Why Bernie Sanders's Rhode Island win is more than a tiny victory

Of the five Northeastern states up for grabs Tuesday, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders walked away with one win: Rhode Island. Why did the nation's smallest state vote big for Sanders?

|
John Minchillo/AP
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., speaks during an election night campaign event at the Big Sandy Superstore Arena, Tuesday, April 26, 2016, in Huntington, W.Va.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton almost had a winning night across the board Tuesday night. Almost. 

Mrs. Clinton won Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut, and Delaware. But her rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders managed to eke out a win of his own in Rhode Island. As the primary season winds down, Clinton has all-but clinched the nomination with 813 more pledged delegates than Senator Sanders. Clinton has 2,151 to Sanders with 1,338, the Associated Press reports. To clinch the nomination, a candidate needs 2,383.

But the Vermonter isn't giving up just yet.

“The people in every state in this country should have the right to determine who they want as president and what the agenda of the Democratic Party should be,” Sanders said in a press release Tuesday. “That’s why we are in this race until the last vote is cast.”

Sanders recently portrayed his opponent’s success as a regional phenomenon, likely to fade when the primary elections move away from the South. 

“Tuesday’s results proved him wrong,” reports The New York Times’ Michael Barbaro. “But her defeat in Rhode Island will sting somewhat because it feeds Mr. Sanders’s argument that so long as he is winning (even small states), he should remain in the Democratic race.”

And just like the New York primary last week, the results of Tuesday’s Democratic primaries were not gamechanging. 

As The Christian Science Monitor’s Peter Grier concluded after New York’s primary, “the results don’t add or subtract momentum from anyone as much as show long-existing strengths and weaknesses and focus our attention on ... important, obvious conclusions about the nomination end games.” Primarily, Sanders can’t win the nomination through pledged delegates alone: he will need to take the fight all the way to the Democratic convention in July. 

And while Sanders’ win in Rhode Island backs up his argument that he still has a place in the Democratic race, it also spoke loudly of his enduring weaknesses: minority voters, party elites, and city wins. 

When comparing unlabelled, statewide maps of Clinton and Sanders victories, it would seem as if the two candidates had equal support. (Or in the case of New York, where the Vermont Senator won 49 of the state’s 62 counties, would look like Sanders had a resounding win.) But after comparing maps where major cities are identified, it is clear how Clinton won. On Tuesday, Clinton won the populated, state epicenters of Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Hartford, Conn., and New Haven, Conn. Big cities – with their large minority populations – have long been a weakness of Sanders.

But the reasons why Sanders lost Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland are the same factors that worked in Sanders’ favor in Rhode Island. Of the five contests Tuesday, Rhode Island was the only state with an open primary, allowing votes from Sanders’s Independent, non-Democrat-registered supporters. And Rhode Island is predominately white, with an African American population under eight percent – the smallest of all five states. Comparatively, 22.2 percent of Delaware and 30.3 percent of Maryland is African American.

“For all of that, the race isn’t over.... It’s likely, in fact, that he’ll continue to have some state wins. What’s changed is that Sanders appears to accept that the once-narrow path to winning the nomination through delegate math has now become impassable,” writes the Washington Post’s Philip Bump. “This isn’t how Bernie Sanders wanted the day to end. But a year ago, he and his activists – and his critics – would never have believed that an ending like this would be possible.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why Bernie Sanders's Rhode Island win is more than a tiny victory
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/0427/Why-Bernie-Sanders-s-Rhode-Island-win-is-more-than-a-tiny-victory
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe