1. It’s Monday, April 25, 2016.

2. My favorite Prince piece is “1999.” I love that organ open on the recording. It announces itself, as a lot of great songs do.

As for Prince himself, I haven’t listened to much of what he’s done in the 21st century. The songs of the 1980s and 1990s set quite a standard on their own.

My brother says the reason Prince’s death resonates with so many people is that his music is the soundtrack of their romance.

I can’t say that’s true for me. But his music is the soundtrack of a time and place in my life that was exciting and adventurous, and I think that’s why his sudden death resonates so much.

3. Still, I was a little surprised by the outpouring for him.

I didn’t expect President Obama to issue a statement – although there is the possibility that he and the First Lady had “Little Red Corvette” playing in the background of their first days. Sports teams and cities turned their sites and buildings purple to commemorate his passing. Maybe it was the shock of someone not so old, and the suddenness.

4. So do you think the deal went down?

Did the rival gangs meet at the Golden Corral in Hermitage, Pa., to work it out?

Was Reince Priebus held hostage, like the Bocchiccios in “The Godfather,” until the details were worked out and no one was double-crossed? (Is he still there?)

Did the two principals meet and kiss each other on the cheek – nah, I take that back, these guys aren’t letting that photo op take place.

Those guys, of course, are Ted Cruz and John Kasich. They have announced an alliance of sorts in an effort to stop Donald Trump from a first-ballot presidential nomination at the Republican convention in Cleveland.

Cruz won’t campaign in New Mexico or Oregon, while Kasich will pass on Indiana. Together, those states have a little more than 100 delegates, but they could be enough to stall Trump and allow one of the two – or, of course, some mysterious else – to claim the nomination.

5. There’s a bunch of flaws in this in my mind. But I – like almost everyone else – have been wrong an awful lot this election cycle, so take this with appropriate grains of salt.

First, if I’m a moderate Republican in Indiana, I might be thinking Ted Cruz is as bad for the party as Donald Trump; and the Ohio governor is a neighbor.

Similarly, if I’m a fundamentalist conservative in Oregon, do I really feel comfortable voting for Kasich, who said in an early debate he attended a same-sex marriage of a friend even though he opposes the idea?

In short, how comfortable are people voting for someone because he’s not someone else, rather than voting for who you want?

Secondly, if I’m Donald Trump, whose success is predicated on the idea that the system is out to get me and you and everyone like us, is this the smoking gun or what?

No one wants me except you, he can tell his minions in Indianapolis and Bend and Gallup, and it’ll resonate.

Finally, let’s say the Cruz-Kasich Pact succeeds. They stop Trump from getting the nomination on the first ballot.

Who the hell do the Republicans nominate?

Cruz and Kasich won’t be able to combine their delegates to choose the candidate themselves. Are they going to be able to convince other non-Trump Republicans and those forced by law to support Trump on the first ballot that their partnership is the path to beating the Democrats?

Does Cruz, who has far more delegates, have to take Kasich or Kasich’s designate as his running mate?

Does someone who never ran in a single primary, or who dropped out, get a gift nomination?

And how do you think the people who support Trump, who now are less than 400 delegates from their goal and will be even closer after tomorrow’s mid-Atlantic primaries, would feel about the nomination going to “Lyin’ Ted,” “1-for-38 Kasich,” “Little Marco” or anyone else not named Donald J. Trump?

It’s 84 days until the Republican convention. It’s gonna be a fun 12 weeks.

1. It’s Wednesday, April 20, 2016.

2. Maybe the Mets should have saved some runs for tonight’s game. But I do like 11-1 wins!

3. There’s a lot to ponder after the New York primaries. So let’s start with a general observation.

This is my 12th presidential election, and I’ve voted in New York in every single one. So I can understand why anyone who’s voting for the first or second time might be a little flummoxed by the byzantine way of elections in the Empire State.

But this morning, some of the Bernie Sanders backers are complaining that independents, who have strongly supported their man in other states, couldn’t vote in yesterday’s Democratic primary. That, they said, made the difference in what was otherwise a blowout win for Hillary Clinton.

This didn’t seem to come up much in the run-up to the vote. But I’ll leave that part aside.

The idea that people who don’t declare for a political party can influence the nominee of one or the other party is a two-way thing. I’m a Democrat, I believe in what I think the Democratic Party stands for. And because I’ve made that declaration, I believe I – and others who’ve taken the same stance – should have the say about who our party’s nominee is.

And, following that logic, I shouldn’t have anything to say about who the Republicans nominate. There are Republicans who believe in what they think their party stands for. And because they’ve made that declaration, they should have the say about who their party’s nominee is.

If I believe that Donald Trump is the worst possible candidate the Republicans can run, and I’m happy whether Sanders or Clinton is my party’s nominee, it’s in my interest to cross over to the Republican primary and vote for Trump.

It is not in the interest of someone who has made a commitment to the Republican Party and believes that Trump is a disaster. And that Republican would have a legitimate case for claiming that I’m screwing around with the political process and their party’s right to put forth the candidate that best represents its members.

So I’m perfectly happy with the fact that only members of a party can vote in that party’s primary in this state. If independents want to support a presidential candidate, they can create a party and hold a primary that puts her or him on the November ballot.

The Sanders people knew the rules before the contest started. You can’t cry about it after the fact.

4. New York City’s comptroller will investigate the fact that the Board of Elections lopped 120,000 voters off the rolls in Brooklyn.

The Board of Elections is notorious for the mysterious ways in which it operates. That’s been the case for as long as I can remember, going back to my first journalism job in 1976 helping to set up the city vote-counting center on the Lower East Side. There was an always an issue with the Board of Elections, even when your side included the New York Police Department, which was officially responsible for counting votes.

Voting should be among the easiest things we do. In every city, in every state. But because of the way this nation is divided, setting a national standard that would make American democracy as transparent as other nations is a dream with little chance of reality.

Since Clinton won Brooklyn, I’m skeptical that Sanders would have picked up more than half of those disenfranchised, as some of his backers claim. Even so, those people should have been given the right to express their support for him.

5. Ted Cruz is right about New York values. For him, they equal zero. He didn’t win a single delegate in the nation’s fourth-largest state, and not because the rules were winner-take-all, like they are in Florida.

That appears to be just the start of his terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day.

Apparently, Cruz spent a part of an e-mail to supporters whining about the strain of campaigning for president. He complained about a lack of personal time, being away from his family and little sleep affecting his health.

Unfortunately for Cruz, one of those who got access to the note was Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the liberal firebrand from Massachusetts. She sent out a series of sharp-tongued tweets pretty much putting Cruz’s “sacrifices” in perspective. 

“Are you kidding me, @TedCruz? We’re supposed to pity you because trying to be the leader of the free world is hard?! 2 words: Boo hoo.” was the third in the series, after she introduced the issue.

And then she attacked.

“Know whose health is limited? Workers w/ no paid leave who can’t stay home when sick or caring for kids. @TedCruz won’t support it.”

“Know whose sleep is limited? Working parents who stay up worrying about getting kids thru college w/o big debt. @TedCruz blocked #refi.”

And more along those lines. If you follow @elizabethforma, you can see the whole thing.

Sometimes I wonder how different this race would have been if she had gone for the presidency.

She probably would have gotten clobbered, much as Sanders would if he were to win the nomination. But she would have been a lot more substantive in her solutions to the nation’s problems.

1. It’s Tuesday, April 19, 2016.

2. It’s a gorgeous day here in New York for the state’s presidential primaries. I voted around 8, and there were people in the polling place, so turnout should be pretty good.

If you’re a fellow New Yorker who’s registered as either a Republican or Democrat, you should vote today. We’ve had months of debates and TV soundbites and speech making and comedy show appearances.

Now you actually have to think about it. Which of these people do you trust most to steward the world’s largest economy and command the world’s strongest military? Which of them will proudly bear the standard of your party in the fall election?

3. I picked Hillary Clinton. I feel pretty good about that. Whether you pick her or Bernie Sanders (if you’re picking one of the Republicans, you’re probably better off reading something else), you should emerge from the polling place with a feeling of satisfaction in your choice.

I’m still thinking it’s Hillary by something between 55-45 and 57-43.

4. The Pulitzer Prizes were announced yesterday. I always believe the winners are deserving; last year’s winner for biography was an amazing book about the collaboration between Mussolini and Pope Pius XI.

I’m specially interested in the journalism prizes, and one that stuck out this year was the one for explanatory reporting. It went to the Marshall Project, a nonprofit group specializing in reporting on the criminal justice system, and ProPublica, another nonprofit that focuses on stories about the public interest.

I almost as though I shouldn’t describe the story – the writing by Ken Armstrong and T. Christian Miller is so good that it reads like a good novel. But it involves a rape victim who was badgered into recanting her accusation – and her eventual vindication.

Besides being a fascinating tale, it is a reminder that young women – especially those who aren’t the stars of society – face a daunting task in getting people to believe them when it comes to violence and abuse.

I highly recommend it. I commend the Pulitzer panel for honoring this. And I congratulate the writers and editors for putting this forward. Here it is: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/12/16/an-unbelievable-story-of-rape?ref=hp-1-112#.X2D2JXnIY

1. It’s Monday, April 18, 2016.

2. Your tax filings are due today. If you haven’t filed them yet, it’s more likely National File-For-An-Extension Day.

3. It’s also Patriot’s Day in Massachusetts and the running of the Boston Marathon. The weather is gorgeous here in the Northeast – in fact, it might be too hot for a 26-mile, 385-yard run. But best to all the runners and spectators.

4. So I’ve been saying that, even though I support Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders should keep running. He’s had something important to say, and I’ve believed that he’s making Clinton a better candidate for the run in the fall.

And I still think that.

But.

I’m hearing more people talk about how this campaign is starting to drag, and the more it goes on, the more annoying they think Sanders is. It seems to them as though Sanders says pretty much the same thing all the time, in the same gruff shout.

These people are going to throw up if they hear the phrase “millionaires and billionaires” one more time. Or “Wall Street bankers.”

Yes, income inequality is an important problem in this country. Yes, we need more younger people involved in the political process. Yes, Clinton should release the transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs and others.

But in the months since this campaign started, these folks – and I don’t know that I agree – believe Sanders is only focused on a couple of issues. He does not have the breadth of knowledge and the ability to change focus that Clinton does.

And, while some may doubt Clinton’s sincerity about her compassion for people, has Sanders shown any emotional attachment to the people he says he running to help? He does not have a personal touch in the same way that she or President Obama have among Democrats.

Tomorrow is the New York Primary, and Sanders needs a good showing to make the argument that he is a better alternative to the flaws of Hillary Clinton. He has a lot of support among young people, as evidenced by those big rallies in Greenwich Village and Brooklyn’s Prospect Park.

But will Democrats turn out for Sanders? I’m skeptical. I think Clinton wins by 12 or 13 percentage points.

5. One important way to bridge the income gap is to make sure everyone can afford health care.

That’s what Obamacare is supposed to do. And, according to an analysis reported in The New York Times today, that’s exactly what it’s doing. 

The study, based on 2014 statistics, shows that the poor and minorities have gained the most from the law. Hispanics have seen their coverage rates grow at the fastest pace, up more than 10% from the year before the law took full effect.

And this growth comes despite the spite of Republican governors in 19 states who have refused to expand their Medicaid programs to the poor. They, of course, are more interested in making a political statement than helping people.

Obamacare isn’t perfect. Lots of folks have seen their insurance rates soar and, despite President Obama’s promise, lost the coverage that they had and enjoyed.

But even the president acknowledges that his signature achievement needs fine tuning. Hopefully, that will happen in the new administration, and the gains shown as a result of the Affordable Care Act will grow.

6. One Republican governor who is not spiteful is John Kasich of Ohio. Although it seems unlikely that he’ll be his party’s nominee, it would be interesting to see if he campaigned on these improvements in health care coverage that he, honestly, contributed to.

That probably wouldn’t sit well with the GOP orthodoxy – but would make him a better candidate against the Democrats.

7. Another interesting thing in The Times today is an op-ed piece on immigration by former U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana. 

The Republican defends President Obama’s right to focus on the immigration issue in the way he sees fit, saying Congress abdicated its responsibility to him. But, now that it doesn’t like what he’s doing, it and other Republicans are challenging him.

It’s like we don’t want to tell you how to do your job, but you should do your job they way we want you to.

The Supreme Court is listening to the GOP arguments against Obama’s executive actions on immigration today, which is why Lugar’s piece appears. He’s one of those Republicans that the hard core would call a RINO – Republican In Name Only. But he’s actually governed, which is more than you can say for the clowns who dominate the party now.

Lugar’s piece is worth a read.

1. It’s Wednesday, April 13, 2016.

2. I wonder how much Hillary Clinton’s discomfort using MetroCard in the New York subway led to the announcement that the New York subway system is replacing MetroCard. It’s not a moment too soon.

Also, the Clinton campaign can use this as proof that it gets results.

3. Again, if you get a chance on either one of its numerous re-airings or to buy a version for home viewing, Ken Burns’ “Jackie Robinson” is excellent.

I went on ad nauseum yesterday about the judgment of history relating to the guys who obstructed Robinson. So let me talk about two things that stuck in my mind from Part Two.

First, I’m sympathetic to Robinson’s travails in his later years. Here’s a man whose courage in breaking baseball’s color line should be unimpeachable.

And yet, as the civil rights movement became more militant in the late 1960s, Robinson found himself on the other side. His criticism of Muhammad Ali’s refusal to be inducted during the Vietnam War looks really bad in the light of history – almost an echo of what I said yesterday about the guys who petitioned and hurled epithets when Robinson played for Brooklyn.

But it’s a dim echo, overpowered by his courage speaking his mind about the civil rights movement and his willingness to put his prestige and name behind efforts to improve the economic status of African-Americans.

Second, I’m struck by the toll being Jackie Robinson took on Jackie Robinson. He died a physically diminished man at just 53. I don’t know the extent genetics played on his health problems. But the stress he faced as he shattered one of America’s biggest barriers must have been overwhelming.

4. Good for the Golden State Warriors. There were those who believed they should ease up on the idea of setting a NBA record for wins in a season – the idea is to win the championship, and that’s done in the playoffs.

But they weren’t having that. They won their 72nd game over the weekend against their toughest possible foe, the San Antonio Spurs. Tonight, they go for 73.

In some ways, that’s bigger than the championship. The regular season in most major sports has been diminished; in hockey and basketball, it’s almost a joke. But people pay money to see those games, and they should have some meaning.

That’s the respect the Warriors are paying to their fans and those of their opponents. I’m not a big NBA fan; if I were I’d root for the Brooklyn Nets. But I hope the Warriors do it because of the integrity of their pursuit.

History might or might not remember if the Warriors win the NBA championships. Winning 73 of 82 games will get history’s attention. Big time.

1. It’s Tuesday, April 12, 2016.

2. Today is a big days for history buffs. It’s the 155th anniversary of the start of the Civil War. It’s the 71st anniversary of the death of President Franklin Roosevelt. It’s the 55th anniversary of the launching of the first man into space by the Soviet Union.

3. Anyone amused by Hillary Clinton’s travails with a New York City MetroCard has never used a New York City MetroCard.

I’ve stood at the freakin’ turnstile waving that damn thing through three and four times, each time getting the “PLEASE SWIPE AGAIN AT THIS TURNSTILE.” It triggers the fear – not unfounded – that you are on the verge of losing $2.50 off whatever balance is on that card if you don’t stand there and keep swiping until the damn thing lets you through.

I don’t think Clinton worries about the $2.50. I think it’s just the frustration that you’ve invested time and money into this stupid piece of plastic, and it’s not goddamn working.

You can mock her for giving six-figure speeches on Wall Street. You can mock her for the way she tends to step on applause lines when she gives a speech. But when you get on her for struggling with a MetroCard, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

4. It’s stupid for Donald Trump to complain about the Colorado delegate process, just as it would be stupid for Ted Cruz to complain about the Florida delegate process. Everybody knows the rules before going into these things, and if even they seem unfair and unrepresentative, they’re what’s in place.

Cruz’s advantage over Trump is his organization. Deal with it.

5. What is it like to be on the wrong side of history?

I’ve been thinking about that a lot since watching the first part of Ken Burns’ terrific documentary on Jackie Robinson. This is one of the better Burns’ effort, filled with the trademark sweeping shots of old photos and some good interview subjects.

And, of course, as a baseball fan and former Brooklynite, the subject matter interests me a lot.

But what I’ve thought about since last night is not Robinson, whose courage and conviction make him an American hero. 

Instead, I’ve been thinking about the people who tried to obstruct Robinson on his Herculean task of integrating what was then the national pastime.

There are names that have emerged, both in this documentary and other tellings of the Robinson saga. We’re about two years removed from “42,” a noble film about Robinson’s debut with the Dodgers, and there were clear bad guys in that, too. Ben Chapman, the Philadelphia Phillies manager. Kirby Higbe, a Dodger pitcher who signed a petition saying he wouldn’t play with Robinson – and was traded. Dixie Walker, a Dodger star who also signed the petition but wasn’t traded and begrudgingly came to appreciate Robinson’s contribution to his bigger paycheck.

What I’m struck by is how fate or history or God or whatever intervened with these guys. Their bigotry was not a whole lot different than that of millions of other Americans. But because these guys played baseball, and were in a certain place at a certain time, they’ve become villains, as much a symbol of rottenness as slaveowners and rural Southern sheriffs.

At least guys such as Chapman don’t have to listen to the opprobrium anymore. They’re dead. But they had families, and every time there’s a tribute or presentation about Jackie Robinson, they get to be reminded about what Grandpa did to be the bad guy in this tale of good and evil.

They can’t walk into New York’s Citi Field without seeing Robinson memorialized in the ballpark’s rotunda. There’s a parkway named for Robinson. No one on any team can wear the number 42.

You can’t say that about Grandpa. In fact, Grandpa’s the obstacle, the treachery that made Robinson a hero.

It must be hard. I can’t say I’m sympathetic, because in a fair world Jackie Robinson should never had to go through what he did.

But I go back to the original question. What is it like to be on the wrong side of history? I imagine it’s painful, if someone you loved screwed up badly, or makes you angry, if one of your ancestors was so much of a jerk that he hurt you more than he would have had no one even known him.

Or perhaps you’re like Grandpa or Great-Grandpa. You don’t think integrating the major leagues was such a great idea. Why did baseball need Henry Aaron or Willie Mays or Ken Griffey Jr. or Andrew McCutcheon?

Fortunately, at this moment, I can’t answer that. I don’t know if something I believe will be thought to be bigoted in the late 21st century. I hope my children and, as of now, unborn grandchildren and great-grandchildren won’t be able to answer that, either.

6. One other thought: All this should be a precaution to anyone who takes a strident stand on a social issue. 

Those who believe in God would say that only God can judge. But that’s not completely right. Yes, there might be a divine judgment. But there is one of history, whether or not you believe in God. And it will follow you beyond to your grave, as long as there is someone related to you in the world.

Be careful.

1. It’s Thursday, April 7, 2016.

2. Hey, AP, I have an idea. Why don’t we lower case the a in America? It’s been around for awhile. I’m sure any kid who uses it in a text message lower cases it, so it’s pretty standard. It’s a generic concept, because there’s no specific country called America.

Yeah, I think it’s a stupid idea to lower case the i in Internet. But the AP – I’m sorry, is it the ap? – has deemed the capitalization unnecessary for both Internet and Web, as in World Wide Web – again, is it world wide web?

Giving in to people who can’t be bothered distinguishing proper names is dumb.

3. While we’re criticizing trends in journalism, here’s something that made me fume:

The Pulitzer Prices will mark their centennial this month, and there are some suggestions aimed at making them more contemporary.

I get the idea of allowing broadcast outlets to submit their Website stories. I get the idea of allowing non-U.S. publishers compete for awards. I get the idea of expanding the awards to include new forms of media.

I do not, in any way, get the idea of letting readers decide.

This concept of letting people who read web sites or newspapers decide what’s news and what’s not has gone way too far. Newsrooms are writing stories purely based on what they see trending in social media. Managers who support this idea say it’s simply good business at a time when the industry is hurting.

When I went to see my eye doctor last week, she told me she can’t stand to read or watch the news because nothing she sees in it seems important. And I told her to thank her neighbors. That’s what they’ve indicated they want to see in the paper or on TV. So that’s what they get.

As a result, we feel as though everyone is being slashed on the street, or that everyone is bound to be afflicted with some disease, or that every politician is a crook. By focusing on the news they think people want, instead of focusing on, say, what is actually news, this constant pandering feeds itself.

So I’ll sound like an old fogey. Journalists should just do what they’re trained to do. Report what’s important. If it’s uninteresting, make it interesting. If you can’t, report it anyway – because important trumps interesting for a journalist.

The idea that people who aren’t journalists understand what makes good journalism is abdicating your job and your experience. And it’s wrong.

Civillians already have a vote – it’s called their money. Let’s be the ones to tell them what professionals think is the best.

4. Congratulations to Connecticut for winning its fourth straight NCAA women’s basketball title and its 75th straight game.

I was rooting for Syracuse Tuesday night in the title game. My wife went there, so that’s why there’s the affinity.

But I knew a Syracuse victory would have been more miraculous than when the U.S. hockey team beat the Soviets at Lake Placid 36 years ago.

There are some who believe the Huskies’ dominance – they’ve been the force to be reckoned with for more than 20 years – is bad for women’s basketball. Why watch when you know who’s going to win?

But that’s garbage.

The UConn women’s dominance is comparable to that of the NBA players competing for the U.S. in the Olympics. It compares to when UCLA was riding high in the John Wooden era.

And all of these are good for the game. They speak to the integrity of it – these are the best, and to win at that level you have to beat the best. There is no doubt that the UConn women are a special team – they deserve the accolades they receive.

In sports, such overwhelming success is fleeting. The players either graduate or their eligibility runs out. New players come in, but are they at the same level?

Eventually, someone will knock off the UConn women. It will be great for them and the game. Until then, the bar for greatness is now pretty high – as it should be.

1. It’s Wednesday, April 6, 2016.

2. Way to go, Thor!

3. As is always the case, I derive a certain pleasure from typing the words “Donald Trump lost.”

Unfortunately, after yesterday’s Wisconsin primary, I also have to type the words “Ted Cruz won.”

And frankly, folks, I have a hard time distinguishing which of those statements is worse.

Cruz is a smarmy, right-wing ass. He’s a Trump who has slightly more control over his egomania. His election is unthinkable and, as with Trump, would lead to serious economic and social crises in this country.

If Trump wins New York, and he’s expected to, does he regain the momentum toward a first-ballot nomination at the Republican convention in Cleveland?

I think if we’ve learned anything since last August, it’s not to go for all the head fakes of this campaign. New York, Pennsylvania, California and New Jersey have yet to weigh in. Those are some big states – even if they’re blue in general elections. Just let it play out.

5. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders is on a roll. But we sort of knew he would be. After Hillary Clinton was declared the winner of the Arizona primary two weeks ago, Sanders won five state caucuses in the West.

That gave him a little momentum going into Wisconsin, which he won big last night. The Clinton campaign can’t minimize the scope of Sanders’ win in a state that Democrats have a good chance of carrying in the general election.

But as with the Republicans, the battleground shifts to big states in the East and California. There are more minority voters, who have so far been Clinton’s strength. There are fewer open primaries, which have helped Sanders in states such as New Hampshire and Wisconsin.

So Clinton has hit a rough patch. But she’s still on track to be the Democratic nominee. If Sanders pulls off the upset in New York, it might change the psychological picture – even if the math favors Clinton.

As with the GOP, Yogi Berra’s immortal words still ring true: It ain’t over ’til it’s over.

6. I’ve been supporting Clinton in this election, but I have always liked Sanders. The difference between them, to me, is borne out in the controversial New York Daily News interview with Sanders.

Here’s the transcript:  http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/transcript-bernie-sanders-meets-news-editorial-board-article-1.2588306

Please read it. There are too many instances in this interview in which Sanders answers a question by saying variations of “I don’t know.” Does the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill give anyone the authority to break up big banks? Where would an ISIS commander captured by U.S. military forces end up?

I can’t imagine the question that baffles Hillary Clinton. I’ve seen her answer questions about parts of the world most Americans don’t even know exist. And she has an almost equally good grasp of issues in the United States.

I want the smartest President possible, as well as one who cares about what happens to everyone in this country. Right now, that would be Hillary Clinton.

7. The Obama administration is down to its last 9-1/2 months. It’s acting anything but lame.

Yesterday’s thwarting of Pfizer’s attempt to avoid paying U.S. taxes through a “takeover” by Allergan is a great example. The two companies agreed to end the deal after the Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service announced new rules that make such so-called “inversions” less tax friendly.

If the merger had proceeded, Pfizer would still have all the trappings of a U.S. company with offices in midtown Manhattan. It would generate most of its income from selling its products at CVS and Walgreens and through whatever prescription plan your healthcare provider uses.

But it would pay a whole lot less of the taxes that it pays now. And that means you would have gotten stuck with more of the bills for making this country run.

You don’t hear Republicans say much about this. I’m sure they and the drugmakers who help fund them are ticked off. But I’d like to see how they would sell opposition to this to an electorate angered by what it perceives as the shafting of working Americans.

1. It’s Monday, April 4, 2016.

2. It’s snowing! Damn!

3.In election years, I like to hold what I call the Highway Primary. It’s a simple counting of bumper stickers to see which presidential candidate is generating the most support among drivers.

Over the weekend, I took a short road trip to one of my favorite places, Mystic, Conn. It’s about 130 miles away up Interstate 95.

And even though the whole trip was in deep blue country, the Highway Primary should mitigate some of that because of all the travelers from other parts hitting the Interstates to go somewhere.

But of all the cars and trucks I saw in two days on the road, only three had bumper stickers – I didn’t count the truck that had FEEL THE BERN cleaned off an otherwise filthy back door.

And all three stickers were supporting Sanders. None for anyone else. No pick-ups with “Make America Great Again.” No H logos.

In the past, by this point, the Obama stickers would be in double digits. In both runs. And there would have been a few Romney stickers and the occasional McCain – in 2008 – or Ron Paul.

This is completely unscientific. But it is a curiosity. How does a campaign that generates so much attention manage to have little of that reflected in the people who decide? Are people turned off, or are they just not interested yet?

Perhaps it’s true that people don’t really focus on a presidential election until after Labor Day. Or even after the World Series – although nowadays that wouldn’t give you a lot of time.

1. It’s Wednesday, March 30, 2016.

2. Why is anyone surprised that Donald Trump now says he might not support the Republican presidential nominee if it’s not Donald Trump?

And it’s not only because Donald Trump has no real concept of loyalty beyond Donald Trump.

I can’t stand the man and, like John Oliver suggested a few weeks back, I’m waiting for time travelers from the future to come back to 2015 and stop the Trump movement before it starts.

But as the Republican Party apparatchik have made abundantly clear, they don’t want this guy to be their presidential candidate. And they are feverishly looking for a way to stop him.

Now, in recent weeks, Trump’s done a pretty good job of shooting himself in the foot. More on that later. But he remains the front-runner, and just about 500 delegates shy of a first-ballot nomination in Cleveland.

If he gets there and he’s close, how can you stop him? The only way you can do it is to gang up on him with everyone else.

And then he’s supposed to support these people? I don’t understand the logic. A bunch of guys mug you in a dark Ontario Street alley and you’re supposed to say, oh yes, everybody support them.

Keep in mind that Trump is not the only one who has backed off the pledge of supporting the party’s nominee. In the same CNN town hall, Ted Cruz and John Kasich did the same thing.

Is this a mess, a three-way divorce? You betcha, as potential third-party candidate Sarah Palin might say.

3. A couple of weeks back, I speculated that Trump might not have originally wanted to be President. Why would he take a job that requires him to answer to 320-million-plus Americans, many of whom don’t even live in a Trump apartment?

Since he solidified his hold on front-runner status in the Republican race, there are some signs that maybe I wasn’t too far off.

That foreign policy interview in The New York Times. I don’t have a lot of respect for Trump. But he does have a college degree – from a pretty good school. So he should have at least an idea how clueless he came off. Actually, anyone with the ability to read should have an idea about how clueless he came off.

Then there’s his reaction yesterday to the arrest of his campaign manager on charges that he assaulted a female reporter.

If Trump really wanted to be President, the campaign manager would have been canned, pronto. Instead, he defended the guy and made crazy statements about the woman who was allegedly assaulted. “Wouldn’t you think she would have yelled out a scream if she had bruises on her arm,” he said.

I just wonder if he’s getting a little tired of this game he’s been playing. He wanted to see how far he could go.

Now he knows. Time to go back to his Florida crib and work on his tan. Let the Republicans take care of themselves.