“But MSNBC’s Steve Kornacki tweeted a more remarkable data point: Almost 4 in 10 Sanders voters plan to support Trump over Sanders.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/10/early-w-va-numbers-show-4-in-10-sanders-backers-prefer-trump-over-clinton-and-trump-over-sanders/?tid=pm_politics_pop_b

The voting pattern in West Virginia seems to be something of an outlier.

[Exit polls on both sides of the race showed an electorate hungry for a shake-up in Washington. Among Democrats in West Virginia, only 27% said they want a candidate who continues Obama’s policies. In both states, more than 90% of Republican voters said they were “angry” or “dissatisfied” with the federal government. And more than 6 in 10 Republicans in Nebraska said they felt “betrayed” by GOP politicians.
It continues a trend seen in primaries all year — voters are hungry for change. Even if the parties don’t agree on what change they seek, voters have responded strongly to candidates promising to remake Washington, which could pose a challenge to Clinton in a general election as she seeks to build on Obama’s legacy.]

I see more and more people willing to take a chance on Trump, just to make a change.

On climate, I could wish she’d get the message from John Podesta’s ABC Primetime special (which pretty much sunk without a trace) shown here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDqRpM72Odg

To keep minority turnout even equal to what it was in the past, there will need to be a serious volunteer effort to inform the public about the entire process of hoop-jumping required to get proof of citizenship and then state IDs. Poorer people will need to be provided with transportation to government offices, and financial support for the fees associated with the paperwork. Otherwise, it won’t happen.

Regarding the polls you refer to, please read this:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/trump-leads-in-one-poll-of-oh-dont-freak-out.html

Note that “Trump is struggling to raise money,” and to do that he’s undermining his not beholden to special interests credibility by appealing to the Republican establishment and the party’s donors.

Gary Johnson was on This Week, last Sunday, and mentioned a website iSideWith.com. I was worried the answer would always be Gary Johnson, but I answered the questions, and I supposedly side 96% with Sanders, 95% Stein, 88% Clinton and 53% Trump.

While I suspect the most of the ones who say they’ll vote for Trump instead of Clinton are trolls, even that is happening.

Bernie’s stubborn one-note righteousness in a good cause is both his strength and his weakness.

No matter how much we all know that Republican operatives are good at their jobs, all too many people buy the merchandise.

One culprit is the internet. It is entirely possible to hang out with fans who encourage each other to dig up dirt on Hillary. There’s just enough truth in their to make the distortion look legitimate. We all know the Clintons didn’t murder Vince Foster, but many of the other memes are sophisticated enough to fit the bias.

In my rough amateur sampling, the number of these bots is larger than we all want to believe.

If the media finally finds a pair and starts trying to take him down, his followers will just interpret that as “the elites” undercutting someone who says he will look out for the people’s interests rather than the elites. Partly this is because right-wing media have trained their audience to mindlessly reject facts that don’t fit their ideology (I almost wrote idiology – Freudian slip) and partly it is because mainstream media have spent decades condescending to the working class and ignoring their problems, and made themselves appear useless and untrustworthy. And now the chickens are coming home to roost.