Vermont senator and insurgent Bernie Sanders won another state over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on May 10, this time in West Virginia. When the votes were cast and the tally was assembled, Bernie wound up with 51.4% of the vote to Clinton's 35.8% and won all of the state's counties. Sanders was understandably giddy when he took to the stage in Salem, Oregon to thank his supporters for the umpteenth time, expressing his appreciation for the young people coming out and pushing the "political revolution" that he claims to lead. "We now have won primaries and caucuses in 19 states," Sanders said at his rally. "Let me be as clear as I can be. We are in this campaign to win the Democratic nomination."
Arguing that Bernie Sanders has come a long way from a year ago has turned into something of an obvious cliche. But it happens to be the truth: when Sanders announced his candidacy in a hastily assembled press conference on Capitol Hill, the political press corps that was just beginning to cover the presidential race considered him to be a long-shot at best. He would have his fun on the trail, rail against the billionaires and corporate interests, and then go away after Iowa or New Hampshire once he came to realize that he had no shot whatsoever in actually winning anything.
For a while, it looked like this was precisely the scenario the political press would be reporting. Nearly a month after he declared his candidacy on April 20, 2015, an ABC News/Washington Post poll had Sanders down by 52 points against Clinton.
Well, it ain't 2015 anymore. That same ABC/WaPo poll now has Sanders down only seven points behind Clinton nationally -- numbers that illustrate just how wrong most political analysts and horserace watchers were (including myself).
Sanders has struck a chord with many members of the Democratic Party. Millennials are tired of politics as usual, and many of the young people who have never voted before but who are now preparing to become part of the democratic process are excited about an unconventional candidate. You can't take away the fact that Sanders has sparked a fire among a wide swath of the American electorate that were once apathetic about politics.
But with all that being said, is Bernie's victory in West Virginia a sea change in the Democratic race? If you read the mainstream press lately, you would think this might be the beginning of the end for Hillary Clinton's campaign -- a laughable thought given her enormous lead in pledged delegates and her even more enormous lead when adding superdelegates into the equation.
West Virginia's results therefore shouldn't be seen as an adrenaline shot to Bernie Sander's presidential aspirations (Hillary Clinton is 94% of the way to clinching the nomination with about three more weeks of voting to go), but more as a slate of lessons that the Clinton campaign should heed as they transition into the general election against Donald Trump.
One, Hillary Clinton remains unpopular with independent voters in relation to Bernie Sanders. Bernie has performed better in open primaries, where registered independents are allowed to cast their ballots. In West Virginia, Bernie beat Hillary among those identifying themselves at independents by a 58%-21% margin according to the CNN exit polls. The examples of independents rushing towards Sanders during primaries and caucuses are nearly endless (69% in Oklahoma, 69% in Iowa, 73% in New Hampshire, 53% in South Carolina, 55% in Florida, and 72% in New York). Clinton's popularity among Democrats has helped her make up these numbers, but general election contests can hinge on which candidate proves to more popular (or less unpopular) among the independent demographic.
Secondly, West Virginia shows that people under the age of 40 really like what Bernie Sanders is offering. The trend continued this week in West Virginia, where CNN exit polls had Sanders winning the 17-29 year-old grouping by 45 points and the 30-44 year-old grouping by 39 points. Can she find a theme that turns some of these people off of Donald Trump, who's message has been able to resonate across the GOP electorate regardless of age, religiosity, or economics?
Finally, does Hillary Clinton have the capacity to rally the millions upon millions of Democratic and independent voters who have sided with Bernie Sanders throughout this primary season? Indeed, will Bernie's supporters be able to swallow their pride, travel to the polls to vote for their second choice in order to keep Donald Trump far, far away from the White House? This is, in many ways, the $64 million question that could help determine the outcome of the race in November.
Of course, it wouldn't hurt if Bernie took one for the team and started to argue to his supporters why Hillary Clinton would be a far better President and Commander-in-Chief than the nominee on the other side who would tear up America's system of alliances, ban all Muslims from entering the country, and be open to the possibility of using nuclear weapons in the heart of Europe. But apparently he still thinks he can win.