Bill Schneider (REUTERS) Is Sanders’ refusal to end his campaign shrewd? Or just vain?

 It would be shocking for Republican presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump to be elected president of the United States. But it would also be surprising for the Democratic presumptive nominee Hillary Clinton, in her current incarnation, to win, because 2016 is an anti-establishment year. And Clinton is a charter member of the Washington political establishment.Anti-establishment anger is roiling both political parties. On the Republican side, it drove the improbable success of the Trump campaign. Among Democrats, it drove Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders’ surprisingly strong “political revolution.”The two movements have the same adversary: Clinton and the political establishment. Could they somehow work together to bring Clinton down? The answer is no. Because what divides the two movements — their causes — is far stronger than what might bring them together.We’ve seen this kind of thing before. In the late 1960s and 1970s, to be exact. That’s when two different movements emerged to challenge the Democratic Party establishment — the George Wallace movement on the right and the anti-Vietnam War movement on the left. It was the left and the right against the center.Click here to read the full article.