Bernie Sanders Will Win Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. Here's Why.

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders participates in the NBC News -YouTube Democratic Candidates Debate on Januar
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders participates in the NBC News -YouTube Democratic Candidates Debate on January 17, 2016 at the Gaillard Center in Charleston, South Carolina.. / AFP / TIMOTHY A. CLARY (Photo credit should read TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/Getty Images)

Bernie Sanders will win the first four contests of the 2016 Democratic Primary for the same reasons he won the endorsements 170 economists, and The Nation. Furthermore, Sanders dominated the latest Democratic debate because he's never had to evolve from a conservative vantage point, towards a progressive stance. Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War (calling it a "mistake"), pushed for the Trans Pacific Partnership 45 times, recently supported sending U.S. ground troops to fight ISIS, and accepted money from prison lobbyists.

Clinton was "inclined" to greenlight the Keystone XL pipeline and a spokesman from the environmental group 350 Action once stated, "If the pipeline goes through, she'll shoulder part of the blame..."

On foreign policy, one leading historian believes a Hillary Clinton White House will espouse a "neocon" foreign policy.

On gun legislation in 2008, The New York Times wrote that Clinton had portrayed herself to be a "Pro-Gun Churchgoer." Barack Obama even stated, "She's talking like she's Annie Oakley...that's some politics being played by Hillary Clinton."

On Wall Street, POLITICO labeled Clinton Wall St. Republicans' dark secret.

Thus, on major issues, there's only one Democrat running in 2016. Once Bernie Sanders wins Iowa and New Hampshire, his chances of winning Nevada and especially South Carolina will increase exponentially. As stated by South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn in The Washington Post, "If [Sanders] comes out of Iowa and New Hampshire with big victories...if he comes out of there with big victories, hey, man, it could very well be a new day..."

This "new day" will result in polls shifting even faster towards a Bernie Sanders landslide.

If you think Bernie Sanders winning in a landslide is unrealistic, I explain reasons for this eventuality in my appearance on The Benjamin Dixon Show. Or, just look at how quickly it took media pundits to evolve away from the "inevitability" narrative.

On November 13, 2015 The Washington Post published an article titled Democrats l-o-v-e Hillary Clinton in new WaPo-ABC poll. Bernie Sanders? Not so much.

In about two months, however, the love subsided. On January 14, 2016 a Washington Post headline stated Hillary Clinton's national lead is slipping faster in 2016 than it did in 2008.

So much for the power of "l-o-v-e."

On November 3, 2015 an NBC News article titled Hillary Clinton Increases Her Lead Over Bernie Sanders stated, "Hillary Clinton has increased her dominant lead within the Democratic Party's presidential contest."

Less than three months later, with Bernie Sanders surpassing Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire, history began to repeat itself. On January 16, 2016 NBC News published an article titled History Repeating Itself? 2016 Feeling Like 2008 For Hillary.

On October 27, 2015 CBS News ran a piece titled Poll: Hillary Clinton leads Bernie Sanders by 41 points in Iowa. Surely, nobody could ever overcome a massive 41-point lead, as well as an over 20-point lead nationally, right?

On January 12, 2016 CBS News published an article titled CBS/NYT poll: Hillary Clinton's lead over Bernie Sanders shrinks. As stated in the article, Bernie Sanders is only 7 points away from Clinton nationally, and the poll shows "48 percent of Democratic primary voters support Clinton... while Bernie Sanders' support has risen 9 points, from 32 percent last month to 41 percent now."

This surge by Bernie Sanders is also highlighted in a POLITICO piece titled Poll: Clinton's national lead over Sanders dwindles to 7 points.

Do you still think Bernie Sanders winning the Democratic nomination in a landslide is hyperbole?

During an appearance in December on The Thom Hartmann Program, I explained why Bernie Sanders had the momentum to become president, despite the polls and endorsements extolling Clinton's inevitability. I highlight in this YouTube segment why Clinton's negative favorability ratings make the former Secretary of State unelectable. Furthermore, Clinton's continual evolution on contentious topics makes her the antithesis of Bernie Sanders, and I discuss in this YouTube segment why Clinton alters her viewpoint so often.

Have you ever wondered why Clinton evolves so often?

When I wrote a Huffington Post piece titled Why Bernie Sanders Will Become the Democratic Nominee and Defeat Any Republican in 2016, Hillary Clinton held a lead of 58.4% in the Democratic Primary, while Bernie Sanders was mired at 15.9%. However, I knew that Clinton's negative favorability ratings, ongoing and expanding FBI investigation, and evolution on key issues would never allow her to keep that lead over Sanders.

Bernie Sanders is on his way to a decisive win in 2016, primarily because the Clinton campaign doesn't know how to communicate to voters. Nothing illustrates this fact better than a article titled Why Hillary Clinton's Rosa Parks logo was wrong:

The logo, which depicts a bespectacled black woman sitting down with her hair in a bun and her purse in her lap, suggests that the deceased Parks is (or would be) a Clinton supporter. And a whole bunch of folks cried foul.

One relatively mild Twitter criticism expressed surprise that Clinton was able to travel back in time and secure Parks' endorsement. An angrier comment suggested that it's an example of white people co-opting the things black people have done.

The best response, though, was the tweet directed at Clinton that said, "You could've at least let Rosa sit at the front of the logo."

Yes, the Clinton campaign had a Twitter logo with Rosa Parks sitting at the back of the logo. It also had the audacity to travel back in time and get the endorsement of Rosa Parks.

As if that wasn't a perfect example of Clinton's inability to connect with a core constituency, further pandering is highlighted in a Daily Beast article titled Hillary Clinton's Tone-Deaf Racial Pandering:

Hillary Clinton's minority outreach over the last week has rekindled the idea that she is a candidate who is out of touch, particularly when it comes to minorities.

To many of us, her campaign's insistence that she is an abuela for Latinos and the changing of her Twitter logo to represent Kwanzaa came across as pandering at its worst...

Black Twitter had a field day ridiculing Clinton's efforts...

Like the Rosa Parks logo, Clinton's attempt at incorporating Kwanzaa into her campaign was seen as pandering, not a genuine concern for the interests of African Americans.

Latinos also felt the brunt of Clinton's corporate marketing approach to politics. Hillary Clinton's attempt at being the abuela of 54 million Latinos worked as well as the Rosa Parks and Kwanzaa logos, as explained in an NPR piece titled #MemeOfTheWeek: Hillary Clinton, Not Quite An Abuela:

...some online thought it missed the mark. They even called it "hispandering," a mashup of Hispanic and pandering. (NPR's Shereen Marisol Meraji has written extensively about Hispandering.)

Soon after the Clinton abuela post went up, the hashtag #NotMyAbuela (or #NotMiAbuela) began to trend.

In less than three months, Clinton managed to pander three times to the two demographic groups her campaign needs to remain competitive.

However, Clinton forgot to tell both African Americans and Latinos that according to The Intercept, Private Prison Lobbyists Are Raising Cash for Hillary Clinton.

Boston's Black Lives Matter president Daunasia Yancey stated Clinton's racial justice record is "abysmal." In 2008 against Barack Obama, Clinton was willing to use race and Islamophobia and Obama's campaign even complained of "dirty tricks." Clinton used a 3 a.m. ad against Obama that Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson believed had a "racist sub-message." Regarding Clinton's tactics against Obama, South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn stated that "black people are incensed over all of this."

The only thing keeping Clinton's national lead over Sanders is the African American and Latino vote. I explain in just three minutes on The Benjamin Dixon Show why Hilary Clinton will not be able to maintain her lead in the polls among African Americans and Latinos. Once this lead dissipates, as her lead has dwindled among other voting groups, we're looking at a Bernie Sanders landslide victory. In 2016, I'm only voting for Bernie Sanders, not Trump or Clinton, and I explain why here.

Finally, my Huffington Post article from last Wednesday, titled Bernie Sanders Will Win the Democratic Nomination and Presidency in a Landslide, just hit 210,000 Facebook likes. That's 210,000 Facebook likes in less than a week. This doesn't happen unless something paradigm shattering is about to take place. Don't be surprised when Bernie Sanders dominates in 2016.