Although Clinton long had a big lead, it is now very evenly between the two democratic candidates for the nomination meeting in Nevada on Saturday. Photo: AP
NEW! Get news and analyzes about the US election – right in your e-mail basket. Sign up here.
NEW YORK Just hours after Hillary Clinton’s resounding defeat against Bernie Sanders of New Hampshire on February 9 emailed her campaign director Robby Mook to Clinton’s increasingly nervous supporters. The loss in New Hampshire, he assured, it means nothing. Nor the next two Democratic primaries, Nevada today and South Carolina a week, are particularly important in a larger perspective.
Purely mathematically, he has a point – only 102 Democratic delegates at stake in Nevada and South Carolina of the 2,382 needed to secure the party’s nomination this summer.
But the advance in Bernie Sanders, left senator from Vermont whose position in public opinion today considered almost unthinkable just a few months ago, shakes doubt Clinton’s campaign management.
– I think that Nevada could become tight. I really do, says Clinton’s chief strategist Joel Benenson to the radio station NPR.
Opinion polls this week show that Hillary Clinton has such a small advantage in Nevada that it falls within the statistical margin of error. Yet the desert state in the southwestern United States one of the states that the former Foreign Minister should be able to win with ease. She won here in 2008 and Nevada has a large Hispanic minority. The Clintons have been for decades an alliance with America’s black and Hispanic population.
Nevada is a “swing state” so what happened eight years ago is not relevant today, because there are so many new voters.
She also has other benefits according to David Damore, political science professor at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas.
– Clinton was here early and have an experienced team in Nevada who pushed out political messages about things like immigration. Sanders arrived late and was not particularly well known. But he, on the other hand, received much positive attention after Iowa and New Hampshire. I think that helps him here, says David Damore told SvD.
In Nevada are also many young potential voters – a group that is also particularly difficult to mobilize.
– Nevada is a “swing state” so what happened eight years ago is not relevant today, because there are so many new voters. It is a challenge for the campaigns, with each election must start from scratch to teach people how to vote, says Damore.
A democratic “caucus” in Nevada similar to in Iowa, where voters stand in groups, depending on who they support. It is a rather tedious affair that often takes a few hours to complete. Unlike Iowa occurs, however, the vote during the day instead of at night.
for Sanders is about to show that he can broaden his support beyond the white voters in rural areas.
Sanders has built much of its success at attracting young people to choose precisely meetings and polling stations. When the fight now moves on to Nevada, South Carolina for a week and the other Southern states then – far away from the Sanders home stadium in New England – as he meets new challenges.
– For Sanders, it is about showing that he can broaden its support beyond the white voters in rural areas. There are indications that Sanders campaign sought to expand the voter base in Nevada even among registered Republicans and independent to get them to switch sides and go out and vote, said David Damore.
In a larger perspective have Clinton an advantage of being backed by a large part of the Democrats’ “super delegates” who can vote for any candidate they want at the party convention. For example, supports twelve of Ohio’s 16 super delegates Clinton, according to the AP, even after the fiasco in New Hampshire.
The evidence suggests at the same time that Bernie Sanders talk of a “political revolution” has got the momentum and rolling on its own power even in parts of the US where the senator was not previously known. He also favored by strong finances. Clinton and Sanders have together spent about $ 50 million on television advertising so far. But the recent past, Sanders pulled away and invested more in spreading their message than Clinton did. In only 18 hours after the primary election in New Hampshire drew Sanders campaign in $ 5.2 million in new donations, according to news agency Bloomberg.
I that Clinton camp suspected that she would be challenged . But I do not think they thought that resistance would be this hard.
Sanders would need a win Nevada to retain a strong foothold. If Clinton wins Nevada, South Carolina and the Southern states that vote on March 1 she may have amassed as many delegates at the party convention in July that her lead would be more or less impregnable, speculate some analysts, given that the super delegates supporting her.
in South Carolina a week leads Hillary Clinton by over 20 percentage points in public opinion, about as much as Sanders struck her in New Hampshire. Anything other than a big win in South Carolina would be devastating for Clinton.
In what developed to the dirtiest and hardest US elections in decades, particularly among the Republican candidates, but also what applies Sanders and Clinton, as everyone tries to position itself well ahead of Super Tuesday, March 1 when a total of twelve states hold primaries.
– I sensed that Clinton camp that she would be challenged. But I do not think they thought that resistance would be this hard, says Professor David Damore.
No comments:
Post a Comment