NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label 2016 Iowa presidential caucuses. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2016 Iowa presidential caucuses. Show all posts

09 February 2016

A Democratic Socialist Just Won The New Hampshire Primary 9FEB16


BERNIE SANDERS WINS THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY AFTER A TIE IN THE IOWA CAUCUS!!!!!! If you want to know more about +Senator Bernie Sanders check out his campaign website BERNIE 2016 . The political revolution of the 99% is growing, is gaining power from the people for the people! On to South Carolina!!!!

A Democratic Socialist Just Won The New Hampshire Primary

Bernie Sanders' big victory over Hillary Clinton couldn't have been predicted six months ago.

  02/09/2016 08:00 pm ET | Updated 1 minute ago
  • Samantha LachmanStaff Reporter, The Huffington Post

  • CONCORD, N.H. -- New Hampshire’s Democratic primary voters confirmed Tuesday that they do, in fact, want a self-described democratic socialist as their party’s presidential nominee.  
    Bernie Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont, had consistently led former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in polls of the Granite State since last fall, with margins that frequently surpassed 20 percent. On Tuesday, he defeated Clinton handily.
    Sanders' win confirms that Democratic voters identify with a message that many in the party establishment have written off astoo radical. There’s a slew of policy positions Sanders has advocated for that Clinton won’t touch, like making public college free, boosting the minimum wage to $15 across the country, legalizing marijuana, expanding Social Security benefits, reinstating the firewall between commercial and investment banking activities and enacting single-payer, universal health care. While each of these positions has significant, if not majority support among Democratic voters, taking on all of them at once was considered bold for a serious Democratic primary candidate.
    Clinton attempted to dampen Sanders' expected win ahead of Tuesday night, arguing that his popularity shouldn’t come as a surprise since he represents a neighboring state. But it took months for Sanders to catch up to Clinton in New Hampshire in terms of his number of offices and paid organizers on the ground. And Clinton had the support of many of the state’s highest-profile Democrats, including Gov. Maggie Hassan and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.
    Sanders' entrance into the race last spring was met with skepticism from Clinton’s allies, who dismissed his political position as too liberal and extreme to appeal to voters. (They still think he’s too liberal, though they’re not dismissing the threat he poses to Clinton anymore.) Former President Bill Clinton argued that Sanders' worldview isn’t connected with reality, and that many of the desired reforms the senator touts would be impossible to achieve in a Congress controlled by Republicans, as it is now. Hillary Clinton’s backers have consistently painted Sanders' political views as out of touch, and suggested that he sympathizes with socialist and communist leaders.
    But those tactics didn’t resonate in New Hampshire. While the state's voters are famously contrarian, they have not, as Mother Jones’ David Corn recently noted, traditionally embraced Democratic insurgent candidates in the same way they have Republican renegades. New Hampshire’s Democratic picks in the last three primaries have been the establishment candidates: Clinton in 2008, John Kerry in 2004 and Al Gore in 2000.

    JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
    Sanders beat out former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday.

    The announcement of Sanders’ victory came so quickly -- just moments after the polls closed at 8 p.m. local time -- that the crowd at Sanders’ victory party in Concord was probably only one-tenth full. Still, the shouts were loud when the news was blasted over the speakers and displayed on the television screens off to the side of the gymnasium at the local high school.
    Attendees danced to the funk music pumped over the speakers into the chilly room. They waved baby blue Bernie signs and beamed at the news screens. Staffers hugged, some overcome with emotion. They and Sanders' massive army of volunteers put in many months of work to get to this point. And even though every single indicator told them this would be Tuesday night’s result, it still didn’t feel quite real.
    “I was doing a lot of canvassing for him,” said Serena Galleshaw, 25, of Somersworth, New Hampshire. “And back in the fall, they were like, ‘Is he electable? Is he electable?’ Now look at where we are tonight.” 
    Clinton campaigned heavily in New Hampshire, holding dozens of town halls and organizing events throughout the state ahead of Tuesday's primary. But she wasn’t able to pull off a repeat of her 2008 win, in which she came back from consistent polling deficits to defeat then-Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.
    This time around, New Hampshire voters switched allegiances, choosing Sanders and his call for a political revolution that ends income inequality and gets corporate money out of politics. Sanders knew it was a winning message. He criticized Clinton's dependence on Wall Street for speaking fees and campaign dollars repeatedly during last Thursday's final debate before the primary.
    Despite his consistent leads in polls heading into Tuesday's primary, Sanders’ campaign didn’t take a win in New Hampshire for granted. They seemed to be gunning for as large a win as possible, outspending Clinton on television advertisements on the state’s airwaves by a 3-to-1 margin. Clinton’s campaign acknowledged that they had been outspent in a fundraising email to supporters Tuesday afternoon with the bracing subject line, “No matter what happens tonight.”
    “The Sanders campaign knows how strong this team is -- that's why they went to the extraordinary measure of outspending us on the airwaves 3-to-1 here in New Hampshire,” the email read.
    The head-to-head between Sanders and Clinton now moves to the Nevada caucus on Feb. 20 and the South Carolina primary on Feb. 27. Sanders’ job was easier in New Hampshire, where 95 percent of those who voted in the Democratic primary in 2008 were white, and more than half identified as liberal. Clinton has maintained a large lead in polls of Hispanics and African-Americans, two demographic groups that play a large role in determining who wins in the next two states.
    The win in New Hampshire could help Sanders build momentum, if what happened in the 2008 primary between Clinton and Obama serves as a guide. An early primary win might give Sanders a better shot if it causes racial minorities to reassess their perceptions of his viability as a candidate. A path to the nomination for Sanders is still extremely narrow, but it’s now possible to imagine what it looks like.  

    Sam Stein contributed reporting from Concord, New Hampshire. Samantha Lachman reported from Washington, D.C.
    Also on HuffPost:
    Iowa Caucus 2016




01 February 2016

O’Malley to suspend his campaign, according to adviser & Iowa caucus election results 1FEB16


MARTIN O'MALLEY is a progressive,  he just never got the attention his campaign should have. I hope he realizes that the best chance he has to see his policies enacted is by asking the delegates he has won in Iowa to support Bernie Sanders and that he campaigns for Bernie. From the +Washington Post .....
   
Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley was set to announce the suspension of his presidential campaign on Monday night, following a dismal showing in the Iowa caucuses that effectively ended his long-simmering White House ambitions.
O’Malley, who had started laying the groundwork for a presidential bid following his 2010 reelection as governor, was lagging far behind former secretary of state Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. With nearly 70 percent of precincts reporting, O’Malley registered support from only 1 percent of voters.
O’Malley was expected to announce to a gathering of supporters Monday night that he is suspending his campaign, according to someone directly familiar with his plans.
Campaign 2016  Email Updates
“In a tough, unprecedented year, O’Malley spent more time in Iowa than any other candidate and remained the most accessible,” the associate said. “He ran an energetic and honorable campaign — leading the field with the most bold progressive policy proposals, and he successfully pushed the other candidates on gun safety, immigration, and climate policy.”
O’Malley’s effort to cast himself as at the forefront of a “new generation of leadership” never gained traction, as he struggled to raise money and get a toehold in the polls after formally announcing his bid in late May in Baltimore.
Though O’Malley, 53, appeared to be well-liked by many of the Iowa caucus-goers whose support he tirelessly courted, he was unable to make a compelling argument as to why they should side with him over Clinton, a Democrat backed by much of the party establishment, and Sanders, an insurgent candidate who captivated a restless left wing of the party.
In some respects, O’Malley’s failure to connect was surprising given a litany of accomplishments as governor that made liberals sworn: legalization of same-sex marriage, repeal of the death penalty and passage of Maryland’s version of the Dream Act to benefit college-bound undocumented immigrants.
O’Malley’s bid suffered a series of setbacks — some of his own making, some not — that began even before he declared his candidacy.
Anthony G. Brown, O’Malley’s hand-picked successor for governor of Maryland, a heavily Democratic state, suffered a humiliating defeat to a Republican in a 2014 race that in many respects turned into a referendum of O’Malley’s tenure, which included not only his progressive policy victories but also as a series of tax increases. The loss gave pause to some in the Democratic donor community just as they were evaluating O’Malley as a credible Clinton alternative.
The month before O’Malley announced his bid, riots broke out in Baltimore following the death of a young black man in police custody. The episode sparked renewed criticism of O’Malley’s policing policies during the seven years he had served as mayor of the city, with his critics charging his “zero tolerance” approach strained relations with the African American community.
The riots undercut O’Malley’s ability to sell Baltimore’s renaissance, a theme he pushed during a couple of years on the Democratic party dinner circuit during his run-up to launching a full-fledged presidential campaign.
After remaining coy about his intentions during the first half of last year, O’Malley announced his candidacy in late May, more than four months after he stepped down as governor. He said he needed the time to generate some income for his family, but many Democratic analysts argued that he had lost valuable time trying to become better known on the national stage.
By the time O’Malley did make his bid official, interest in Sanders, a self-described “democratic socialist” whom pundits initially wrote off as a fringe candidate, was starting to swell. As Sanders drew eye-poppingly large crowds on the campaign trail, he became the go-to candidate for many party activists who viewed Clinton as too tied to Wall Street and corporate interests.
Early on, O’Malley adopted much of the “rigged economy” rhetoric of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who had been urged to run for president by legions of left-wing activists. Once it became clear the vast majority of her supporters had found a home with Sanders, O’Malley recast his candidacy as one of a leader ‘with 15 years of executive experience” — something voters didn’t seem to be looking for in a cycle where anger and anti-establishment rhetoric has been rewarded.
For O’Malley, the race was a constant struggle to become better known. He cried foul when the Democratic National Committee announced that it would limit the number of Democratic presidential debates to six, only four of which would take place before the first nominating contests in Iowa. O’Malley accused the DNC of “circling the wagons” to protect Clinton. He got attention for the charge but didn’t seem to benefit much from the debates that were held.
Even as his prospects appeared dim, O’Malley remained a happy warrior on the campaign trail. Ever since his days a Baltimore city council member, he has had a side career as a musician, fronting a Celtic rock band called O’Malley’s March. At the end of his campaign events, he would frequently play a song for his audiences on a borrowed guitar.
O’Malley’s optimism seemed to spring from his experiences decades earlier as a young campaign staffer on the 1984 presidential hopeful Gary Hart. In the months leading up to the Iowa caucuses that year, Hart lagged in the polls. He managed to pull off a better-than-expected showing in Iowa, however, which catapulted him to a win in New Hampshire and made him the chief challenger for the nomination going forward to establishment favorite Walter Mondale.
Throughout this campaign, O’Malley’s fundraising was dwarfed by that of his two rivals. During the final quarter of the year, he reported receipts of $1.5 million, including a $500,000 loan, compared to $37 million for Clinton and $33.6 million for Sanders. The disparity hurt O’Malley in a number of ways, including making it impossible for him to air television ads in the early nominating states, as Clinton and Sanders have done.
In the closing weeks of the race, O’Malley remained a figure still unknown among large swaths of the American public. Shortly before the Iowa caucuses, late night television host Jimmy Kimmel ran a segment in which an interviewer showed people on the streets of Los Angeles a picture of O’Malley and asked if they knew who he was. It took more than a dozen tries before someone could identify him.
It’s unclear what O’Malley’s next step will be. He is a lawyer by training, and has served as a visiting professor at the business school at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. O’Malley has said he has no interested in a Cabinet position in another Democratic administration.
John Wagner is a political reporter covering the race for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.

Campaign  2016

Iowa caucus election results

The Iowa caucuses are Feb. 1. Delegates at stake: 30 Republican, 44 Democratic.
84% reporting
0:09

Democratic

  • Leader
  • Winner
  • Population
  • Updates
Des MoinesCedar RapidsCouncil Bluffs
CANDIDATESDEs%DEL
Candidate illustration
Clinton
57950%18
Candidate illustration
Sanders
56849%19
Candidate illustration
O'Malley
71%0
Candidate illustration
Uncommitted
10%0
84.5% reporting
0:09

Republican

  • Leader
  • Winner
  • Population
  • Updates
Des MoinesCedar RapidsCouncil Bluffs
CANDIDATEVOTES%DEL
Candidate illustration
Cruz
43,55028%--
Candidate illustration
Trump
38,35824%--
Candidate illustration
Rubio
36,06523%--
Candidate illustration
Carson
14,6099%--
Candidate illustration
Paul
7,1035%--
What to watch for in Iowa
Observers often focus on the top three finishers in Iowa. Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are in a tight race on the Democratic side. Donald Trump leads the GOP, followed by Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio in a more distant third, according to the latest polling. 
Results are expected after 8:30 p.m. Eastern time.
Past votes
Whom did voters pick in previous elections and who won the nomination? Here's a historic look at votes cast in Iowa. Dots show what percent of the vote a candidate received and white dots show who won the eventual nomination. Nominees with a star  went on to be elected president.
0%20%40%60%80%DEMOCRATIC20122008ObamaNominated2004Kerry2000Gore19961992Clinton1988Dukakis1984Mondale1980Carter1976Carter1972McGovern
0%20%40%60%80%REPUBLICANRomneyNominatedMcCainBushDoleBushReaganFord
Source: Post research
Latest polls
Here’s a look at how the presidential candidates are faring in Iowa. Each dot represents a candidate's five most recent surveys. Filled dots show a candidate's polling average.
In the Republican race, Donald Trump is in the lead with six points over Ted Cruz. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders trails Hillary Clinton by one point.
Last updated: Jan. 31
0%10%20%30%40%50%Clinton46%45% min46% average48% maxSanders45%424549O'Malley4%346Trump31%28% min31% average33% maxCruz25%232529Rubio15%111518Carson9%7910Paul4%245Bush4%244Fiorina2%122Huckabee2%223Kasich2%123Christie2%123Santorum<1%00.82
Source: Washington Post analysis and data from Huffington Post's Pollster.
Independent expenditures
Super PACs have spent $43.3 million supporting and opposing current presidential candidates in Iowa. The super PACs are technically independent. They are required to identify the money they spend in favor of or against specific candidates.
Last updated: Feb. 1, 2016
OPPOSESUPPORT$0$2M$4M$6M$8M$10M$12M-$4M-$2M$0Bush$14M$4.2kRubio$8.8M$1.4MCruz$4.0M$2.1MPaul$3.0M$210Huckabee$2.7M$40kFiorina$1.0MCarson$610kChristie$590k$84kClinton$490k$82kO'Malley$380kSanders$200k$780kTrump$110k$3.2MSantorum$90kKasich$17k$8.9k$0$2M$4M$6M$8M$10M$12M-$4M-$2M$0
Note: Candidates with no associated independent spending not shown.
Source: Federal Election Commission
Top national fundraisers
Area of rectangles represents total campaign contributions for each candidate nationally. The shaded portion  represents cash on hand.
Last updated: Feb. 1, 2016
$114M
Clinton
$74.9M
Sanders
$4.78M
O'Malley
$54.0M
Carson
$47.0M
Cruz
$32.7M
Rubio
$31.9M
Bush
$19.4M
Trump
$11.5M
Paul
$11.3M
Fiorina
$7.56M
Kasich
$7.16M
Christie
$3.95M
Huckabee
$1.24M
Santorum
$214k
Gilmore
Note: A previous version of this graphic displayed net rather than total contributions.
Source: Federal Election Commission