I’ll have to look at some data to figure this one out. I’m not falling for easy answers about Hillary showing emotion or whatever. I’ve never seen a result this far out from the polls in my life. I have some early clues about what happened, but I need to analyze the data.
This, unfortunately, portends an extended and bloody fight for the Democratic nomination. I was very wrong about the state of the Clinton campaign, and I don’t have a track record of being wrong. Until I feel I understand it, I’m not going to speculate.
I will say that this is a tremendously unfortunate development for our party and our nation and for the world. The good news is that the Dems out-polled the Republicans about 208,000 to 173,000.
And I just want to advise David Broder that any erection lasting more than four hours means you have a case of priapism and you should report to the nearest emergency room.
they’re not going to go down without a fight. At least the ones who see the chance to re-fight the past in Hillary. It’s a big generation, and one that won’t give up on its hold over this country.
She’s a sincere woman, honestly, and I think she thinks she’s going to help turn around this country. But Gawd there’s nothing inspiring about her at all. And if she gets the nomination, then it’s hello President John McCain, and one more c-note of years in Iraq. Congrats, NH, you stuck it to the media (good for you, I hear ya on that), but this is when the democratic party decided it wanted to lose, yet again, another Presidential election.
One exit poll showed electability was a major factor for 7 percent of NH voters. If this goes the way I fear it going, NH will have screwed this nation royally.
As I said, the Dragon was wounded but not dead. She is as alive and well as ever.
I was teaching a fundraising workshop to architecture students at a local university last month, and afterwards I went down in the elevator with three women from the class . The conversation turned to the election, and all of them came out strongly in favor of Hillary. (I did not bring it up and did not offer an opinion.) One of the women said she had signed up to actively campaign for Hillary just that day. Not a scientific study, I admit, but I think it’s safe to say that this is not just about the baby boomers.
I thought it was embarrassing when today on MSNBC they kept saying that Hillary won because it was warmer than usual and the “old folks” weren’t too afraid of the cold to come out and vote. Jeebus.
So…how many people told pollsters “Yeah Obama’s my man” and then had voter’s remorse?
It’s almost like thousands of folks in NH woke up this morning and said “My god, a Black man is the frontrunner for the Democrats right now. Can he, you know, win in November?“
All of a sudden what was going in with a clear Obama lead and a lot of undecideds — and folks, there were a LOT of undecideds…turned into a whole bunch of those undecideds going to Hillary, defying a lot of political science wisdom. Hillary wins a close one, even with the record turnout.
So how will SC play now? All indicators are another Obama/Huckabee win, but now…who knows?
Now, let’s see if this means the campaign will stop being so nasty. I hope so. That was embarrassing and I felt all, “Mommy! Daddy! Stop Fighting!”.
From your keys to God’s eyes… (whether they exist or not)
but it won’t happen. Way too much money at stake for courtesy, civility, or rules. This is winner-take-all ultimate fighting, and if you think it’s been nasty to this point, you ain’t seen NOTHIN’ yet.
The extremes of both sides are going to wind up locked into an “If we can’t rule we will bring down” mindset; it’s already starting to shape up after two states.
It may be safer to head for the Middle East.
I wish this were beyond question :
NH: “First in the nation” (with corporate controlled secret vote counting)
81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as “Premier”). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to say “but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!”
But they’re not. They’re counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount. (Is it just a funny coincidence that Diebold spokesman is named Mr. Riggall?)
We need to get the count right on election night. Right now, nobody in New Hampshire, except the programmers at LHS Associates and Diebold Election Systems, knows if we are getting it right or wrong. Our state officials and representatives know this. They learned all about it when computer security specialists Harri Hursti and Bruce Odell testified before the legislative subcommittee on e-voting in September 2007 (Hursti’s testimony is shown in this video). Scientific reports about the vulnerabilities and risks with Diebold optical scanners have been available since 2003.
We love our state. It takes courage and strength to admit where we are going wrong and to fix it. May our state officials and representatives find that courage and strength soon. Before we lose the other 19% of our votes.
Click the link to learn more, or just click the BlackBoxVoting.ORG video below.
By ntobi at 01/07/2008 – 16:15 | Fair elections | Features | Video | login or register to post comments
http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/5307
While I was adding my comment, I see you posted similar info. I hope people will either click through and read the whole thing, or at least the little snippet I posted below.
Thanks for the conspiracy angle, but sometimes a more simple explanation, such as Hillary’s resort to tears, the hallmark of the underdog, is sufficient to have pushed this contest into its final result.
Still, it is now evident that the Democratic primary contest is no longer a proObama or proEdwards one, but an antiHillary one. If the people really want “change,” it is now clear that Hillary will drag us back into the Cheney-Bushite era, with a proCorporate domestic policy and a proNeocon foreign policy.
Hillary (and Bill) must be stopped.
Anybody know how many delegates each of them gets?
Hillary and Obama both get 9, Edwards 4, then there are 5 superdelegates
Thanks.
So as a practical matter this is about momentum. If Obama had eaked out a victory at the last minute the delegate result would have been the same.
Not that momentum isn’t huge.
Correction about the superdelegates. I got the prior 5 figure from CNN, but now I read:
“There are also 8 Democratic “superdelegates” in New Hampshire. Of those, 2 support Clinton and 3 support Obama, according to a CNN survey.”
Fullerg,
Thanks for posting that Diebold article. I was just about to post the link myself.
I don’t know that you can say for sure you WERE wrong, Booman.
There are three possible explanations. I favor the first one.
Here’s the problem:
Source
I think there are two possible explantions, but honestly, the one that most plausibly explains such a drastic last-minute swing is the one above. Either through error or fraud, it’s not impossible that a programmer, as opposed to the people of New Hampshire, chose the winner in the primary.
And before anyone starts screaming unsubstantiated conspiracy theory – I’d point out that in my own state, in San Francisco recently, an audit showed enough discrepancies between what voters had put on paper and what the machines said the voters did that the city ended up recounting the entire election BY HAND. There are precedents, and if I were in Obama’s HQ right now I’d be bending some ears to get a recount in any key place where they felt they had significantly more support than showed up on the records.
THAT SAID, of course, here is the other explanation:
THIRD possible explanation: The American Idol Effect. Their favorite candidate down, all of Hillary’s supporters started doubling their efforts, and it paid off.
The explanation may involve all three of these.
For those too young politically to know/remember, exit polls had been incredibly accurate for nearly forty years, right up until the 2004 election. Is it simply coincidence that coincided with broad use of direct recording electronic (DRE) machines? Maybe. Maybe not.
If I were Obama’s campaign manger, I’d be trying to find a quiet way to get a recount in a couple of key areas to see if the paper records truly matched the machine results. This isn’t about sour grapes. This is about trying to resolve a very obvious discrepancy.
To those who continue to think elections can’t be bungled or gamed in this manner, all I can say is, such naivete will absolutely sink our vote, for good. It’s worth knowing if the counts in NH were accurate, for all our sakes.
obviously there is reason for concern, but before I go leaping to conclusions, there is data to analyze.
I guess my biggest shock is that there is any way that people broke Clinton’s way in the media environment of the last three days.
Me too, hence my preference for explanation #1.
Women were 57% of the vote according to CNN’s exit pollsand she took 46% of them. Obama only took 34%. It was enough to put her over.
It’s possible that the demographics of her internal polling didn’t match actual turnout of women. Or it’s possible that many of those women were still reflecting as undecideds. There was a large number of undecideds when the polls opened this morning. Something like 14%.
I don’t find it such a shock. Though a long-time Clinton-loather (both of ’em) I’m finding myself more and more sympathetic to her every time sexist drivel is directed at her by the boyz. If Edwards drops out Clinton might well get my vote, if not enthusiastic support, in the primary. I’d bet that I’m not the only one and that she gained thousands of votes from people disgusted by media reaction to her “emotional display” yesterday.
I’m not going to vote for Hillary but early tonight I found myself hoping that she wasn’t blown away and that she maybe could pull off a miracle and come within 5 of Obama. And I felt that way because I was disgusted by the media coverage of her emotional moment. Good god, you would have thought the woman broke down sobbing the way they talked about it.
Unfortunately, she did better than I wanted tonight so I’ll have to watch those good thoughts for her next time, lol. But I don’t find myself distraught over her win tonight.
And I still think Super Tuesday will be her last stand.
Yup be careful what you wish for! As soon as I wrote that I’d vote for Clinton I wanted to take it back. I couldn’t vote for her in the primary. I don’t think I could. It just makes me so mad though, the sniggering condescending idiocy she has to put up with. I think she’s very cool about it, and I admire that.
Btw, Mark Crispin Miller and others in the evoting community are all abuzz about this. Believe me, we have a right to be suspicious.
I’m going to repudiate myself here. 😉
I was looking at an exit poll question wrong, which had me really scared.
But when I reversed it and looked at it the right way, the exit poll sure does seem to match the results. The exit poll shows based on the first question, Hillary with a 2% lead, more or less, over Obama.
So unless the exit polls have been altered, which at this point I have no reason to believe they have, I’m inclined to believe this is because there were a huge number of undecided voters who went for Hillary in larger numbers than for Obama.
Either way, I am SO not happy. But we have to buck up.
I absolutely believe this was her “Bill’s bitten bottom lip” moment, and it worked beautifully. The appearance of waterworks or something masquerading as “emotion” may not work a second time.
[Sidenote: has John Edwards turned into Rick Lazio with his comments that being president is tough work (rough paraphrase)? I’m seriously asking. The “boys are ganging up on me” worked in her favor. Complete with a snot-nosed NYT column from Gloria Steinem that might as well have said, Well damn, America, you mean you’ll elect even a Black man before you elect white woman? Umm, but sure, sexism and racism must be fought together. Maybe Steinem’s been hanging out with Vicente Fox these days. As a woman–apparently the wrong color, though–thanks lots. No offense, in case she was wondering.]
She has never stopped thinking that she is entitled to this nomination; like Cheney, she thinks this is her due. With all of the work we’ve started to do, we can’t just let the Clintonistas think the Clinton Restoration proceeds apace. No way! We gotta fight for this.
Me? I’m ready to take the first thing smokin’ to SC.
The outcome was consistent with the exit polls, so unless the exit polls were rigged, this was a fair election.
I was born in 1968, a little under two weeks before someone decided to end Martin Luther King Jr.’s life, a little over two months before someone decided to end Robert Francis Kennedy’s life. I wasn’t aware of much at the time besides my continual need to be fed and changed, but I get the feeling that I am going to get to experience a little bit of 1968 here and now, a little over two months from my 40th birthday.
I hope that things turn out differently this time…
you and me both oscar. l was there in ’68, and it was very ugly.
and like l commented in the previous thread: the race is beginning to take on a lot of the dynamics of the ’68 and ’72 d conventions…buckle up, it’s gonna be quite a ride.
l’m outta here for tonight.
peace
lTMF’sA
I really don’t think this was racially motivated but other than that I’m not going to speculate.
I have to disagree with everything you said here, Boo.
Why was it stunning? A couple weeks ago she was supposed to have a 10 or 20 point lead. Her narrow win would have been ho-hum if not for the expectation hype raised by media/pollster windbags.
Did you really think it was all over if Obama won? Not by a long shot. Again, just crap made up by the windbags.
Why is it unfortunate? I think it’s great that this process may be undecided right up to the convention, or at least the last primaries. I’m glad Obama is spared from being put into the superhero frame, only to be shot down mercilessly when he inevitably stumbles somewhere along the way. The narrative of the long and grueling race is much better for Obama (and Edwards) than the narrative of Obama being the new king of the world.
The first two Dem contests in this election cycle resulted, within less than a week, in two truly historic moments: the first black American and the first woman to win a presidential primary ever in this country. That is no bad thing for the Dem party or the country. I think this return to reality could actually result in a more civil and substantive primary.
I’m going to be pissed and depressed if Hillary goes on to win the nomination, but we’re nowhere close to that at this point. Until that happens, I’m going to uncharacteristically enjoy the good things tonight might yet bring over the long haul.
I need to explain why this is bad?
We were on the verge of beating back the warmongering corporatists and it was snatched away from us.
No we weren’t, and it wasn’t.
yeah, it was. As I explained, even the Clinton campaign had themselves down 11% today. They genuinely thought they got killed and didn’t even try to hide the fact.
I have no idea what happened. But the DLC is now officially undead. Maybe it’s time to get a subscription to the New Republic and some DVD’s of the best of the Hannity and Colmes show.
I agree with DaveW. The only thing that made this a “stunning victory” for Hillary is the post-Iowa polls. Take that out of the narrative and it’s a stunning rise for Obama.
Now let’s see how they, and Edwards, do in states that are not 97% white. Let’s hear from the other 99% of the electorate, especially people in big cities.
I am not going to jump to conclusions, but we do have to look with unjaundiced eye at what went down. What could possibly explain it?
Not exactly – Jesse Jackson won five primaries and caucuses, including Louisiana, the District of Columbia, South Carolina, Virginia and one of two separate contests in Mississippi in 1984, and he won seven primaries (Alabama, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Puerto Rico and Virginia) and four caucuses (Delaware, Michigan, South Carolina and Vermont) in 1988.
It is true, however, regarding Hillary’s win, AFAIK.
Point taken, Oscar. Somehow that didn’t register as historic, I guess — maybe because Jackson was never identified by the media or the pols as having any serious chance of being nominated. So I still think Obama’s accomplishment is a pivotal moment, but for less clearcut reasons.
It was indeed historic and he did indeed have a serious chance of winning – it was my awakening to American politics – and some of us remember why it is of the utmost importance to utterly defeat and discredit the DLC, an organization that is, as The Nation put it, “hostile to the grassroots (it favored the term ‘special interests’) and determined to make the party safe, or safer, for white men.”
Haven’t we seen this somewhere before?
Zogby was predicting 42/29 for Obama over Clinton. And other not so good stuff.
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5529#more-5529
Russert says the Clinton people had themselves down by 11% and Obama’s people had themselves up by 13%.
I will say that this is a tremendously unfortunate development for our party and our nation and for the world
what…that the woman won? that it’s Hillary? that it’s bad for our democracy that 200,000 caucusers in a rural state (and a bunch of white male Beltway pundits) presume to decide who the next president will be before the rest of us have had a chance to weigh in? that the Obama coronation has been postponed?
that’s a piece of shit comment, and I hope that you explain it or retract it.
yeah. I’ve said repeatedly that nothing could do more to improve our politics than to increase the percentage of female representatives.
Anyone want to suggest I oppose Team Clinton because their figurehead is a woman?
I suspect a crucial factor tonight was precisely about NH voters listening to a bunch of white male Beltway pundits presume to decide who the next president will be before the rest of us have had a chance to weigh in, and telling them to shove it where the sun don’t shine.
Brad’s just put up a new post…
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5530
There is an upside to Clinton winning New Hampshire: nobody who prefers Barack Obama’s message of hope will be able to simply assume that he will win – they’ll know with absoulte certainty that they have to actually show up at the polls to make sure that their voices are heard. I’m sure that 100% voter turnout is a pipe-dream, but I’ll be interested to see just how high the turnout numbers go in South Carolina and beyond.
We made too much of the Obama win now we’ll make too much of the Clinton win. In the background I hear the MSNBC folks talking about a historic win. The only thing historic about it is that its history now. Kinda like lunch today. A little more historic than that I guess(a salad). This looks like quite a fight for the nomination. Obama and Clinton could be too close politically for either to pull away. Maybe the electorate is just torn and we are not used to this kind of primary fight. Maybe its the Diebold machines. Booman I think your right to sleep on this one.
I see Edwards is getting the Biden/Dodd treatment. He has dropped off the face of the earth as far as the MSM is concerned.
This is now a historic post.
Come to think of it. I’ve gotten so used to the idea of a woman winning (Hillary). I’ve forgotten it is historic. Iowa was historic. I’m really becoming cynical. Scratch that last post I’m going to bed.
Maybe a lot of the independents voted for McCain. Maybe some even thought Obama had it in the bag and thought they’d influence the repub vote instead.
On the other hand, maybe our country isnt ready for someone young and doesnt want something fresh. Maybe people arent yet fully aware of the disastrous position the country is actually in.
Then sure the establishment media would rather have Clinton, McCain, Giuiliani or some other tired long term establishment character that they knew and loved. Maybe the people too, but hey the media just love the comeback kid meme and theyll sell it well
I think this was the best possible outcome tonight. Each of our candidates will get more time to put out their message and more time to learn how to be a better candidate in preparing for the general election.
There is nothing that our candidates will throw at each other that will come close to what the GOP will throw at them. Better to get some seasoning.
And the turnout was high — things are looking up.
Well, you were right about McCain, which means I owe $20 to the Dem candidate of your choice.
I’m going to guess that isn’t going to be Hillary Clinton. 😉
Whatever actually happened tonight in NH, computerized voting is a real and very serious threat to democracy in this country.
Note — the suit has ALREADY been filed in all 50 states, including NH.
November 6, 2007
50 States Sued to Block Computerized Vote Counting
Federal Court to be Asked to Delay Primaries
On October 2nd we posted an article in which we announced that the Clean Election Lawsuit was being expanded to all fifty states. We said we were in the process of filing an amended complaint to name all of the nation’s chief election officials as defendants.
For the rest of the story, go to:
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/Update2007-11-06.htm
On further checking I find that this We The People Foundation is an extreme right wing organization of “militia” and Posse Comitatus types. I don’t know that they are the best people to be representing the voters of this country, to put it mildly.
As a Nevada resident, this now gets interesting for us on Saturday the 19th. Maybe we will matter after all.
Douglas Bersaw of Richmond, NH, plaintiff in the NCEL lawsuit in New Hampshire, is the founder and director of the St. Benedict Center, an extreme right-wing, virulently antisemitic pseudo-Catholic cult.
http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/4723
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=782
The point being, when you have people like this purporting to safeguard the voting rights of Americans, the word that first comes to mind is PSYOP … as in “discredit a movement by identifying it with right-wing nutcases.”
You BET it was stunning.
Stunningly honest.
A stunningly rebellious act by some rock hard New Englanders who wouldn’t be stampeded by the natioinal media.
GOOD on ’em.
And the Clinton “emotional moment”?
iT was real. Real emotion.
Real frustration on an IDEOLOGICAL, MORAL LEVEL.
Not the frustration of naked ambition thwarted or of the James Bond villian-like Agent of the Evil PermaGov character that she has been painted by so many of the leftiness bloggers.
Go watch it yourself.
Try to watch it without “knowing” who Hillary Clinton might be. Leave your Clinton baggage at the door, pro OR con.
What do you think?
And further, I read the constant kneejerk attacks on Hillary Clinton from the left…from men AND from women, including any number of women who consider themselves feminists…to be anti-female.
I really do.
You have heard of the idea of self-hating Jews? It’s a common trope in certain quite upright Jewish circles. The Jewish version of Uncle Tomism.
Well…fill in the blanks.
I think that many of the leftist women who have been most vocally attacking Hillary Clinton are in some quite complex way actually attacking the fact that she is female.
And a WHOLE lot of the men. Who are quite unconscious of what they are doing or why.
I surfed around the TV a little last night after the results were in. I do not remember which usually empty talking head actually said this, but the point was made that if it was Barack Obama who had 35+ years in government, had experienced the White House system in a real, up close and personal manner for 8 years and had been a Senator for 8 years versus Hillary Clinton who had Obama’s fairly limited experience in real power positions, Ms. Clinton would already have been laughed off of the national stage as a lightweight.
Obama’s maleness gives him a certain kind of pass, and Clinton’s femaleness means that she is not to be trusted.
EVEN BY MANY WOMEN.
Women who have staked their lives on being feminists.
Very Interesting.
Very interesting indeed.
Has our cynicism has reached such depths that we can believe NOTHING?
If so…BushCo has ALREADY won.
Later…
AG
I think he’s right, kids. That one moment could have changed my vote.
Intelligence, work ethic and fighting spirit are important, but passion is where it’s at.
We’re all so tired of posturing and manipulation, the revelation of genuine humanity is now a remarkable event. Headline news even.
are you saying we women cant look at all the info and think for ourselves?
that we cant look at all the corporate and special interest donations and come to the conclusion that she cant possibly do anything progressive because she is bought and paid for?
i dont support hillary although i will vote for her in the election if she is the nominee. i dont really care if she is a woman. i dont care if obama is black. i dont care if edwards is a lawyer.
i really can think for myself.
Read it here if you so desire:
The Queen cometh. And many of her potential subjects shaketh. That’s my take on what’s up, anyway.
later…
AG
I feel about the same way that I did after the OJ Simpson verdict.
You expect maybe some riots in Chevy Chase?
AG
Bottom line, I think, is that Hillary won because she is strong and determined. Maybe she comes off sometimes as too strong, but I think that’s often better than the nonchalance, bordering on apathy, that the other candidates show.
Sometimes, particulalry, in pop culture (see Princess Hillary), she comes off a ‘bitch’, but–hey–if it wins primaries, then maybe the other candidates need more bitchiness! Or at least more drive.
Massive Party Regular Turnout Trumped Massive New Voter Turnout
The vote was rigged? I thought only Republicans do that. 😉
Little mentioned is an analysis that the late poll numbers still has a lot of undecideds and almost all went to Hillary and McCain. Exit polling showed a fair number literally making their choice in the booth.
In the end I suspect this has more to do with the effectiveness of the Clinton machine and voters not wanting to have the primaries effectively end in NH with a Obama victory.
Just curious, does anyone know who asked Hillary, “How are you doing?”
The more I have seen that clip of her crying, the more it seems her words were too well chosen to create the impression that she has passion too. Almost seems like it might have been a planted question.
Tin foil hat off. 🙂
See the link to the video and transcript in Arthur Gilroy’s comment above. It gives the woman’s name and age and the full question.
The woman who asked Hillary the question was just on NPR.
She claims she voted for Obama because SHE was driven to tears by one of his speeches.
And she is stunned the effect her question might have had on the election.