NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

A few thoughts about Thursday’s Clinton v. Sanders debate

by | Feb 3, 2016

By Dave Andrusko

clintonsanders881To be honest, I was sort of stunned when pro-abortionists Hillary Clinton, Democratic Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, and the since departed former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley agreed to expand the number of debates. Why was I surprised? Because Thursday’s debate on MSNBC was not part of the Democratic National Committee’s tightly scripted original schedule.

But unsurprisingly, they bickered over details about the debates after Thursday’s one-on-one in New Hampshire. For a moment Sanders threatened not to take part.

Since New Hampshire is across the street from Sanders’ home state of Vermont, that was hard to believe. And sure enough, Sanders quickly abandoned that posture.

Many of you probably watched the Iowa caucuses Monday night. If you did, especially if you watched MSNBC which I did more than usual, you couldn’t miss the stark generational divide. Mrs. Clinton’s supporters were heavily tilted in the direction of older Americans; Mr. Sanders’s troops were very, very much younger.

Writing in the Atlantic Ron Brownstein offers a flurry of fascinating details. For example,

In the Iowa entrance poll (which questions voters on the way into a caucus, rather than on their way out the door, like “exit polls” in primaries) Sanders amassed astounding margins among young people. He crushed Clinton by an almost unimaginable six to one—84 percent to 14 percent—among voters younger than 30. For those tempted to dismiss that as just a campus craze, he also routed her by 58 percent to 37 percent among those aged 30 to 44.

But Clinton’s margins were almost as impressive among older voters: she beat Sanders 58 percent to 35 percent among those aged 45-64, and by 69 percent to 26 percent among seniors.

And, of course, older voters are much more likely to vote in the fall, which the Sanders’ campaign obviously knows.

Brownstein goes on to talk about the challenges Sanders faces. That includes more appeal for minority and working class Democrats.

But actually, he needs support from more Democrats in general. Brownstein observes

Sanders won over two-thirds of independents who participated in the Iowa caucus. But even amid his otherwise strong performance, he lost Democrats by a resounding 56 percent to 39 percent. Compared to Obama in Iowa in 2008, Sanders enjoyed a wider margin among independents, but fared much more poorly among Democrats: Obama and Clinton split them about evenly eight years ago

His final sentence?

Sanders, who did not describe himself as a Democrat until recently, is very unlikely to become the Democratic nominee without converting more Democrats to his “political revolution.”

Stay tuned–and be sure to watch tomorrow night’s get together. Something tells me it could get very interesting.

Editor’s note. If you want to peruse stories all day long, go directly to nationalrighttolifenews.org and/or follow me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha.

Categories: Politics