Why Sanders Will Be Able To Hang Around

Clinton won’t be able to choke off his small donors, letting him fight through March.

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton debate in New Hampshire.
AP Photo/David Goldman
Feb. 8, 2016, 8 p.m.

After months of can­did­ate vis­its to town halls, diners, and in­di­vidu­al voters’ back­yards and liv­ing rooms, New Hamp­shire Demo­crats head to the polls Tues­day—and will de­term­ine al­most noth­ing.

To help un­der­stand why, here’s a brief primer on the Demo­crat­ic race post-New Hamp­shire:

What’s ex­actly at stake in the New Hamp­shire primary?

The primary res­ults will be used this sum­mer to award 24 del­eg­ates to the Demo­crat­ic Na­tion­al Con­ven­tion, which will choose the party’s pres­id­en­tial nom­in­ee. Iowa, which held caucuses last week, chose 44 del­eg­ates. For per­spect­ive: Win­ning the nom­in­a­tion re­quires 2,382 del­eg­ates, out of 4,763 avail­able. So these two con­tests will de­term­ine 1.4 per­cent of the del­eg­ates needed to se­cure the nom­in­a­tion.

That’s it? Then why all the at­ten­tion on Iowa and New Hamp­shire?

The states’ de­fend­ers ar­gue that mak­ing the can­did­ates spend lots of time in front of en­gaged voters serves as a use­ful first screen. And, in­deed, voters in later states of­ten look to these res­ults when mak­ing up their own minds. A can­did­ate who winds up win­ning the early con­tests of­ten be­comes the con­sensus choice re­l­at­ively quickly.

So why won’t that hap­pen in 2016?

It could—but typ­ic­ally a con­sensus emerges when the lead­ing can­did­ate cre­ates a sense of in­ev­it­ab­il­ity, which dries up money flow­ing to the re­main­ing can­did­ates, prompt­ing them to drop out. The front-run­ner in this case, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton, won’t be able to stop the flow of con­tri­bu­tions to Sen. Bernie Sanders’s cam­paign be­cause so little money is com­ing from the usu­al stable of Demo­crat­ic Party donors. Rather, Sanders has been able to tap in­to an enorm­ous pool of small donors who gave him $73 mil­lion through the end of Decem­ber, with $28 mil­lion in the bank as of Jan. 1. (Clin­ton raised $110 mil­lion in 2015, and had $38 mil­lion to start 2016.) In oth­er words: There is no fin­an­cial reas­on for Sanders not to keep cam­paign­ing through the com­ing weeks and months.

But doesn’t the cal­en­dar start to fa­vor Clin­ton after New Hamp­shire?

Sanders has been able to build a de­voted fol­low­ing with his simple mes­sage that the polit­ic­al sys­tem has been cor­rup­ted by big money. His weak­ness, though, is among non­white voters—who hap­pen to make up a large per­cent­age of the Demo­crat­ic primary elect­or­ate. Most of the states that come after New Hamp­shire have sig­ni­fic­ant black, Latino, and oth­er minor­ity vot­ing pop­u­la­tions.

Does this mean Clin­ton will lock up the needed del­eg­ates in the March con­tests?

She could start build­ing a sub­stan­tial lead, but the party’s del­eg­ate rules will make that a slow pro­cess so long as Sanders can win a reas­on­able share of the vote in each state. Demo­crat­ic del­eg­ates are awar­ded by con­gres­sion­al dis­trict and by the statewide win­ner—but in both cases the del­eg­ates are al­loc­ated in pro­por­tion to the vote share. Even if Clin­ton star­ted win­ning 60 per­cent of the avail­able del­eg­ates in the com­ing six weeks, she would have won few­er than 1,400 del­eg­ates through the end of March.

Mean­ing this could go on through April?

Pos­sibly, par­tic­u­larly if Sanders can do bet­ter than 40 per­cent in the com­ing states. In either case, Sanders is also up against Clin­ton’s over­whelm­ing ad­vant­age among the Demo­crat­ic Party’s 700 so-called “su­per del­eg­ates”—mem­bers of Con­gress, gov­ernors, and Demo­crat­ic Na­tion­al Com­mit­tee mem­bers, whose votes are not based on the res­ult of any primary or caucus, but rather their own dis­cre­tion. Cur­rently, ac­cord­ing to the As­so­ci­ated Press, Clin­ton has a 362-8 lead over Sanders.

And it is that ad­vant­age, ac­cord­ing to Josh Put­nam, a Uni­versity of Geor­gia polit­ic­al sci­ent­ist who main­tains the pop­u­lar Front­load­ing HQ web­site, that ul­ti­mately might wind things down in Clin­ton’s fa­vor. In fact, by late March, half of the del­eg­ates up for grabs in primar­ies and caucuses will have been al­loc­ated. And if Clin­ton has a lead among those, her large su­per-del­eg­ate lead will make it math­em­at­ic­ally dif­fi­cult for Sanders to come back.

What We're Following See More »
AVOIDS SHUTDOWN WITH A FEW HOURS TO SPARE
Trump Signs Border Deal
1 days ago
THE LATEST

"President Trump signed a sweeping spending bill Friday afternoon, averting another partial government shutdown. The action came after Trump had declared a national emergency in a move designed to circumvent Congress and build additional barriers at the southern border, where he said the United States faces 'an invasion of our country.'"

Source:
REDIRECTS $8 BILLION
Trump Declares National Emergency
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

"President Donald Trump on Friday declared a state of emergency on the southern border and immediately direct $8 billion to construct or repair as many as 234 miles of a border barrier. The move — which is sure to invite vigorous legal challenges from activists and government officials — comes after Trump failed to get the $5.7 billion he was seeking from lawmakers. Instead, Trump agreed to sign a deal that included just $1.375 for border security."

Source:
COULD SOW DIVISION AMONG REPUBLICANS
House Will Condemn Emergency Declaration
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

"House Democrats are gearing up to pass a joint resolution disapproving of President Trump’s emergency declaration to build his U.S.-Mexico border wall, a move that will force Senate Republicans to vote on a contentious issue that divides their party. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Thursday evening in an interview with The Washington Post that the House would take up the resolution in the coming days or weeks. The measure is expected to easily clear the Democratic-led House, and because it would be privileged, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would be forced to put the resolution to a vote that he could lose."

Source:
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DRUG FORFEITURE FUND
Where Will the Emergency Money Come From?
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

"ABC News has learned the president plans to announce on Friday his intention to spend about $8 billion on the border wall with a mix of spending from Congressional appropriations approved Thursday night, executive action and an emergency declaration. A senior White House official familiar with the plan told ABC News that $1.375 billion would come from the spending bill Congress passed Thursday; $600 million would come from the Treasury Department's drug forfeiture fund; $2.5 billion would come from the Pentagon's drug interdiction program; and through an emergency declaration: $3.5 billion from the Pentagon's military construction budget."

Source:
TRUMP SAYS HE WILL SIGN
House Passes Funding Deal
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

"The House passed a massive border and budget bill that would avert a shutdown and keep the government funded through the end of September. The Senate passed the measure earlier Thursday. The bill provides $1.375 billion for fences, far short of the $5.7 billion President Trump had demanded to fund steel walls. But the president says he will sign the legislation, and instead seek to fund his border wall by declaring a national emergency."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login