On Monday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton beat Senator Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Iowa caucus by only .3 percent of the vote, making it one of the closest caucus races in history, according to the Associated Press. In fact, in as many as six precincts, a coin toss reportedly decided the winner in ties, according to NPR. Sanders, a democratic socialist, had been written off by many pundits and analysts early in the race as a fringe candidate. Martin O’Malley, the third Democratic candidate, suspended his campaign after the Iowa results. Why do you believe the results were so close, and what does this mean for the remaining Democratic primaries and the general election?


Dor Cohen ’16

The results in the Iowa caucus were more a reflection of Hillary Clinton’s weaknesses than Bernie Sanders’ strengths. Hillary is widely viewed as untrustworthy and cold and has been unable to garner the youth vote, and this turned many Iowa voters away from her. The race won’t be an easy one for her going forward; it will probably remain tight until the Democratic National Convention. That said, Hillary will probably still receive the nomination. Sanders has almost no congressional support, and his proposals are not feasible, both of which worry Democrats about his electability in the general election and their ability to retake the Senate. Iowa’s biggest impact is to alert Hillary to her campaign’s biggest flaws, which she can work on until July to improve her standing.

Dor Cohen is the president of Brandeis Conservatives. He is also a columnist for the Justice.

Paul Sindberg ’18

I believe the results were so close because Sanders’ anti-establishment message of hope is really resonating with our younger generation. We see the current establishment as one that reinforces extant systems of oppression — by pledging to take tangible steps against these systems, Sanders has engaged with an energized and invested base of support. Clinton, however, is campaigning to youth who view her as irrevocably participatory in that establishment. When she discusses her time as Secretary of State, or her speech as First Lady advocating women’s rights to the United Nations, we are reminded that the progressive work she’s done has come consistently from a position of power. When Sanders discusses his attendance of the 1963 March on Washington, or his leadership of a 1962 sit-in against housing inequality, we are reminded that he has fought against this power for decades. The Iowa caucuses have proved that Sanders is more than a leftist curmudgeon — he’s possible. That, I think, is incredibly exciting.

Paul Sindberg is the treasurer of Brandeis Democrats as well as the Executive Senator and Class of 2018 Senator with the Student Union.

Iona Feldman ’17

Sanders’ near tie with Clinton in Iowa is a testament to his campaign’s effective progress over the last nine months in getting its message out across the country. However, he will need much more than this to win the nomination. The highly undemocratic “superdelegate” system gives a vote to 712 politicians and party officials, most of whom are firmly aligned with the Democratic Party establishment. 356 of them have already endorsed Clinton, in contrast with Sanders’ 14. In order to overcome this disadvantage, Sanders must lead by a wide margin across the nation, not merely tie. Whether that can happen, we shall see. Should he succeed in winning the nomination, the Democratic Party might be pushed in a slightly more principled social democratic direction. But if Clinton wins, we will have another general election with a corporate and hawkish centrist candidate representing what passes for the U.S. mainstream left.

Iona Feldman is a member of Brandeis Climate Justice.

Isaac Kurtz ’19

The Democratic Party saw the closest results in Iowa Caucus history last week, as Senator Sanders launched a historic comeback against the seemingly unbeatable Secretary Clinton. Sanders was able to capture 84 percent of the vote from the youth (18-29) and saw huge turnout from “very liberal” voters. Sanders hopes to build off of these results in Vermont, where he already enjoys a double-digit lead over Clinton. However, it seems difficult to see how Sanders will maintain momentum as he looks to capture future primaries. Sanders has had months to build elaborate networks of support running dozens of town halls and spending millions on campaign ads in Iowa. Translating this to a national strategy will be no small feat for the Sanders campaign. Alternatively, Clinton has been building a national campaign network and is much better prepared for more primaries across the nation heading up to Super Tuesday. Moreover, Clinton gains much of her support from older voters, a population much easier to mobilize nationally than the youth, with their historically low voter turnout. While Sanders declared the start of a political revolution following the “virtual tie” in Iowa, he will also need to create a national strategy if he wants the Democratic Party to feel the Bern.

Isaac Kurtz is a member of Brandeis Bridges as well as a member of J Street U.

Catherine Rosch ’16

It is always hard to predict the nominee from the Iowa caucus; Rick Santorum won in 2012, after all. That being said, I think it is very clear that Bernie Sanders is more than just a fringe candidate and that his message of social justice and combating all forms of inequality resonate with many voters, regardless of party affiliation. Americans are angry and frustrated with the political establishment, and I think it is clear that both parties are seeking an alternative. Bernie Sanders represents a break from the establishment and has a message about inequality on all axes that speak to many Democrats who have felt ignored or left out by both the party and the system as a whole. Regardless of the primary outcomes, both parties will have to deal with the fact that many voters are simply fed up with politics as usual and will have to address concerns raised by candidates like Bernie Sanders.

Catherine Rosch is a co-president of Brandeis Democrats. She is also an associate editor for the Justice.