...I believed then and believe still that the experimental journalism of the future will embrace the multi-dimensionality of metanarrative. Write that Sanders is in the midst of a competitive primary race enough times--and support those claims with unimpeachable elements of the totalized ‘Real’--and in time we collectively can see that that seemingly impossible metanarrative is every bit as powerful and present and perceivable as any other. Over the last 90 days, my articles on the 2016 Democratic primary have been shared more than 200,000 times on Facebook, and with each share there were people who read the article and called it a fantasy and others who saw in it a master narrative equally plausible to the one they’ve been sold daily since that moment in the 1990s when Hillary Clinton decided she would become President....

The fact that Hillary Clinton beat Bernie Sanders in February early voting in Arizona by more than 30 points, but lost to Sanders 50 percent to 46.5 percent in live voting in Arizona in March, could be entirely explained by the demographics of the archetypal early voter — as the mainstream media claimed, per usual seeking a binary approach to their own master narrative, one in which a given analysis either ‘fits’ or is ‘fiction’--or some part of that dramatic statistical disparity could be that Hillary Clinton wears on voters over time.... So when I wrote that ‘Bernie Sanders Is Currently Winning the Democratic Primary Race, and I’ll Prove It to You,’ I was offering a ‘minority report’ of the Real: suggesting that something may actually have shifted in the Democratic race around March 15th.... The mainstream media said only, of the March 15th primaries, ‘Clinton goes five-for-five.’ I saw in the same data another possibility entirely. Another metanarrative. And as an experimental writer I wanted to write of, from, and for that metanarrative rather than any other then available for public use...