Sanders Soars to Victory in Wisconsin

Sen. Bernie Sanders won the Wisconsin Democratic primary, taking nearly 60 percent of the vote and over 40 delegates.

Following a familiar pattern, Sanders dominated the youth vote in Wisconsin and won a majority of the white vote. He also won among self-described “very liberal” voters. Somewhat surprisingly, however, he also edged Clinton out in every other liberal demographic.

Sanders has now won six of the last seven primary contests. And although Clinton leads Sanders 1743 to 1056 in delegates, 469 of those are superdelegates. When superdelegates are taken out of the equation, Clinton leads Sanders by only 249 delegates.

[lz_third_party includes=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyuITz8C-yU”]

Coupled with a possible FBI indictment, the trends highlighted in Wisconsin just might be enough to give the Democratic Establishment pause about Clinton’s general election prospects, make the remaining 249 superdelegates consider Sanders, and force some of those pledged to Clinton reconsider their decision.

[lz_table title=”Delegates Won” source=”CNN”]Total delegates
Clinton,1743
Sanders,1056
|Pledged delegates
Clinton,1274
Sanders,1025
|Superdelegates
Clinton,469
Sanders,31
[/lz_table]

Clinton clearly has a problem attracting white voters — eight out of 10 voters in Wisconsin were white and more than half went for Sanders, exit polls showed.

This isn’t necessarily an issue for Clinton in Democratic primaries, but white voters constitute a much larger portion of the overall electorate than they do the Democratic Party membership rolls.

Non-Hispanic whites likely will account for around 7 out of 10 voters in the general election. Her resounding Super Tuesday victories earlier in the year were due solely to the black vote, a fact that doesn’t bode well for her general election prospects.

[lz_table title=”Wisconsin Exit Polls” source=”CNN”]18-29 year old vote
Sanders,81%
Clinton,17%
|30-44 year old vote
Sanders,66%,
Clinton,33%
|45 and older vote
Sanders,43%
Clinton,56%
|White vote
Sanders,58%
Clinton,40%
|Black vote
Sanders,26%
Clinton,74%
|Very liberal vote
Sanders,60%
Clinton,39%
|Somewhat liberal vote
Sanders,57%
Clinton,42%
|Moderate vote
Sanders,50%
Clinton,49%
[/lz_table]

She took more than 80 percent of the black vote in Georgia, but lost the white vote there. In Virginia, Alabama, Texas and Tennessee, her percentage of the black vote was also in the 80s. In Oklahoma, where Clinton lost, she still took 75 percent of the black vote.

Clinton also has a serious problem attracting young voters, whose mobilization was key to Obama’s resounding victory in 2008. Indeed, the white votes Clinton has managed to earn appear to be largely from white voters over the age of 40.

Sanders performed far better with younger voters in almost every state, winning a majority of the 18-29 year old vote in most states.

Sanders has also proven himself a better and more authentic critic of the Democratic Establishment and business-as-usual, and Sanders consistently polls better than Clinton when it comes to the issue of honesty.

[lz_table title=”Sanders’ Westward Expansion” source=”CNN”]Alaska
Sanders,81.6%
Clinton,18.4%
|Hawaii
Sanders,69.8%
Clinton,30%
|Idaho
Sanders,78%
Clinton,21.2%
|Utah
Sanders,79.3%
Clinton,20.3%
|Washington
Sanders,72.7%
Clinton,27%
|Wisconsin
Sanders,56%
Clinton,44%
[/lz_table]

It’s hard for voters to believe Clinton’s criticisms of foreign policy, when she helmed the state department for the first half of his presidency. It’s difficult to take seriously her professed desire to reign in Wall Street, given her lucrative speaking career there.

And it’s hard to believe her stated concern for the working man done wrong by unfair free trade deals, considering NAFTA and permanent normalized trade relations with China happened under her husband’s watch and she endorsed them enthusiastically at the time.

In Mississippi, which Clinton won, 56 percent of Democratic primary voters who said they were dissatisfied or angry at the federal government. This is a problem for any Democrat given that party has run the government for seven years, but especially for Clinton as, unlike Sanders, she was in the thick of it.

Simply put, if 2016 is to be an anti-establishment election, Clinton is in trouble. She has connected to the financial industry, and has been constant presence in Washington in one form or another since Bill Clinton first won the presidency.

Then there’s the FBI investigation and possible indictment hanging over Clinton’s head. At the end of March it was reported that the FBI was preparing to arrange interviews with some of Clinton’s closest aides, and on April 1 it was reported that four of those aides had hired the same attorney, suggesting they may be closing ranks around their former State Department boss.

But Despite Hillary’s plethora of problems in attracting certain swaths of the voting public and her looming legal problems, even continued success for Sanders is unlikely to gain the delegates necessary to snatch the nomination from Clinton’s claws.

However, after the Wisconsin results, Sanders’ only strategy — to make a strong enough stand in late primary states and take enough delegates away from Clinton in order to make superdelegates think twice about Clinton — doesn’t seem so crazy after all.