IT wasn’t quite Bernie Sanders first, the rest nowhere, but the senator’s victory in the Nevada caucus might well be a huge step forward in his campaign to gain the Democratic nomination for the US presidential election.
Many politicians and pundits say that Sanders is now uncatchable in the race to be selected as the Democratic candidate, and with former vice-president Joe Biden coming in second and Mayor Pete Buttigieg third, he certainly scored a huge psychological advantage ahead of a potentially decisive series of primaries in 15 states over the next two weeks.
“We’ve brought together a multi-generational, multi-racial coalition that is not only going to win Nevada, it’s going to sweep this country,” Sanders said.
The contest had a sour aftermath when television broadcaster Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC, appeared to compare Sanders’s victory to the Nazi invasion of France. Matthews said: “I was reading last night about the fall of France [to the Nazis] in the summer of 1940. And the general, Reynaud, calls up Churchill and says, ‘It’s over’.
READ MORE: Bernie Sanders would be 'favourable' to Scottish independence
“And Churchill says, ‘How can that be? You’ve got the greatest army in Europe. How can it be over?’. He said, ‘It’s over’.”
There were calls from Sanders supporters and from influential Jewish lobbyists for Matthews to resign but neither he nor MSNBC had commented by the time The National went to press.
Mike Casca, Sanders’s communications director, said: “Never thought part of my job would be pleading with a national news network to stop likening the campaign of a Jewish presidential candidate whose family was wiped out by the Nazis to the Third Reich. But here we are.”
Given his left-wing views, Sanders’s win has been seen as a boost to the re-election chances of President Donald Trump who tweeted: “Looks like Crazy Bernie is doing well in the Great State of Nevada. Biden & the rest look weak, & no way Mini Mike [Michael Bloomberg] can restart his campaign after the worst debate performance in the history of Presidential Debates. Congratulations Bernie, & don’t let them take it away from you!”
The Washington Post reported: “Sanders’s advantage in Nevada was overwhelming, with substantial leads in nearly every demographic group, allowing him to set down a marker in the first state with a significant share of non-white voters.
READ MORE: Bernie Sanders's brother says he would not get involved in indyref2
“Sanders expanded the electorate by attracting relatively large numbers of first-time caucus-goers, providing momentum as the race shifts into a critical stretch over the next 10 days.
“He prevailed among those with college degrees and those without; those living in union and non-union households; and in every age group except those over 65. He won more than half of Hispanic caucus-goers — almost four times as much support as his nearest rival, former vice-president Joe Biden — and even narrowly prevailed among those who identified as moderate or conservative.
“Despite attacks on his health proposal by the powerful Culinary Workers Union, he won in caucus sites filled with union members.”
The biggest prizes in the next fortnight will be decided on so-called Super Tuesday on March 3 when Biden and billionaire candidate Bloomberg will hope to do well – the latter has yet to take part in either a caucus or primary – on a day when the two most populous states, California and Texas, allot 415 and 228 delegates respectively.
“The press is ready to declare people dead quickly. We’re alive. We’re coming back,” Biden said. “We’re going to win in South Carolina, and then Super Tuesday.”
The unlucky candidate in Nevada was Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren who performed very well in a televised debate – Bloomberg was the victim of a forensic examination by Warren – but which was broadcast after many voters had already registered their choice.
Senator Amy Klobuchar and billionaire candidate Tom Steyer also flopped in Nevada, though the latter spent million on an advertising campaign and is going to spend even more on Super Tuesday.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel