As this very early stage of the presidential campaign continues, the speculation is rampant as to the outcome of the nominating process and then the election itself. Despite media bias, which includes burying stories, misrepresentation, dismissal and ridicule, Sen. Bernie Sanders Bernie SandersNYT editorial board remembers Ginsburg: She 'will forever have two legacies' Two GOP governors urge Republicans to hold off on Supreme Court nominee Sanders knocks McConnell: He's going against Ginsburg's 'dying wishes' MORE's (I-Vt.) candidacy is becoming a reality. He is actually gaining traction.

Sanders appears at a rally in Colorado that draws a crowd that is at least as large as Hillary Clinton Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonBiden leads Trump by 36 points nationally among Latinos: poll Democratic super PAC to hit Trump in battleground states over coronavirus deaths Battle lines drawn on precedent in Supreme Court fight MORE's "kickoff" event in New York and larger than any crowd attracted by the Republican candidates. Ann Coulter, conservative political commentator, and certainly no fan of Democrats, suggests Sanders would be a stronger candidate against Republicans than Clinton. Why? Because he appeals to the American workers, rather than Clinton, "who's now on the side of the Chamber of Commerce." According to the most recent Suffolk University poll, Sanders and Clinton are essentially tied among men in New Hampshire, even though Clinton holds a 19 percentage point lead among women.

ADVERTISEMENT

The most intriguing comment of late was quoted by a middle-aged conservative leaving a Sanders rally in Iowa. Paraphrasing: "He may actually have a chance. What he says should appeal to everyone I know."

Most everything that is written or said at this point in the campaign needs to be taken as hyperbole, since it is really early and the time when inaugural events of the season receive the enthusiasm of base support that overstates broad acceptance. It is still the fact that only 25 percent of the electorate identify themselves as liberal, versus 35 percent as conservative. It is still the fact that the overwhelming polling results show Clinton's lead over Sanders starting at 38 percent and moving up from there to 55 percent (Real Clear Politics has Clinton's lead over Sanders averaging 47 percent). It is also clear that Clinton has shifted her rhetoric to a more progressive tone, and that will impact voters as more moderates enter the fray. It is also the case that Sanders is relatively unknown and has very little of name recognition enjoyed by Clinton.

We have argued that Sanders actually does have a chance, not just because the message is candid and direct, but because his appeal crosses party lines. The "disappearing middle class" he refers to includes 80 percent of the Republican Party. Coulter is right: Sanders actually does pose a greater threat to a Republican candidate more so than Clinton.

So, the question becomes how that threat can, or should, materialize? Starting with the facts on the ground, it is the case that Sanders has raised money from over 200,000 contributors whose contributions averaged $40. What if Sanders had access to the Obama for America contact list that included 13.5 million donors? To quote from an article that appeared in Reader Supported News, "According to Marshall Ganz, one of the architects of Obama's 2008 organizing strategy, Obama's campaign had 3,000 organizers who recruited thousands more local leaders, who then helped mobilize 1.5 million volunteers and 13.5 million contributors." What would happen if that support moved to the Sanders's column? Not likely right now, but you never know.

Sanders's independent status in the Senate may be remembered when he filibustered in 2010 against extending "tax breaks for the wealthy." At the time, he was considered quite the maverick, but he is now joined by Sen. Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth WarrenGOP set to release controversial Biden report Biden's fiscal program: What is the likely market impact? Warren, Schumer introduce plan for next president to cancel ,000 in student debt MORE (D-Mass.), whose agenda and presence has literally changed the dynamic of the Senate Democratic caucus. It is no longer easy for senators to "get along by going along," and her powerful stance against the influence of Wall Street banks, income inequality and the Trans-Pacific Partnership has created an underlying current that forced or permitted Clinton's move to the left as she began her campaign. While Warren has publicly endorsed Clinton, the legitimacy of progressive stances also indirectly benefit Sanders. And Warren's astuteness as a politician virtually guarantees that she will end up endorsing either outcome, also a plus for Sanders.

The compelling need for Sanders at the moment is not just "more of the same." His message does resonate with virtually every worker, at every level, irrespective of party affiliation. It is clear that his current strategy of being as ever present and available in the primary efforts in New Hampshire and Iowa and engaging in other venues to introduce himself will, and should, continue. This strategy is garnering success.

What he has also to address is the media's need to continuously slander him with innuendo. "Sanders the socialist from Vermont." "Sanders rumored to have dual Israeli citizenship." "Sanders the grumpy old man." Or the repeated exclusion of his name from discussion or consideration when campaign topics are addressed.

In the past, Sanders has made himself continuously available to MSNBC, which draws essentially no one other than its less than 1 million viewers. Moving up to a slot on "Real Time with Bill Maher," which he did this past week, broadens the audience to 4 million viewers. So, if he can keep snagging coverage from National Public Radio, that number would rise to 34 million (the average listening audience for its news broadcasts). But he needs to extend that reach to the guys who speak to conservatives like Don Imus (3.25 million average), Rush Limbaugh (14.25 million), Bill O'Reilly (3.2 million), Sean Hannity (11.75 million), Dr. Laura Schlesinger (8.5 million), Michael Savage (7 million), etc.

It is not just because Sanders needs to introduce himself cross party lines; it is because he is indifferent to bluster. While conservatives like Limbaugh, O'Reilly or Hannity have made it their preferred mode of operation to interrupt, outshout or bully their interviewees, Sanders is impervious, and he stays on message no matter what is being said. And that is all that is actually needed. He needs to do as he has done for the past 40 years: just keep saying the same simplified message over and over again. It is hard to listen to if you're expecting variety, but his is the right message. Bernie Sanders is a true phenomenon.

Russell is managing director of Cove Hill Advisory Services.