buttigieg, tom steyer, senator michael bennet, senator byron e sanders, patrick, senator elizabeth warren, senator amy klobuchar and andrew yang. watch live on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the free c-span app. >> the new hampshire primary is tuesday watch results in candidate speeches starting at 7:30 p.m. eastern live on c-span, c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. ♪ ♪ >> en campaign 2020 coverage continues now with remarks by vermont senator bernie sanders. he spoke to reporters in new hampshire about his campaign and the ongoing counts from iowa's first the nation caucuses. this is 25 minutes.

>> we are our last i heard in manchester, holding a press conference that should have occurred three nights ago into moyne iowa. but, for the inability of the iowa democratic party, to count votes in a timely fashion. that screwup has been extremely unfair to the people of iowa, it has been unfair to the candidates, all of the candidates, and all of their supporters. so what i want to do today, three days late, is to thank the people of iowa for the very strong victory they gave us at the iowa caucuses on monday night. even though the vote tabulations have been extremely slow, we are now at

a point with some 97% of the precincts reporting, where our campaign is winning the popular initial vote by some 6000 votes. in other words from 6000 more iowa ones came out on caucus nights to support our candidacy then the candidacy of anyone else. and when 6000 more people come out for you in an election than your nearest opponent, we here in northern new england, call that a victory. further, and iowa as you know there is a realignment process where people who supported a candidate with less than 15% in the room, can cast a vote in a second round for a

different candidate. that is the realignment process. and that process, we are now ahead by over 2500 votes. in an election with voter turnout of approximately 180,000 people, and with eight strong candidates competing, a victory margin of some 6000 votes is pretty decisive. and the reason that happened is because of the unprecedented grassroots effort of our volunteers. thousands of volunteers and iowa, knocked on hundreds of doors, they did that in the snow, they did that in the rain, and they did that in freezing temperature. and i just want to take this opportunity to thank all of those volunteers for the

extraordinary efforts that they made, which made our victory possible. now as everyone knows, the iowa process is enormously complicated in my view. it is far too complicated. one word if i might about the so-called safe delegate equivalents that the cable news and political pundits have spent so much time pontificating about. because of changes, the democratic party rules that were widely supported during the democratic unity reform commission, these estate delegate equivalents have greatly diminished importance from past caucuses. and they should. in the past, at candidate with more delegates than the state and county conventions could actually change the number of national delegates. delegates that go to the

national convention from that allocated on caucus night. that is no longer the case. as it stands right now, to the best of my knowledge, either i or mr. buttigieg will end with a tiny fraction of an advantage in the sde's. i think he is ahead now by three and a half state delegates out of 2150 total number of delegates. that made change and we may go in the lead by a little bit. given the remaining precincts outstanding and mathematical errors, which we are discovering in the data, we could well end up with more sde's. but this difference, no matter who ensures ahead in the end, is a meaningless because we are both likely to receive the same number of national delegates to the democratic national convention in milwaukee. i think right now it's about 11 each. it will probably go up a bit.

those national delegates, not the state delegates, are the ones that really matter in the nominating process. and now that iowa is hopefully finally behind us, let me take this opportunity to thank the thousands of volunteers here in new hampshire who are out today on the streets, in the rain and snow, are knocking on doors, making the phone calls that have to be made, using social media in order to help us win here in iowa. last point that i want to make, is i have been asked over and over again, why i believe that we are the campaign to defeat donald trump. let me tell you why that is the case. at the end of the day, in order to defeat donald trump, who will be a very formidable opponent, we are going to need an unprecedented grassroots

and movement of folks who are prepared to knock on doors and do all of the things that our supporters did in iowa and they are doing right here in new hampshire. they are doing it right now in california, nevada, south carolina and all across this country. our campaign, i believe, is the campaign that is putting together a multigenerational, multiracial, process in which we are bringing people together. around an agenda that is speaking to the working families of this country, we are not out raising huge sums of money from millionaires and billionaires. we have an agenda that is going to take on the millionaires and the billionaires. we have an agenda which is going to deal with income and wealth inequality, we have an agenda which is going to raise wages for the working families of this country. an agenda which says finally,

after a hundred years of talk, now is the time to do what every other major country on earth is doing and that is to guarantee healthcare for all people as a human rights. we have the grassroots movement, we have the agenda that wins, i am confident we are going to do really well here in new hampshire having one iowa. we are going to do very wellin nevada and a lot better than people think in south carolina emily got a good shah at california. the bottom line is i believe we are well-positioned to win the democratic nomination and to death eats the most dangerous president in the modern history of this country. thank you all very much. cbs will start the in the gone. >> senator perez is calling for a recount in this process is that something you would support and do you trust that the people running the party and iowa are effective in

doing their jobs? >> all i can say is what i just said. we one and eight person election by some 6000 votes. that is not going to change. what may be changed in this so-called recounts, is a few sde's here. but at the end of the day as i indicated, they are not important. what the sde's will do is they'll go to a convention in iowa. they will determine who the iowa chairman's. they will determine the rules of the iowa democratic party's. i guess that's important for the aisle democrats but not for the rest of the country. at the end of the day, i expect will definitely happen is that mr. would adjudge and i will end up with the same amount of delegates, 11 now each, probably a little bit more. that is what can happen in a given change. and what's not going to change in terms of a popular vote we won a decisive victory. see max's center there has

been a lot of accounting issues and issues of the iowa democratic party. how should people respond to that should they trust our democratic party? >> i really do feel bad for the people of iowa. i have been all over the state, as you well know. we have held i think a hundred and 20 rallies and town meetings and these are serious people who are trying to do the best they can in determining who the best candidate for president is. i think what has happened with the iowa democratic party is an outrage. that they were that unprepared , that they put forth such a complicated process and relied on untested technology. and also to be honest with you, they have relied on thousands of volunteers, good people who have to get up and go to work the next day. to do what is enormously complicated. i think there is very little doubt that what happened on

monday night, that type of process, that complicated process, that is never ever going to happen again. >> mayor pete has been declaring a win for days now. why should people believe you are victory speech over his? >> because i got 6000 more votes. where i come from when you've got 6000 more votes he regarded to be the winner. >> senator huge part of the recount is from the satellite caucuses which you are doing very wellin. are you worried about why this recount was called, specifically with those votes in mind? >> no i don't think i just learned about this a few minutes ago i think if they do redo this recount it will be for every person in the state. in terms of the satellite caucuses, the purpose of the satellite caucus which is a good purpose, one of the problems that you have with the caucuses it takes place at

7:00 o'clock in the evening. what happens if you are working person? what if your mama to kids and you can't come out to a caucus? what i think is the iowa democratic party tried to do correctly said if you can't come out, if you are student in a night class we will provide you an opportunity to vote. and i think most the people who voted are working people and we did very wellin the satellite caucuses and very proud of that. >> joe biden said yesterday that donald trump is desperate to pin the socialist label on our party. why are you so certain that your own self identification won't have serious blowback in november? >> let me tell you, my good friend joe when we are dealing with someone like donald trump who lies all of the time. he will pin any label that he wants on any candidate. it doesn't really matter. but i think the agenda that we have is the agenda that speaks

to the working families of this country. and let me type something else. we will exposed from, not only for the liar, pathological liar that he is, but for that. [inaudible] this is a man that is all of you know i spent half of his life demonizing the undocumented in this country. he just hates the undocumented, how terrible. yet as a private businessman, he hired quite knowledgeably, hundreds and hundreds of undocumented workers in his resorts and in construction projects so he could save money. this is the gaia says i hate outsourcing, we've got to make sure that corporations create jobs here in the united states and not go to cheap labor countries abroad. this is a businessman he manufactured his product and low wage countries abroad. in turkey and china, and other

low-wage countries. he is a fraud, he is a liar, and we will expose him for what he is. this is a man, who during his campaign said my tax plan is not going to benefit the wealthy it's going to benefit working families. 83% of the benefits of his tax plan have gone to the top 1% over the last ten years and we have absurdity like companies like amazon which made $10 billion of profit last year end not paying a nickel in federal income taxes. so we will have an opportunity during this campaign to exposed trump, not only is a liar but as a fraud. >> thank you, senator sanders, so michael bloomberg is skipping the early states. there will be a debate tomorrow night and he won't be there. do you think it's fair that the democratic party altered or revised the rules. let me at least put the question out there. you know i'm going.

do you think it is fair that the rules are now allowing michael bloomberg to come in and i am looking at you as i see year slogan they are burning the billionaire so could you comment also so could you comment on not only the debate, but even the more money that bloomberg is putting in the process? >> thank you for the question and i knew the question was going to be. i think it's an outrage. rules are rules. and people like hooley on castro, played by the rules and campaign really hard. cory booker played by the rules, tulsa gabbert played by the rules, andrew yang played by the rules. they were here in new hampshire, they were in iowa, they have worked really, really hard. and based on the rules determined by the dnc, they were unable to participate in

one or more of the debates. and now suddenly, a guy comes and who does not campaign one bit in iowa, new hampshire, he is not on the ballot. i'm guessing not in nevada or sarah entrench south carolina but he is worth $55 billion. so i guess if you're worth $55 billion you can get the rules change for debate. that answer your question i think that is an absolute outrage and really unfair. and i say this because these other guys are my friends. people like cory booker, hooley on castro, tulsa gabbert, they worked really, really hard. they were excluded, but they are not multibillionaire's that's why. >> two questions,. >> will see how the first ones goes. [laughter] >> a lot of democrats are going to hear what you're saying this morning. members are people who are actually members of the democratic party will say why not wait? why not let ila finish counting first don't you want to wait to claim victory.

is it confusing the process by climbing victory? >> given the fact that we have waited three days and now there's talk of another recount, maybe we want the decision of the aisle caucus before the november election. but i think what is very clear, two points. what is not going to changes that we won a very significant victory in the popular vote, we won a very significant victory in the realignment vote. and if you go out on the streets, you go to new hampshire and vermont you ask people how do you determine who wins an election? well from where i come from and where everybody else comes from, the person who gets the most votes wins. we got the most votes and as i said before and i've got to say this to my friends in the media, you guys have been putting too much emphasis on these ftes. there is confusion that the sde's will determine the number of national delegates. national delegates are important, sde's do not

determine. they determine who the party chair is, the rules of the islet democratic party. so as i said earlier, in terms of the basic question coming out of bio how many delegates do we have? how many elizabeth have? counted his people to judge hapless mark that is not determined by the sde's. so i do think it's fair to say that we won the caucus. >> was or something specific, you talked about a multiracial grassroots movement in iowa. whether something specific you did in iowa either targeting certain communities are certain part of the state that you want to survey doing again down the road and the other states? >> the whole cost of water campaign is about is to understand that in america we have one of the lowest voter turnout of any major country on earth. the reason for that are many fold. one of them is that a whole

lot of working-class people here in new hampshire, vermont, all over the country are working two or three jobs. they can't afford childcare, they spent half of their income and housing, they can't afford to send their kids to college, and they are saying who is concerned about me? i turn on booktv there's -- is anybody worrying about me that i'm going to retire at 65 and i don't have anything in the bank for retirement? who's worried about me or is it just the billionaires and the wealthy who determine what goes on in washington? a lot of this people say it's nonsense, while what i want to waste my vote the whole system is so corrupt. and the essence of our campaign is a talk to those people, to knock on those doors. the doors of black voters and white voters and latino voters and asian american and native american voters and say you know what, if we all stand together, we can take on the

billionaire class which now dominates what goes on in washington both politically and from an economic perspective. yes we can create an economy and government that works for all of us. >> this one is about the inconsistencies we are seeing in the results because this is the first time that we have had the popular vote results. does this make you question the results of the 2016 iowa caucuses and do you think should be caucus system at all? >> that's a good question and i don't want to revisit 2016. all i can say is you are right. we fought for it, the fact that we now have clear results of the popular vote is something that we fought for it that did not exist before in 2016. now i can't give you a definitive answer with what happened in 2016, i don't know when i don't think anybody knows. it turned out that in 2016, i think secretary clinton got

one or two more delegates than we got in the state process. there is some supposition that we actually won the popular vote. i cannot say that definitively. i can say definitively that in 2020 we did win the popular vote. i want to reiterate we have a hundred and 80000 people voting you have eight candidates and when you win the popular vote by 6000 votes that is a pretty good victory. >> you have said the process and iowa should not repeat itself. but do you think the caucus itself should remain first? >> i think it depends how you do it. but the iowa caucus is much much much too complicated. on one hand you got to determine the popular vote, that you've got to do. if you want to talk about realignment and you could make the argument that okay what happens if somebody doesn't get their 15% should those people have options to go elsewhere.

but then when you get into calculating these sde's, that is enormously complicated. the answer is, what i just told you what i believe to be the case. we are going to win by 6000 votes, we will end up with the same number of delegates to the democratic national convention as will mr. buttigieg. does that sound right? one would think if you win a pretty good victory of the popular vote you would get more national delegates. it's a complicated formula and so forth. so what will not happen again if i have anything to say about it, is a caucus this complicated that will not happen again. maybe one more question. >> senator, a key part of your argument of the general election is that you will boost turnout by bringing all these people into the process that have not been voting. i would turn out does not look like it was higher than it was last time.

does that concern you? >> it does, i would like to see a higher turnout and i think i could speak for every other candidate. but this is what i do want to say. i want to say i am very excited and what i think bodes well for the overall 2020 election and that is last year, in 2016, and the iowa caucus, in terms of voters -- young people from 17 to 29, 18% of the total vote, 18% was under 29. this election, 24% -- that's a very significant, very significant increase in young people participating in the iowa caucus. and actually, as i understand it turns out to be even higher percentage wise than the turnout of young people of 2008 when there is a massive turnout and obama won.

i believe as i've said many times, that the young people of this country, the younger generation is the most progressive young generation in modern history of this country. and to defeat time, we are going to have to mobilize young people who are concerned, deeply about climate change, they are concerned deeply about racism and sexism and homophobia and xenophobia, they are concerned and very worried about the kind of student debt that they are carrying. they're worried about the cost of housing. if we can mobilize, and iowa is a good start in that process. if we can mobilize and bring young people into the political process, i think it will have a very positive and profound impact on the general election. thank you all

>> during this election season the candidates beyond the talking points are only revealed over time but since you can't be everywhere there is c-span with our campaign 2020 programming differs from all other political coverage for one simple reason, it is c-span but we brought to your unfiltered view of government every day since 1979 and this year we are bringing you unfiltered view of the people seeking to steer this government this november. in other words, your future but this election season see it direct and unfiltered. see the biggest picture for yourself and make up your own mind. with seeping c-span camping 2020 brought to you as a public service by your television provider.