Bernie did very well last night. Clinton only won by .2 percent of the SDEs and the pledged delegates were divided 23 to 21. With 6 Clinton Superdelegates (at this point — I still feel as I did during the Obama campaign and as Plouffe stated that the Superdelegates will not overturn the pledged delegate winner), then at this point in time Clinton is taking 8 net delegates out of Iowa. I feel that both candidates had something going for them : Hillary had money, the establishment, the party organization, name recognition, … but Bernie had an electorate that was very white and extremely liberal (43 percent self identifying as socialists). I think that demographics and the ideological makeup of the electorate trump everything else. You can predict the winner of the primary or caucus if you know those two factors. pretty much every. single. time. It is the single most reliable way to predict the winner. Money cannot change the ideological makeup of the electorate nor can it alter its demography.
Bernie likely wins New Hampshire by a lot and so the delegates may be evenly divided at that point. At this point, the challenge to the Sanders becomes undeniable. That issue is how will Bernie win future contests given the challenging demographics and challenging terrain (ideologically and geographically for him ) [perhaps he does well in northern white states like Minnesota and Massachusetts (although I see Clinton with an edge in both states)] ?
What is their plan with states like South Carolina ? I think the answer is the same one that I have read from Sanders’ supporters — expand the electorate, especially the youth vote. I think that just as ideology trumps money, age is more important than ethnicity and more important than gender. We can see from polling that Bernie wins women under 45 . This means that age is a better predictor of voting behavior than gender if the two would seem to counteract each other. I think something similar happens with age and ethnicity.
Therefore, I think there is a narrow , but arguably plausible path for Bernie. The argument is that Bernie’s more economically progressive positions will help minority populations more than Hillary’s, that Bernie has definitely addressed social injustice outside of the economic arena with his proposals, that Bernie’s heart led him to support social justice in his actions (marching ...) for nearly 50 years and his voting record is pretty much impeccable. Moreover, Single Payer (let us make sure that the Hyde Amendment is repealed if we go for this) will help people of color and women more than anyone else. Therefore, he is best candidate for people of color. Then, he must expand the electorate and bring in more voters under 35 . If he does that, he has a chance of limiting Clinton’s gains among voters of color. It is still tough and I still see other problems, but this must be the path. And he must keep the margins down, continue to organize beautifully (which I feel he did in Iowa) and win as many of the caucuses, especially open contests, and then remain competitive. He has the funding and support from the most progressive parts of the Democratic party.