The Indiana result represents a continuation of the pattern.

[Garrett78]

11. I'm not "Hill folk," but I just don't see that.

It's an open primary in a state that's 84% white. Whether it's late March or early May, it fits the profile of a Sanders state. Had it been a caucus or a state with even less diversity, I'm sure he would have won by more than 5 or 6 points.

It's still not as close as 2008 was, and Obama (who also lost some primaries toward the end) had no trouble getting elected in a race against someone far more popular than Trump.

The folks voting for Clinton will vote for her in the GE, and many of those voting for Sanders will vote for Clinton in the GE. Meanwhile, there are some who take part in open primaries who vote for the underdog to increase dissension in the ranks of those they oppose (i.e., people who wouldn't vote for either Sanders or Clinton come November). How many? I don't know, but it's safe to say there are some.

The path to 270 electoral college votes is relatively easy for the Democratic candidate. As the Washington Post pointed out, just winning the 19 states (plus DC) that the Dem candidate has won each of the last 6 presidential elections amounts to 242 electoral college votes. Another 28 and it's a done deal.