Clinton and Obama are tight. I need to go to ABC's studios pretty soon to film this appearance and may not be able to liveblog the moment when we get to know the outcome.
« Tea Leaves | Main | Clinton Comeback »
Too Close to Call?
08 Jan 2008 08:01 pm
Comments (80)
This would be interesting if it held true, and a reminder that the herd mentality of the media is not to be trusted. I am supporting Obama, but I don't see any compelling reason he has to crush Clinton tonight. He'll win regardless. What I've liked about the Obama campaign, and it appears to be a reflection of the man himself, is that it doesn't panic. With a few minor tweeks, which should be expected, his arguments are the same now as they were when he was down in the polls. I suspect he isn't even watching the poll results -- he didn't when he was in Iowa -- and it would probably be healthier for the rest of us to follow that example.
Unless the precincts counted are not typical samples, with 12% reported Clinton's maintaining a significant though narrow lead, so a Clinton victory is far from discounted.
If the current closeness on the Dem side holds up, I wonder if it'll turn out that Independents assumed Obama would win big so they decided to vote in the GOP primary for McCain instead.
The Concord Monitor is already calling it for Clinton as her lead has solidified into 40% - 35% with 13%.
Bwhahhaha. Oh I hope Obama enjoyed his 15 minutes.
uh, El Cid, I think you read that chart wrong. The check mark is for McCain, not Clinton.
B
El Cid, I think you overwhelmed their server, but that seems really premature.
Retraction!
In a stunning reversal, the check mark appeared in a different place than I had thought!!! Unprecedented primary action!
Obama and Clinton are close to even on intrade for the Democratic Presidential nominee.
damn it, this is depressing.
I wonder how many of the Independents thought that Obama had the Democratic victory assured and so voted for McCain instead? NPR said that the Indy's broke 60-40 for the Dems and were commenting on how strong the Dem response was but it seems low to me.
The repeated lesson of this cycle is that running as the inevitable candidate in either party is a recipe for disaster.
If Hilary wins, it will be inspiring. so damn inspiring.
What the hell is going on? Do they use Diebold electronic voting in New Hampshire?
Most likely?
Women (and not only women) reacting to the ridiculous "crying" story, and also the absurd reports of the out of control Clinton in the debate. I don't want her, but I was appalled by the coverage.
What likely happens is Obama/Clinton are even through 2/2, but Edwards leaves the race and most of his supporters go to Obama.
And if Obama can't stand the heat from Clinton, then he'd be less likely to win in November anyway.
If Ms. Clinton wins it will be fascinating, and depressing. Demonstrating that the Obama phenomenon is a bit of a mania. However, no democratic candidate will galvanize the opposition as will she. How abour reconsidering a real progressive, JRE of NC.
Before Iowa, Clinton was favored in NH, correct?
I'm going to wait until the larger, more heavily populated areas weigh in before I'm calling this for Clinton.
Obama wasn't doing so well at this time in Iowa either, but his numbers crept up slowly the whole night as the larger precincts came in.
"If Hilary wins, it will be inspiring. so damn inspiring."
No big deal.
Obama did well in a state neighboring his own. Clinton did well in a state neighboring her own. We'll soon know if Edwards can do well in a state neighboring his own.
This is going to be a long race.
"but Edwards leaves the race and most of his supporters go to Obama."
Nope at best 50-50, even if Edwards endorses Obama. And Edwards ain't going away.
Michael Whouley is running the field operation for the Clinton campaign. He's the guy that delivered Iowa for Kerry in 2004. Don't underestimate what he can do for Hilary.
They pros are good enough with exit polls that there is no way this doesn't end close. Delegate counts remain close, and Obama loses most momentum and all inevitability.
Game on.
Although the race is far from over, by now I think it's pretty clear that the trend is strongly in the leader's favor, and it's entirely possible that by this time next month, Blu-Ray will entirely have won and HD-DVD would at best be limping toward an honorable exit -- at least until the possible last minute "surge" of non-disc based media.
So far it looks like this to me: the Clinton cry and Edwards jackass response had its effect. Edwards is cratering, and every woman in New Hampshire who was going for Edwards switched to Clinton. Obama's % totals so far are roughly consistent with his poll numbers. But Edwards is bombing, to Clinton's benefit.
"Michael Whouley is running the field operation for the Clinton campaign."
A good point.
Obama crawls back in the race:
established old woman: 39
Obama: 36
Obama did well in a state neighboring his own. Clinton did well in a state neighboring her own. We'll soon know if Edwards can do well in a state neighboring his own. This is going to be a long race.
Is someone parodying Petey now?
Bob McManus: "The pros are good enough with exit polls that there is no way this doesn't end close."
Somehow, exit polls seem to lose their accuracy wherever Diebold voting machines are in use.
This may be the night that brings the return of a term we haven't hear for a while, and perhaps thought had been buried forever by Iowa: the Wilder Effect. It's hard to explain the massive disconnect between the polls and the vote count any other way.
"Is someone parodying Petey now?"
No. I honestly think this is going to be a much longer race than folks expect, and that we've got three nominatable candidates.
2000 and 2004 were the anomalies in Democratic nomination races, not the norm. Usually, the races have a bit of a regional component early.
damn it, this sucks. somehow the democratic party finds a way to choke. here it comes.
It's hard to explain the massive disconnect between the polls and the vote count any other way.
I don't think that's it. The polling ended Sunday and Clinton cried yesterday; and the spring-like weather today is thought to have brought out more older voters. The exit polling is based on sampling models that may not have held up if the turnout was much higher in some age groups than projected.
I love all three of the Dem contenders; not only will I proudly vote for any of them in the general, I'll weep when 2 of them have to bow out. But if they pick McCain, we have to pick Obama.
Doesn't look too tight to me, it looks like Clinton's blowing him out of the water.
Don't want that to happen, but I think it IS happening...
Although it's a Southern state and all, South Carolina does have about a million more people than Iowa, 2.7 million more than New Hampshire, and 1.5 million more than Nevada. South Carolina ought to matter a bit.
Edwards is toast after tonight, especially if it looks like his gaffe cost Obama the NH race.
How did Edwards comment become "jackass?" Not particularly sympathic (like most guys), but he did not say she was a crybaby or criticize her. Just pointed out that running for president was a long hard business. It is. Will crying now work again. This seems to be a double standard as well.
If you go to the NY Times website, and look at the results by county, it's very interesting. The two counties that are going most heavily for Clinton have a much higher percentage of reported results. For example, Strafford County (heavily Clinton) is close to 70% reported, while Keene County (heavily Obama) is closer to 30%. I'm not saying she won't win; I'm just pointing out that it's still too early. Much too early to get depressed.
And if she does win, still way to early to do anything other than savor the moment -- whether bitter or sweet.
Come to think of it, why would the Democratic primary do otherwise than nominate the least electable candidate of the lot, in the name of electability? Me and my silly optimism. Tonight I temper it with the familiar cynicism.
Serious, why is Clinton crying a valid reason for her come back?
If it is, it doesn't say much for democratic party voters.
this is pitiful.
Petey
Would a 41-38 Obama win put Nevada in play, or make it a likely Clinton win? Or don't know?
"Would a 41-38 Obama win put Nevada in play, or make it a likely Clinton win? Or don't know?"
Nevada is in a great state of flux at this minute.
It's going to be highly interesting to see if Culinary backs off tomorrow morning or goes ahead with Obama.
Nevada is a Democrats Only event, and Clinton is going to easily win Dems in NH. But again, it really shouldn't be understated that Obama overperformed in a neighboring state to his and that Clinton overperformed in a neighboring state to hers.
The players in NV, of course, are Harry Reid who's working like hell for Clinton, and Culinary, who everyone is now waiting on.
I shorted Obama in Nevada on Intrade an hour ago, but I got amazing odds on the bet. I'm not sure how I'd pick Nevada right now straight up.
thehova: "damn it, this sucks. somehow the democratic party finds a way to choke. here it comes."
Funny how Obamabots hate democracy (such as an election with a secret ballot) when it goes against them.
More importantly, get a grip--if you really believe in democracy, you should embrace a long primary battle.
BTW, this race tonight is not over yet.
I'm beginning to suspect that results are being parsimoniously reported in order to maintain TV ratings. No doubt we'll finally find out at 10:59.
Edwards is toast after tonight, especially if it looks like his gaffe cost Obama the NH race.
Posted by Dan Kervick
Right, because it was obviously impossible that a state long looking like a Clinton leaning state could possibly be a win for Clinton; it must have been Edwards' horrendous gaffe which lost it for Obama. Edwards' toastiness aside, it seems more rational to see this as a Clinton win than an Edwards' sabotage.
Going back to the NY Time website, it's amusing to note that Romney isn't leading in any of the counties.
And to update my earlier observation, Hillsborough County, which includes Manchester and is leaning heavily to Clinton -- has only reported about 35% of its results (a good fact for her). But a number of other counties that are leaning heavily to Obama are at the same number or less.
And lo and behold, the race is tightening.
Funny how Obamabots hate democracy (such as an election with a secret ballot) when it goes against them.
Stop it with the asinine swipes. Nobody here "hates democracy" Mr. Hannity.
More importantly, get a grip--if you really believe in democracy, you should embrace a long primary battle.
Embrace? Sure. I "embrace" the opportunity to extend an already hideously protracted "national conversation" with Her Highness. Who incidentally loves democracy more than anyone, which is why she fake cries when she's behind.
"Edwards is toast after tonight, especially if it looks like his gaffe cost Obama the NH race."
Dude. You've got no clue whatsoever where Edwards' vote is coming from.
His constituency at the moment seems to be non-youth ideological lefties, who are much more natural fit in the Clinton electorate than the Obama electorate.
Clinton is doing well tonight because NH is close to NY, just as Obama did well last week because IA is close to IL.
I'm not finding much of anywhere with an insight into the currently counted precincts' regional breakdown to say if this is likely to be the end results. They're talking about it on the Young Turks, but I don't know New Hampshire.
I can't stand Clinton, and yet I take a certain weird pleasure in her win. It is 1998 all over again. Bill Clinton was criticized for bringing up Monica yesterday, but it was exactly the right note, and he was, once again, the true political pro, and not the high school glee club in the press. It was the elitist, grinning persecution of the Clintons in 98 that turned the country off, and the press seems to have created that type of atmosphere going into NH. Edwards would have done himself a favor if he'd gone after the press on the Hillary crying thing. Since Clinton is surrounded by sinister DLC types, I can't be too happy. But I'm not that surprised.
What's interesting is that the lead is shrinking, percentage-wise, but Hillary's absolute lead is still roughly 2K votes. Seems like the new votes are going 42-42-16 or so.
I think Manchester reports separately from Hillsborough county by the way.
Yes, Andruw, disliking an electoral result is the exact same thing as hating democracy. God, you are stupid.
Alright, I'm going to bed early. Either Hillary scrapes by or Barack scrapes by. I was overeager to see her closer to gone, but I still think Obama beats her in S.C. and regains the momentum.
Funny how Obamabots hate democracy (such as an election with a secret ballot) when it goes against them.
Funny how Clintonistas only hate a coronation when it doesn't involve Hillary wearing the crown.
More importantly, get a grip--if you really believe in democracy, you should embrace a long primary battle.
I agree, a long primary battle strengthens our candidate. The reason we don't have a long primary battle, however, is because of the ridiculous jealously that some people have for Iowa and New Hampshire. "Boo hoo hoo, why don't we ever get to be a swing state, boo hoo"
I don't think what Edwards said was a gaffe. While I was a bit pissed at the hyperbolic coverage of her brief emotional response, I would not have changed my vote based on Edwards' comment.
Go Edwards. I still think he's the best candidate, but like others here, I think all three are fine choices.
"Bill Clinton was criticized for bringing up Monica yesterday, but it was exactly the right note"
Beware the possible pyrrhic nature of the Clinton strategy over the past 72 hours.
Clinton is doing well tonight because NH is close to NY
Or because she's killing him among women.
Milind makes a good point about the raw votes.
Don't know how Manchester reporting separately from the county would impact the numbers we're getting. As they come in from that county (very slowly, compared to some of the others) there doesn't appear to be a change in results.
Given that HRC never trailed in any New Hampshire poll until about 3 days ago, I don't think she can realistically spin any size loss as a "win," although the media probably won't agree with me.
I think Clinton's increasingly overt playing of the gender card may be a case of short term gain/long term problem.
His constituency at the moment seems to be non-youth ideological lefties
That must explain why he won the conservative vote in Iowa.
Well, whatever the outcome, time to take my whuppin':
Petey, you were right and I was wrong.
"Petey, you were right and I was wrong."
Not on what happened in NH, I wasn't. I thought Barack was a sure thing today.
There's no doubt that Obama is struggling in the "big cities" of New Hampshire.
Could it simply be that Clinton used the "democratic machine" better.
I think its as simple as this: older, poor women love Clinton.
Many in the liberal community have been dancing on Hillary's grave for the past few days; the schadenfreude was sickening.
Hillary-Obama is going to be a great ticket.
We'll see what the Heathers in the Press say. I like the McCain comeback he's so cool theme - it is so Teen beat. Since the real comeback story here is icky Hillary - eww, she's so nasty - there has to be a way to make it seem like it wasn't a comeback. Surely Michael Scherer at Time's Swampland can come up with one. Like, she's like Carrie? Like that gross girl with the pig blood? There will be some divine frothing as they regain their usual stances of omniscience, but that crew - brainless, almost illiterate, sycophants the lot - will die thinking they are the brightest things that have ever lived.
"There's no doubt that Obama is struggling in the "big cities" of New Hampshire."
Lieberman killed Lamont in the "big cities" of Connecticut.
bill: "Embrace? Sure. I "embrace" the opportunity to extend an already hideously protracted "national conversation" with Her Highness."
Wow. "Protracted". "Her Highness,"
I should have my whupping at this point too, whatever the outcome. This primary is way closer than I thought it should be.
I am chagrinned.
If Obama loses tonight I send condolences to his supporters. If Hillary wins congratulations to her supporters. Since I am supporting Edwards, and supported him in the last electoral cycle as well, perhaps supporters in both camps y will now have have an inkling how we Edwards folks felt coming out of Iowa twice in four years. We are impressed by Edwards determination, his tenacity, his consistently progressive policies and his willingness to fight for them, and for the ordinarly working people they would benefit, with dogged strength. We are convinced that serious flaws in both his competitors (Hillary's high negatives and ability to galvanize the opposition, coupled with a desire to move beyond the Clinton/Bush presidential cycles; Obama's less substantive policies and lack of experience) and Edwards' strengths (years of both real-life experience as a top advocate taking on and beating powerful banks of corporate; rural working class roots; win against the Helms machine in NC, etc.) bode well for the best possible winning nationwide candidate. Regarding questions about where Edwards supporters go, who knows? Our bottom line is a democratic victory, but because we honestly feel that the party is missing its chance in that regard, I think a number of us will think long and hard about which of the less effective candidates will have the best chance in the general election. Speaking for myself, I may just stand back and watch the process if Edwards drops out until the winner is selected.
The repeated lesson of this cycle is that running as the inevitable candidate in either party is a recipe for disaster.Posted by Petey | January 8, 2008 8:39 PM
ding ding ding.
Hey, on a meta level, how about as a new paradigm shaping up: Instead of stump speeches and getting sound bites out from those, they all have to do questions and answers with audiences AND THEN after that, it's not over, then from those, they have to get a good snippet out and publicized and popularized, a "candid interaction," preferably one with some kind of mini-drama involved. It's YouTube culture taking over?
One thing I am certain about is that while Obama gives great speech, eventually he's going to have to show interactions with individual "real" people. Haven't heard much one way or another on how good he is on that.
Doing some quick math, it looks like HRC and Obama together got the same number of votes as all the Republicans combined.
"I should have my whupping at this point too, whatever the outcome. This primary is way closer than I thought it should be."
Join the crowd. I haven't heard anyone, anywhere speculating on a Clinton win today.
-----
Last night, I took a flier on an upset in the GOP NH primary at Intrade, betting Romney at about 10 to 1 odds.
My theory was that the NH voters would come home to a Northeastern candidate.
I should've been thinking that way about the Dem NH primary instead.
my basic theory is this:
Obama is to the left of Clinton.
Clinton's biggest constituency is older, depressed, poor, uneducated women (don't most teacher unions support Hillary). They have no idea where either Obama and Hillary are on the issues. But they like that hilary is a "working" women.
The Edwards campaign is smart for leading with Elizabeth on TV tonight.
Are you crying? Are you crying? ARE YOU CRYING? There's no crying! THERE'S NO CRYING IN POLITICS!
Fellow Obamabots take heart, he's doing better than expected. Looks like it's going be a long race and 2/5 will be a big date.
Any thought that the Planned Parenthood/present vote story got some traction with NH women? The gender gap in this primary is stunning.
Good win for Clinton (assuming the projections hold). Good speech for Edwards. Obama's reaction will be interesting.
Note the NYT exit poll story - all those women voting for Hillary also thought that Obama would be better able to beat a Republican in the general election.
So they voted for the candidate who was less likely to win the general election.
Now that's what I call...uh...smart?
You're looking at total female backlash here, without a shred of logic in it.
Comments closed January 22, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Called for McCain
Posted by bob | January 8, 2008 8:12 PM