were 4 points more likely to say they were very enthusiastic in voting for him than Clinton’s were for her in the final ABC News/Washington Post poll, even as Clinton led overall. That enthusiasm advantage should have been one of the warning signals to the Clinton campaign.

The Los Angeles Times opinion page May 16 has the headline “Opinion: Joe who? Biden’s the likely nominee, but readers are oddly quiet about him.” One contributor wrote “I have watched Biden the last few months. Does he inspire others through his leadership? The answer obviously is no. So why will he almost certainly be nominated for president by the Democratic Party? He’s not at the top of his game, he’s prone to making verbal mistakes, and he does not have a coherent message. I can’t imagine him leading our country.”

Sadly I have to agree with that writer.  Biden has not offered any message.  I’m here to oppose Trump is not a message.  It appears Trump will lose in November due to his incompetence related to the coronavirus and the state of the economy rather than enthusiasm for Joe Biden. 

Obama team fully vetted Biden in 2008 and found no hint of former aide’s allegation

David Axelrod Super Tuesday election results reported from CNN's Washington DC bureau on Tuesday, March 1, 2016 in Washington, D.C. Photo by John Nowak/CNN