Decision ‘08

Early New Hampshire Results

9% of precincts in, Hillary leads Obama by 37-36(!), McCain over Romney 37-28%…

UPDATE 7:04 p.m.: Hillary up by 3% now with 11% in - if she wins this, and she may very well, it just goes to show that nothing that anyone in the pundit class says (myself included) means much of anything. Sigh…I’m not looking forward to those Hillary as the “Comeback Kid” stories…

UPDATE 7:13 p.m.: That didn’t take long - McCain declared the winner of the Republican primary…

UPDATE 7:36 p.m: Good place to watch the results here…so what does it mean if the results hold and Hillary wins? It means (bad news for Obama, and a fact I should have given more weight to) that, once again, always and forever - YOUNG PEOPLE DON’T VOTE…

UPDATE 7:45 p.m.: Obviously another early reaction is that Romney is in trouble. His biggest problem, in this observer’s view, is that he just isn’t likable…I can hardly stand to listen to the guy myself…my God, I’m listening to his concession speech right now, and it’s atrocious…he is intentionally placing a stutter into a litany of things that “Washington” has promised but not delivered…you have to see it to (dis)believe it…and who the hell is “Washington”? I thought he died 200 years ago…

UPDATE 7:52 p.m.: As of right now (this is a world-wide exclusive, folks) Decision ‘08 has declared Hillary Clinton the winner of New Hampshire (why not, I’ve been wrong on everything else, so missing this won’t hurt me). With 22% in, Hillary’s lead has widened to 6%. What happened to the polls? He was up by double-digits!…let me state it once again, so it sinks in to even my head: YOUNG PEOPLE DON’T VOTE…

UPDATE 7:57 p.m.: However, folks, for what it’s worth, CNN reports that Hillary’s camp is - how shall I put it? - cautiously pessimistic…so it ain’t a done deal yet (though I stand by my calling the election, and stress that I was the first on the entire planet to make the call for Hillary)…

UPDATE 8:00 p.m.: Hold on, now…with 26% in, Obama’s within three again…

UPDATE 8:04 p.m.: Huckabee’s speaking, and it’s pure cornpone…Michael Barone, the king of political analysts, is saying that Hillary has a good chance of winning, reports RealClearPolitics…but remember, I beat him by six minutes!…

UPDATE 8:16 p.m.: McCain’s speech started strong (he got off a good “Comeback Kid”-type crack), but it’s gone on too long and lost its mojo. He needs to keep it shorter and sweeter…

UPDATE 8:27 p.m.: It’s still awfully close - with 42% in, Hillary up 39-37…Wolf Blitzer just hinted that Richardson may drop out…

UPDATE 8:41 p.m.: Hillary’s lead widens again to 4 with 48% reporting…though CNN notes that several college towns have not reported yet, it’s getting harder to see how Obama can make up that big a margin with essentially half the vote in…Jay Cost is wondering whether McCain sucked Independent votes from Obama…maybe so, but let’s say it again in unison: YOUNG PEOPLE DON’T VOTE…

UPDATE 8:49 p.m.: Ron Paul is speaking, unsurprisingly, in a completely insane manner about getting rid of the Federal Reserve. Those considering supporting Paul might wish to review his ‘interesting’ racial views here…

UPDATE 8:58 p.m.: Note to networks - HD matters! I’m watching CNN exclusively tonight because they broadcast in high definition…HD is like broadband, once you get a taste for it, you can barely stand to be without it…also, a big thank you to everyone who is coming by (and don’t be shy about commenting!)…I’m seeing the highest numbers of visitors over the last week (starting with the night before Iowa) that I’ve seen since I started basically blogging part-time…

UPDATE 9:03 p.m.: I’m sticking with my call for Hillary - with 59% in, she’s up by 2%, but her actual vote lead remains in the 4,000 range…in a small state, even with the record turnout, I don’t think he can make up that margin with roughly a third of the vote left…

UPDATE 9:10 p.m.: CNN just reported, in so many words, that Hillary won the class warfare, economic resentment vote…

UPDATE 9:51 p.m.: It’s a done deal now…CNN confirms my call of two hours ago: Hillary Clinton has (improbably) won the New Hampshire primary. The storyline? Old women vote - and they vote for Hillary. And - all together now - YOUNG PEOPLE DON’T VOTE. A lot of people who wrote Hillary off completely just hours ago are being served tremendously large portions of crow as we speak…

13 Responses to “Early New Hampshire Results”

1 too many steves Says:
January 8th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
The “professional” polls and the professional nomination watchers continue to be wrong, by a good margin. Obama was rolling to a win - as of yesterday. Romney was still strongly in the hunt, while McCain was likely to “edge” him out.

Sheesh. What did Fargus predict? He’s been most reliably correct!

And, yes, young people talk (a lot) but don’t vote. They just don’t, ok?
2 Sean P Says:
January 8th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Agreed about the youth vote, but I actually though Obama would do very well with upscale professionals. He probably did, but I guess there aren’t enough of them to even win in a Northeastern state.
3 Andy Says:
January 8th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
That’s the stubborn independent New Hampshirians — we keep hearing about — for ya!!!

Now we’ll hear the dissections ad nauseum.

Have to concur about the youth vote — you can’t count on them even if it was in their interest. To whit, would the drinking age still be 21 if they all went out to vote against it? They have the numbers, yet rather than do something about it, they’ll continue to risk what little they have by drinking illegally.
4 Ryan Says:
January 8th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Well, I think that’s it for Obama. How in the world does he beat Hillary now?
5 Mark Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 12:00 am
What a difference a day makes, eh?…
6 Fargus Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 12:34 am
Ryan, seriously? You’re writing off Obama? He won handily in Iowa, he came in a close second in New Hampshire, and by all accounts, he’s got a hell of a lot more money left than she does. He’s leading in South Carolina at the moment (although polls are now to be taken with a grain of salt). This is as bad as people yesterday saying that Clinton’s campaign was over.
7 Mark Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Obama’s not out, for sure…but Hillary’s win, and more particularly, the way she won, reminds me of why Howard Dean imploded despite being the frontrunner for months. It wasn’t the Dean Scream - that was the icing on the cake. It was the fact that his supporters were young.

I know I’ve been beating that drum throughout the post above, but that’s partly out of aggravation at myself for having such a short memory. I let myself be fooled into thinking the excitement over Obama was different - THIS time the young people would vote.

But they didn’t…at least, not enough to overcome Hillary’s advantages with traditional Democratic constituents. With so much of Obama’s appeal riding on young voters who don’t show up in the proportions needed, I think he’s a decided underdog again…
8 Ryan Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 6:44 am
Fargus, I don’t see how Obama can win in more traditional closed primaries. Like Mark says, the young vote was what carried him in Iowa, and he was only close in NH because of all the independents. Hillary crushed him among registered Democrats in NH, and a lot of the primaries that are left are closed. I’d like to believe he can convince blue-collar Democrats to vote for him, but I don’t see how.
9 Fargus Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:01 am
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/matthewyglesias/~3/213591721/how_wrong_were_the_polls.php

Interesting numbers, y’all. Note, if you will, that the Obama and Edwards poll numbers appear to have been just about correct. It looks like this wasn’t a matter of a systemic poll failure, but rather of a last-minute surge in Clinton support (likely from people who could no longer bear the sexist coverage from the likes of Chris Matthews). Either way, though, it’s no evidence that there’s a lack of a constituency for Obama, or that the young don’t vote. There’s a lot of factors here (also consider those independents who thought an Obama win was certain, so decided to vote for McCain in the Republican primary instead).
10 Fargus Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 7:41 am
That is, sure, young people don’t vote in numbers like the older demographics do. I’d be interested in seeing the young people numbers from 2004 compared to last night, though, for posterity’s sake.

I can’t help but think, though, that this was a result of the fact that so many independents remained undecided until the last day, and lots more Democrats and women cameout responding to what they saw as attacks on Hillary. And even though Obama outperformed the polls that were being conducted just a week ago, the period between Iowa and New Hampshire got so hyped, and the polls so overinflated, that for some reason this close victory is being seen as a much bigger thing than Obama’s much wider margin in Iowa. I don’t see it, and I think that we have to wait for a little while to see how this makes the national polls trend. Also, there’s South Carolina to consider.
11 Sean P Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Fargus: Obama isn’t “finished” like Edwards is finished, but his window of opportunity to knock out Hillary early has just slammed shut. And even though Obama can match her dollar for dollar he doesn’t have the political machine that she does.

I would compare this loss to McCain’s loss of South Carolina in 2000. The loss wasn’t immediately fatal — he won the next two primaries and even went into Super Tuesday with a slim lead in delegates. However, it did deprive McCain of the momentum he needed to knock out Bush quickly, and without that quick finish Bush’s organizational advantage eventually overwhelmed McCain. I think its pretty safe to conclude at this point that the same thing will happen here.
12 Fargus Says:
January 9th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Sean, have you watched the last 2 primaries? You think at this point anything’s safe to conclude? Especially something as far-reaching as the nomination itself?

That said, your scenario is eminently plausible. But I can think of other ones that are also, and especially with the way every state becomes a huge thing, I’d expect this race to swing all over the place. Clinton’ll get a bump from NH, making her the Comeback Kid (somehow), but if Obama, in the wake of that, takes NV or SC or both, that’ll get hyped just as much as last night’s win did.

As for the political machine, I don’t think the 2000 GOP situation is remotely comparable here. Tactically or otherwise. There’s the matter of endorsements to contend with, as well (and if some high-profile ones go unexpected directions, things could get shaken up just as much as they would with an unexpected primary victory).

Basically, here’s my thing. If the results from NH and IA had been the same, only chronologically reversed, then both of them would have been enormously positive for Obama. Cutting Clinton’s lead in NH from double digits to only two or three points? Impressive! Then winning Iowa! Fact is, both of those things happened, just in reverse order. I don’t think it’s nearly the loss for Obama that polls + pundits + predictions have made it out to be.
13 Cheryl Says:
January 11th, 2008 at 7:09 am
People need not count anyone out although I’d like to on Clinton. We have had her for 8 yrs yes I know you guy’s think it was Bill running the White house but they still laugh at her for trying to call congress in to session. She then made The Mr I didn’t have sex with her do it for her so she could speak her peace. That was a joke.
So don’t count anyone out and the news media is trying to fix this race the way they want it to go. Just listen to there comments.