By Melissa KoenigCONTRIBUTOR

The New Hampshire primary was unpredictable and served to highlight the insanity that is the 2016 presidential election.
While some political analysts were unsure if Bernie Sanders could claim victory over Hillary Clinton, it seemed that New Hampshire voters really wanted an economic change. Sanders campaigned there on the idea that the wealthy are taking money away from the poor. In a state that has been struggling to increase its job growth, the fact that the wealthiest one percent of Americans have most of the money concerned voters.

The political science department’s trip to New Hampshire emphasized this point. Sanders seemed in touch with the average person as he spoke about issues of income inequality, opportunity for all and equal rights. During his speech, you could see that he was passionate about what he was saying with the way he was pointing to the crowd and listening to people’s complaints. It was very inspiring and could easily sway an undecided voter.

Clinton, on the other hand, represented the status quo. Sanders attacked her several times on the idea that she is funded by Wall Street and lobbying organizations. This claim will only become more relevant now that the Democratic National Convention has decided not to limit the amount that super PACs and lobbyists can donate. To the people from New Hampshire, Clinton is one of those wealthy people who are out of touch with the average American.

Even her events seemed well-planned and not as personal. When Hofstra students went to see her speak, only a handful actually made it into the main room where she was speaking, several more were stuck behind a glass wall in an overflow room and the rest were stuck in a hallway unable to even see her. And although she was also using hand gestures and buzz words, they seemed more robotic. It seemed like she thought she could win New Hampshire solely because she won it in 2008.

If Clinton really wants to win, she is going to need to learn how to portray herself as a likable, average person who does not have connections to the banking industry and various lobbies. She is going to have to talk about the problems of inequality and the mess that the banks created for the United States in 2008 without angering her backers. She will also need to distance herself from the Democratic National Committee, which awarded her and Sanders the same number of delegates, despite her double-digit loss in the state.

Nevada was an interesting case, however. For instance, it is a caucus system and as we saw in Iowa as well, it can be hard to determine a winner in this system. Moreover, there were many Latinos in Nevada, who the Clinton campaign saw as its supporters, but instead broke for Sanders.

Finally, there were still conservative people in Nevada, who did not agree with Sanders’ economic views.

This race really boils down to a David and Goliath situation, and while it’s going to be interesting to watch it play out, it’s nowhere near over.

Melissa Koenig is the president of the Democrats of Hofstra University.