The Daily - The Latest: The South Carolina Debate

Episode Date: February 26, 2020

On the debate stage in Charleston, candidates went after Senator Bernie Sanders, painting his potential nomination as dangerous for the party and questioning his chances of winning against President Trump.“The Latest,” from the team behind “The Daily,” brings you the most important developments on today’s biggest news stories. You can find more information about it here.

Senator Bernie Sanders won the primary last night and will take that momentum into Nevada. And now I'm delighted to bring you some pretty good news. We have now won the Nevada caucus. Well, all eyes are turning to South Carolina, the next battleground state in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Bernie Sanders is the undisputed frontrunner among Democratic presidential candidates hoping to challenge Donald Trump. Hey, it's Alex Burns in New York. So last week in Nevada, we saw the candidates start going after each other more intensely than ever before. Days before the caucuses there as Bernie Sanders was emerging as a progressive front-runner, with none of the more moderate candidates

willing to drop out, and Mike Bloomberg fragmenting the vote even further. Good evening and welcome. The Democratic presidential primary here in South Carolina, the first primary in the South, is just four days away. And Super Tuesday is just a week away. And this is the biggest primary day of the year, as voters in 14 states cast ballots. And many of them tell us they have not actually made up their mind. This week, with days to go until the South Carolina primary and signs that Sanders is gaining among African-American voters, things were even more wild, and the debate moderators

totally failed to keep control of the event, which didn't help. Mr. Steyer, Mr. Steyer. I think we're talking about a match. We will get to you, Mr. Sanders. Let's talk about it. Can I say something? Look, first of all, let me go. Tom, I think she was talking about my plan, not yours.

Right away, as expected, it was a Sanders pile-on. Bernie and I agree on a lot of things, but I think I would make a better president than Bernie. The candidates were trying to convey that nominating Bernie Sanders would be dangerous, that to nominate a Democratic Socialist is to deliver a second term to Trump. We will elect Bernie. Bernie will lose to Donald Trump. And Donald Trump and the House and the Senate and some of the state houses will all go red. Donald Trump and the House and the Senate and some of the state houses will all go red and then between gerrymandering and appointing judges for the next 20 or 30 years, we're going to live with this catastrophe.

And cost Democrats their House majority and imperil their efforts to win the Senate in 2020. The time has come for us to stop acting like the presidency is the only office that matters. Not only is this a way to get Donald Trump re-elected, we got a House to worry about. We got a Senate to worry about. And this is really important. Pete mentioned, I'm hearing my name mentioned a little bit tonight.

I wonder why, and maybe, you know. But what we saw from Sanders was a candidate totally claiming his mantle and digging in on some of his most controversial positions. On Medicare for all. What we need to do is to do what every other major country on earth does, guarantee health care to all people. On Israel.

I am very proud of being Jewish. I actually lived in Israel for some months. But what I happen to believe is that right now, sadly, tragically, in Israel, through Bibi Netanyahu, you have a reactionary racist who is now running that country. One of the most revealing exchanges was on Cuba. You've praised the Chinese Communist Party for lifting more people out of extreme poverty than any other country. You also have a track record of expressing sympathy for socialist governments in Cuba and in Nicaragua. Can Americans trust that a democratic socialist president will not give authoritarians a free pass? I have opposed authoritarianism all over the world.

When Sanders is asked why he had praised some accomplishments of the Castro regime there. Dictatorship there, of course you have a dictatorship in Cuba. What I said is what Barack Obama said in terms of Cuba, that Cuba made progress on education. Yes, I think. Really? Really? Literacy programs are bad. What Barack Obama said is they made great progress on education and health care.

That was Barack Obama. I talked to Barack Obama. Excuse me. And rather than try to back away from it, Sanders is essentially saying, yes, I said it. I stand by it. I was right, and I'm not pivoting. Occasionally, it might be a good idea to be honest about American foreign policy. And that includes the fact that America has overthrown governments all over the world,

in Chile, in Guatemala, in Iran. And when dictatorships, whether it is the Chinese or the Cubans, do something good, you acknowledge that. This is a core tenet of Sanders' worldview, his belief that the United States has often been a disruptive or even a destructive force overseas. And by standing by that view, even as he becomes a frontrunner for a major party's presidential nomination, he is reinforcing one of his essential political calling cards, his consistency. His ability to say, these are the views I've had for decades, I'm right now, I've been right for 40 years.

And many voters really admire this about him. Thank you. Your time's up. Vice President Biden. But the latest is that there's one issue where Sanders can't claim that kind of consistency and didn't try. You know, we talk about progressive. Let's talk about being progressive. Walking distance here is Mother Emanuel Church. Nine people shot dead by a white supremacist. Bernie voted five times against the Brady Bill and wanted a waiting period. No, let me finish.

And waited a waiting period of 12 hours. I'm not saying he's responsible for the nine deaths, but that man would not have been able to get that weapon with the waiting period had been, what I suggest, until you are cleared. JOHN YANG, For most of his career, Sanders opposed crucial forms of gun regulation, including the landmark Brady bill in 1993. And he voted to shield gun manufacturers from lawsuits. AMY WALTER, The Cook Political Report, I want to allow Senator Sanders to respond, because you have gone after the insurance industry, you've taken on pharmaceutical companies,

and you've taken on big tech. Why did you vote repeatedly to give gun manufacturers a pass? Well, you know, Joe has voted for terrible trade agreements. No, no, no, no, no. Sanders seems to know this is a problem, whereas on all these other issues, he's just digging in his heels under attack. Here he says, yes, I made a mistake.

I have cast thousands of votes, including bad votes. That was a bad vote. And this is the rare part of his record that undercuts his claim to total consistency and authenticity over the years. I have today a D- voting record from the NRA. But Sanders' opponents didn't let him off the hook. It's a chance for even candidates like Bloomberg, a former Republican, to question Sanders'

claims to progressive purity and to total consistency over a long career, and to do it heading into this critical next state. The issue of gun control has hurt Sanders badly in South Carolina in the past. It's an issue that matters a lot to African-American voters there, and in 2016, Hillary Clinton used it to great effect in the state. This time, even Mike Bloomberg managed to get his footing in a handful of important exchanges, including one in which he accused Sanders of having supported the NRA. Support of the NRA, and certainly some of Sanders of having supported the NRA. Support of the NRA and certainly some of the Sanders's support of the NRA.

But we can do this. So that's the latest. We'll see on Saturday whether Sanders can manage a decisive breakthrough in South Carolina or whether Joe Biden or someone else might still make a comeback.