One of the more irritating narratives of this political season has been the one that since Bernie Sanders is from Vermont, a landslide win in New Hampshire doesn’t count because he is from “neighboring Vermont”. So? Hillary represented New York in the United States Senate, which according to Google is exactly 37 miles away (at Vermont’s narrowest point). Come on, that is not exactly the dark side of the moon.
The wider northern part of Vermont is an entire 89 miles across. I think people in New Hampshire are all too aware of who Hillary is, and her New York values. Looking at Iowa, being from neighboring Wisconsin certainly didn’t help Scott Walker. He never got off the launch pad. Bernie seems to be the only one they are laying this political osmosis thing on that because his state physically touches another, some sort of geographic oozing takes place that guarantees him a win.
I don’t buy it. Hillary ran in New Hampshire in ’08 and won, that state knows her all too well. I think they know Bernie quite well also. If the polls translate into votes Tuesday, they will have chosen between two people they know intimately. I think it is a clear rejection of HRC. Geographic oozing to the contrary. Vermont also touches Massachusetts and New York, does that mean Bernie can put those in the ‘win’ column?