For general discussion and debate. Most obvious talking point: What the heck happened yesterday in New Hampshire?
How do you feel about the outcome? Are you angered by how wrong the pre-primary polls were? How do you feel about McCain's comeback?
How important was this result to the players, in particular Clinton, Obama, McCain, Romney, and Huckabee? In the end, do Iowa and New Hampshire EVER decide a nominee? Are the press making much more of these two campaign events just to drive ratings? Will we look back months from now wondering why we got so excited about what happened in these two states?
Finally, how important was Hillary's crying game Monday to her victory Tuesday? Did the incredible focus this received push her over the top, or was this irrelevant? Will we look back on this as the crocodile tears that made a president?
Comments Policy
And now, today's Shrub
January 9, 2008 - 11:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberAnd now, today's Shrub Report®:
Big whoop about NH. We can finally move on to the states that actually MEAN SOMETHING. Especially since every state who is having primaries/caucuses before Feb 5 are losing half their delegates, these results are twice-as-meaningless.
On this date in 1861, the first shots of the Civil War were fired upon the Star of the West.
Here's a shocker: Iran claims US Navy video is a fake.
Was this cow named Khartoum?
The new American Gladiators is on TV. What happened to the old ones?
It's been a while since we've had a FastEd's Story of the Day! You gotta love Joisey!
Angel Eyes would have turned 83 today, meanwhile, this guitar god turns 63.
Partner With Islam! I'm serious!
The latest on the civil war/Al-Qaeda inconsequential presence in Iraq.
A Nanny State Update.
Slick Willie's pointer is out again. Once again, where is the Clinton Thumb these days?
And, finally, all hail the Queen!
Edit: Oh yeah, almost forgot today's Phileas Fogg Balloon Update. Apparently, DasBlimp might not even be able to be airborne in the freezing winter wonderland of SOUTH CAROLINA. Can't wait until Super Tuesday. Oh, wait. $195,000 still needs to be raised to run DasBlimp through February. Genius!
Found another Roger!
January 9, 2008 - 11:20 ET by FastEdus in joisey might be nuts, but NYC likes to make real life out of movies! "Weekend at Bernies" comes to mind!
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Scooped by Ed once again!
January 9, 2008 - 11:31 ET by Roger the ShrubberScooped by Ed once again! Great story!
And now for today’s
January 9, 2008 - 11:42 ET by TruthMongerAnd now for today’s Anti-defamation(™ :) report…
Partner with Islam…
Impressive! You only had to
January 9, 2008 - 11:52 ET by Roger the ShrubberImpressive! You only had to reach back into 2004 to find one story. Not exactly a flood of evidence gushing out in your defense.
nice try:) it started in
January 9, 2008 - 19:24 ET by TruthMongernice try:)
it started in 2004 - even bigger now:)
hee-hee-hee
With such a loud outcry of
January 9, 2008 - 19:34 ET by Roger the ShrubberWith such a loud outcry of "moderate" Muslims, surely you could have found a news story that appeared with the past three years.
Hee hee hee.
Way to..
January 10, 2008 - 03:39 ET by Sua Sponte 75stay on thread.....Return of the De-railer...
"You're either part of the solution or part of the problem"
Uh Roger, that's not a thumb
January 9, 2008 - 11:26 ET by Ruths husband BenUh Roger, that's not a thumb and it ain't Clinton's (although Edwards does call it his little slick willy).
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't. - Ben Franklin
That isn't Clinton?
January 9, 2008 - 11:29 ET by Roger the ShrubberThat isn't Clinton? Darn.
Actually, I used Edwards to point out that tons of politicians do the same thing these days. I guess I could have been more descriptive. You what happens when you assume, right? haha.
No, it is Edward's. Notice
January 9, 2008 - 11:31 ET by Ruths husband BenNo, it is Edward's. Notice that it is not attached. Elisabeth lets him take it out of the house once a week as long as he promises not to play with it in public. He got in a lot of trouble with her over this episode.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't. - Ben Franklin
Are you sure? I expected
January 9, 2008 - 11:39 ET by Roger the ShrubberAre you sure? I expected something a bit smaller...
It swelled up in the jar
January 9, 2008 - 11:47 ET by Ruths husband BenIt swelled up in the jar (pickling can do that, you know).
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't. - Ben Franklin
Crozine is a .....
January 9, 2008 - 13:15 ET by SouthJersey1953Arghhh, I cannot stand Corzine. First he hands out all of our money, plus money we don't have, then he "taxes" the tolls roads....I guess he heard that we don't want them to raise taxes on us again and he figures NJ voters are too stupid to realize that toll hikes = tax hikes......Oh wait, NJ voters MUST be that dumb because they keep electing bozos like him.
It's not Right vs. Left; it is Right vs. Wrong
Hey South,
January 9, 2008 - 15:33 ET by FastEdYou gotta read the comments at the Asbury Park Press - youse ain't the only one to "not like" jon cortezone. You gotta wonder too, WHY would a guy, who is supposedly SO smart, leave the US senate and run for gov - unless he's got a burning desire for POWER?? "After our taxes, let them TRY to eat!"
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
tolls
January 9, 2008 - 15:37 ET by DontabThe people in NJ are morons (not all of us) they keep putting libs or rino's in office. Corsine figures if he asks for the stars, we would be happy if only he charged us for the moon.
Lee Van Cleef was cool!
January 9, 2008 - 18:34 ET by Carl KolchakWay to remember Lee Van Cleef's birthday. He was great in "The Good the Bad and the Ugly" as well as "For a Few Dollars More."
He was also in "Escape from New York", but not in the all time best sequel "Escape from L.A." Why "Escape From LA" didn't win every concivable Oscar that year is beyond me.
Don't forget he was also in "The Master" a long lived tv show that won lots of Emmys I think.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086756/
Angel Eyes: When I'm paid, I always follow my job through. You know that
Good to hear from you,
January 9, 2008 - 19:07 ET by Roger the ShrubberGood to hear from you, Carl. Your posts are too infrequent for my tastes (it is good that we pm each other, though!). The reason Lee did not do "Escape from LA" was because he died in 89, and the movie came out in 96.
Speaking of great movies, today is the anniversary of the British aand her allies retreating from Gallipoli in WW1. The 1981 movie was the film Mel did between the first two Mad Max movies, and was directed by Peter Weir, who also directed "Year of Living Dangerously", "Witness", "Dead Poet's Society", & "Maaster and Commander" (thx, IMDB!)...
Which candidates are
January 9, 2008 - 11:05 ET by mattmWhich candidates are actually leading in delegates?
I see a lot of different
January 9, 2008 - 12:55 ET by Hero SquadI see a lot of different numbers (some count committed delegates from states where voting has yet to take place.) On its home page, CNN reports that Obama now has 25 delegates, Clinton has 24, Edwards has 18. Democrat delegates needed to clinch the nomination: 2,162 (4,323 total.) (However, click the democratic scorecard and the numbers change considerably.)
Republicans need 1,152 to win (2,302 total.) Romney has 24, Huckabee 18, McCain 10, Thompson 6, Paul 2, Giuliani and Hunter, 1 each.
So one has to wonder why people are ready to jump overboard/declare victory when barely 1% of the delegates have been locked down.
*****
"There are no stupid questions. Only stupid people who ask questions." - Chris Berman
McCain's victory can hardly
January 9, 2008 - 11:11 ET by motherbeltMcCain's victory can hardly be called a "comeback"....he was expected to win in NH. And it doesn't necessarily translate to victories in any upcoming states.
Oh Ma . .
January 9, 2008 - 11:22 ET by FastEdwhen the msm(Lsm) SAYS is't a comback, it has to be! And besides, me thinks it's the voters heads that give the state its nickname!
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Predicting Romney's future
January 9, 2008 - 11:56 ET by ThisnThatWhat bugs me are the pundits trying to predict that Romney must be quitting. I don't believe we have any indications of that -- but a lot of libs are sure trying to push this viewpoint.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
same as Thompson after IOWA
January 9, 2008 - 13:18 ET by SouthJersey1953MSM spread rumors that if Fred didn't do good in Iowa he would drop out. They tried (successfully) to hurt his chances, now they have moved on the sabatage Mitt's campaign.......
They want Hellary or Hussien Obama....but they need to hedge their bet by putting their boy McCain on the Repub side
It's not Right vs. Left; it is Right vs. Wrong
How lucky are we, a RINO is
January 9, 2008 - 11:17 ET by USA4freedomHow lucky are we, a RINO is in the lead.. for us.
Some choices for the Democrats:
Bimbo
Dumbo
Sleazeo
Makes me want to puke.
I think if we put up a RINO it will be a walk over for Dumbo rats.
You cant out Democrat the Democrats. The conservatives will just stay home like they did before.
I just have that sinking feeling that no matter what happens we are screwed.
I get so tired of $hit sandwiches.
Good job there, Bush and company. UGH!!!
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
So, USA, how do you see it play out?
January 9, 2008 - 11:24 ET by FastEdBimbo or Dumbo vs. RHINO? or none of the above?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
I sure am hoping for NONE OF
January 9, 2008 - 11:34 ET by USA4freedomI sure am hoping for NONE OF THE ABOVE...
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Random thoughts on Hillary "comeback" ...
January 9, 2008 - 11:38 ET by mustangsallyIf it was really the tears which swayed last minute deciders amonst the blue-haired biddies in NH, how stupid are Democrats in the frozen state?
It is clear to me that the Clinton team cooked up the "tears" as a last minute and desperate ploy to "humanize" Hillary. How scary is it that she needs "humanization"?
Now that she's used the "tears ploy", what does she have left in her bag of tricks?
Much as I'd like to see this witch "burned at the steak" by OsamaBama, I think she'd be a gift to Republicans in the General Elections. McCain, in particular, would eat her alive.
After watching her post-election speeches in Iowa and NH, I'm convinced that I've seen more charisma from a wet newspaper than Hillary. She is so mundane and pedantic. And her husband just stands there thinking "I can't believe they're going for this ..."
didn't want to die without woman prez
January 9, 2008 - 13:21 ET by SouthJersey1953I heard one of the old ladies actually say that she didn't want to die and think that if only she had voted for Hillary she would have lived to see a woman in the White House.
It's not Right vs. Left; it is Right vs. Wrong
Do not underestimate the
January 9, 2008 - 13:33 ET by NL207Do not underestimate the power of this desire amongst women. Hillary will draw widespread support from "Republican" women on this one point. In they hearts, they want a woman too be President, any woman, just once, within their lifetimes. It does not matter to these women what kind of odious monster this one woman is, just that she be a woman.
This is why I pray the Dems nominate Obama. He's a classic leftoid against whom we can debate ideas without the backdrop of this hidden emotion.
Women won't vote
January 10, 2008 - 10:17 ET by ThisnThatAlso, if Hill loses the primary, this will likely de-motivate the Dim women so much that they will stay home and not vote, thereby increasing Republican chances even more.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
If it quacks like a duck...
January 9, 2008 - 11:24 ET by vrwc13"I am glad somebody is talking about this! Here's the problem. The polls accurately predicted to within 1% error EVERY SINGLE CANDIDATE EXCEPT OBAMA/CLINTON. If you look at the pre-vote polls for ALL other candidates, they match up exactly. I mean exactly. Then, it is as if the Clinton/Obama results are reversed. They're both off by 5+% each. The statistical odds of this happening by chance must be astronomically small. This should cause a serious investigation into potential vote fraud. You must be able to explain this discrepancy and rule out fraud. Otherwise, fraud must be the prime suspect if we hope to have fair elections in the future!"
Posted by: Eric | Jan 9, 2008 12:55:27 AM
from here: (h/t Drudge)
http://blogs.abcnews...
v
Good morning vrwc13 I
January 9, 2008 - 11:36 ET by shawn228Good morning vrwc13
I seriously doubt this is some vlwc. People on this site have been saying for years that polls are biased and not accurate. Now the very rare time, the polls are off by more than 5 percent, your saying there might be voter fraud?
The msm, politicans, Romney and the family dog
It just goes to show a good
January 9, 2008 - 13:06 ET by dscottIt just goes to show a good plausible conspiracy theory can grow legs. That's what makes them fun, however, did Hillary & Co. bus thousands of voters across state lines? Surely someone would have noticed that especially at the voting places. On the other hand, a high turn out "could be" a sign that an unpurged voter registration roll or people falsely registering at the door engaging in fraudulently voting. Given the experiences of Chicago and Philadelphia, this isn't outside the realm of possibility. Philadelphia being an outrageous example of Dem Machine Politics where more people are registered voters who vote than there are adults available to vote according to the Census Bureau! In other words 100% participation rate among adults, which is not in the realm of probablity (possible but highly improbable).
But would someone be desperate enough to do this during a primary versus the general election thus attracting a public scandal maybe stretching it a bit. It's one thing stuff the ballot box and have the Repubs cry foul when they lose as this is discounted as being a sore loser, it's quite another thing for one Dem to do it to another Dem where the MSM backing of candidates may make it in their interests to expose the whole affair to help their candidate and up their ratings in the process. I guess the real question is Hillary that desperate?
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
I guess the real question is Hillary that desperate?
January 9, 2008 - 13:15 ET by vrwc13Just how BAD do you think Bill/Hill want "their" house back? Desperate times call for desperate measures.
btw: do the Clintons have a history of this kind of thing?
v
YES!!!
January 9, 2008 - 13:24 ET by SouthJersey1953Yes, they ARE that desperate.....I believe they are willing to do ANYTHING to get back in......
It's not Right vs. Left; it is Right vs. Wrong
That will give something
January 9, 2008 - 12:03 ET by dscottThat will give something for the Truthers to chew on, a Clinton conspiracy.
But it does demonstrate again why polls from the MSM should not be used in any event to determine the outcome or an indication of what people are thinking. The poll in the hands of the MSM is nothing more than an attempt to sway the election results and deceive the public into thinking a certain way that conforms to the agenda of the MSM, aka the Democrat Propaganda Outlet. The MSM of course denies this but the results speak otherwise, they have been caught too many times engaging in bias reporting through misrepresentation. As long as the MSM holds the view that they have a right to filter the news in such a way as to influence public opinion under the guise of their political agenda, they can not be trusted at all. It goes back to the old saying: Don't believe anything you read, don't believe anything you hear and only believe half of what you see.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
"Just the facts Ma'am" Sgt. Joe Friday:
January 9, 2008 - 12:22 ET by vrwc13"Just the facts Ma'am" Sgt. Joe Friday:
Zogby/Rasmussen//actual:
McCain – 36/32//37
Romney – 27/31//32
Huckabee – 10/10//11
Guiliani – 9/8//9
Paul – 8/8//8
Thompson – 2/3//1
Obama – 42/37//37
***Clinton – 29/30//39***
Edwards – 17/19//17
Zogby and Rasmussen are reputable sources, and spot on ***except for Clinton***?
you be the judge...and don't forget the "high turn-out" and "shortage of ballots". Grew up in Chicago during hiz-honor Daley(Sr.) times, and he always had "high turn-out". Even people from the grave showed up!
v
"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
Ever watch the Simpson's
January 9, 2008 - 12:27 ET by taterEver watch the Simpson's episode where Sideshow Bob wins the mayoral election because of dead people voting (from both the people AND pet cemetery). My guess is Hil might of had a few Snowball I and Humphrey Boa-Gart votes :) .
Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns
tater - That was a funny
January 9, 2008 - 12:36 ET by Jack Bauertater - That was a funny one.
Didn't Lisa uncover the scam with the help of Deep Throat (Smithers)
I think it makes for a
January 9, 2008 - 13:12 ET by dscottI think it makes for a plausible conspiracy theory. But during a primary and near the beginning of the primaries? Where the risks of the MSM outting you for ratings and political gain are so large? There's a lotta love in the MSM for Obama, I don't think they would restrain themselves to out Hillary on a voting scam. It would be a very high stakes desperate move on Hillary's part not to have all of the MSM and Dem Party to cover one's rear and that only happens during the general election.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
Check out this "rolling"
January 9, 2008 - 13:33 ET by vrwc13Check out this "rolling" poll from top to bottom. If you cut and paste it, and then graph it...it quite obvious the "big mo" is there for Obama...Oct '07 46/18(HRC/BO) ...now 30/30!
http://www.rasmussen...
v
Best possible result
January 9, 2008 - 11:25 ET by KC MulvilleThe Democrats amassed an enormous amount of money, but the more they spend it on each other, the better. I want the Democrats to wage a draining, divisive, recriminating race, right down to the convention.
I'll also say that the Democrats are more and more showing that they're the party of emotion. Voters swoon over Obama, and then they swoon over Hillary. But the problem with swooning is that it leaves you with a headache. Swooning can be manipulated, up and/or down. It can be manufactured, and it can be destroyed over the smallest events.
I'll also repeat my suspicion: since the media profits from a close and dramatic contest, the media has a vested interest in not allowing any candidate to pull away. Anyone who pulls ahead can count on the media trying to pull them back.
About the "tears"
January 9, 2008 - 11:29 ET by FastEdWhen can we expect to see "water from the eyes" (see DUNE), from Edwards? Bad hair day?
Obama? 'but I do have experience!'
Kusinich? 'what'da mean I'm not tall, both feet touch the ground!'
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Give that lady a stillsuit,
January 9, 2008 - 13:25 ET by Hero SquadGive that lady a stillsuit, Lyet!
*****
"There are no stupid questions. Only stupid people who ask questions." - Chris Berman
Hillary
January 9, 2008 - 11:31 ET by Gat New YorkIt was evident that Hillary's two events the other day helped garner sufficient women's votes to get her the victory.
Her Tears: Not coincidentally it happened the day before the election, in the morning, and in full view of all cameras. Not coincidentally it took over the press coverage for the day and every response by her or her minions was the same to deliberaely garner the female vote.
Iron My Shirt: How do a couple of radio shock jocks get literally a front row seat to a Hillary town hall meeting with her having the heaviest security detail of all candidates? The minute they show this ridiculous sign, she smoothly turns and asks the lights be turned on and without missing a beat launches into an obviously rehearsed rant on women's rights. Has the MSM asked these radio guys or anyone at their station how they got those front row seats?
The Race Card: Our first supposed Black President used a not so subtle race card in his last day speech which Donna Brazile launched into him over. As a result, there was significant voter booth conversion.
In doing this, the Clintons are fracturing and demoralizing the base of their party. This primary is very similar to the one Democrats had in 1968 - lots of enthusiasm over RFK, Gene McCarthy, and George McGovern - but it was Humphrey that got the nomination but not the support of Dem voters.
In the end, do Iowa and New
January 9, 2008 - 11:36 ET by AJIn the end, do Iowa and New Hampshire EVER decide a nominee?
No but they do decide who will no longer be running. I.E.: Biden and Dodd.
Mrs. Bill Clinton vs.
January 9, 2008 - 11:37 ET by OldSailor88I was happy to see that Mrs. Bill Clinton won in New Hampshire. Her being the Democrat nominee is our best bet to ensure a Republican, whether it be RINO or conservative, is voted in to office. People will come out and vote Republican just to vote against Mrs. Bill. That won't happen with Hussein on the ticket. As I said in live chat last night, Hussein and his legions of sheep scare me. They don't care that he has no substance, and you have to give him credit for being able to motivate people into a frenzy.
Faciem durum cacantis habes
I think Hillary's win smells
January 9, 2008 - 11:43 ET by BruzillaI think Hillary's win smells like last week's garbage as the numbers just aren't working for me. I heard reports last night that voter participation in some districts was exceeding 80%! 80%! You can't get 80% of a population group to come out for a free dinner. While turnout was above average in most areas, some areas were wayyyyyy above average.
Frank Luntz has been ragging on the polsters, saying that their methods for polling are wrong due to invalid turnout models, the numbers of new voters, etc., but the exact same conditions were present in Iowa and the polls were spot on, and the Republican polls were spot on. Also, Terry McAuliffe was making the rounds yesterday, setting the expectations that if Hillary finished only five points down from Obama it would be a victory for Hillary, so you know the Clinton internal polls were showing the same thing that the external polls were.
Here's what bothers me. There was record demand for Democrat ballots, so much so that some districts ran out and had to have some delivered. The CW at the time was that the Indys were coming out in force and voting Democrat. But in the end, it looks like the major flow of indy voters went for McCain. So if the indy voters were using Republican ballots to vote for McCain, who was snagging up all these Democrat ballots and voting for Clinton?
Here's my predication for what's going to shake out of the review of the polls: I think that we're going to find that the polls were close to being right. They were showing a 10-pt lead for Obama up to the final days. I think that the Clinton tears and the radio stunt "iron my shirt" episodes got some women back to Hillary's side and probably gained her three or four points. I think the rest of the votes came from an effort on Hillary's campaign to truck in voters from other states to vote for her. NH law allows anyone with a NH address, even if they just moved in or are about to move out, to vote and to register during election day. This makes it possible to bring in busloads of voters from Mass and NY, give them some group residential addresses, register them, and get them voting.
The reason I believe this is the 80% turnouts and McCauliffe's predictions. Hillary was down ten points in all the polling, and I would bet that Hillary's campaign folks were trucking in enough voters to cut that to a five point lead, which was why McCauliffe was making the rounds predicting a five-point loss. But they didn't anticipate how big the crying bounce was going to be and it ended up being enough to put her on top.
I'm expecting the post-mortum on the polling to show that there were a lot of people with the same addresses voting, and who registered the day of the elction or shortly before, and who have since left the state.
Bruzilla
January 9, 2008 - 11:48 ET by OldSailor88That's quite the conspiracy theory, and not below the Clintons, but do you think that if it is true that it will get reported? My gut feeling says, nope.
Faciem durum cacantis habes
To put things in context,
January 9, 2008 - 11:58 ET by BruzillaTo put things in context, Hillary was effectively dead in the water if she lost NH. She could say want she wanted, but her funds and support would be gone and her only way to fight back would be to get vicious with Obama, which would sully her and hubby's relationship with black voters. So NH was a must win state for her, which makes it more likely she would be willing to cheat to win.
Will it get reported? I think so. Watching CNN last night, the feeling I got was that Wolf Blitzer & company were like the munchkins after their tormenting witch was killed. They trashed her and Bill, and did everything but start singing Ding Dong The Witch is Dead, so I think they would welcome a story about her stealing the election. Also, the pollsters, many of whom are connected to the media, have a severe credibility problem to overcome. If folks stop trusting the polls, these folks go out of business, so I think there's a strong motivation for them to discover the truth and make sure everyone knows it. I'm betting their sense of self-preservation will trump their desire to protect the Clintons.
Cheating would be good news for Hillary
January 9, 2008 - 12:07 ET by ThisnThatThere are a lot of people who want to kill our democratic process. I believe Hillary is one of them, and I think she would capitalize on any cheating. Look at what these type of people have said during the previous two elections -- they were rigged, the election was stolen, etc. Destruction of our form of Government is the real "Change" Hillary wants, I believe.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
If it quacks like a duck...cont.
January 9, 2008 - 11:49 ET by vrwc13Bru
My thoughts exactly and on Drudge the following:
http://newsbusters.o...
v
If it quacks like a duck...follow-up
January 9, 2008 - 12:12 ET by vrwc13"Just the facts Ma'am" Sgt. Joe Friday:
Zogby/Rasmussen//actual:
McCain – 36/32//37
Romney – 27/31//32
Huckabee – 10/10//11
Guiliani – 9/8//9
Paul – 8/8//8
Thompson – 2/3//1
Obama – 42/37//37
***Clinton – 29/30//39***
Edwards – 17/19//17
notice the only one with a real discrepency? hmmm
v
lets start the vast-left-wing-conspiracy theory!
H/T Dan Riehl Local polls
January 9, 2008 - 12:42 ET by Right2thePointH/T Dan Riehl
Local polls showed a toss up for Obama and Hill
The results were there all along, it just didn't generate any buzz.
Local polls versus all the rest and consensus...
January 9, 2008 - 12:54 ET by vrwc13...had Obama by +8.3 then actually losing by -2! 10 point swing by my math.
RCP Average 01/05 - 01/07 - 38.3 30.0 18.3 5.7 Obama +8.3
Suffolk/WHDH 01/06 - 01/07 500 LV 39 34 15 4 Obama +5.0
American Res. Group 01/06 - 01/07 600 LV 40 31 20 4 Obama +9.0
ReutersC-Span/Zogby 01/05 - 01/07 862 LV 42 29 17 5 Obama +13.0
Rasmussen 01/05 - 01/07 1774 LV 37 30 19 8 Obama +7.0
CNN/WMUR/UNH 01/05 - 01/06 599 LV 39 30 16 7 Obama +9.0
Suffolk/WHDH 01/05 - 01/06 500 LV 35 34 15 3 Obama +1.0
Marist 01/05 - 01/06 636 LV 36 28 22 7 Obama +8.0
Rasmussen 01/05 - 01/06 1203 LV 38 28 18 8 Obama +10.0
CBS News 01/05 - 01/06 323 LV 35 28 19 5 Obama +7.0
USA Today/Gallup 01/04 - 01/06 778 LV 41 28 19 6 Obama +13.0
Franklin Pierce 01/04 - 01/06 403 LV 34 31 20 6 Obama +3.0
Strategic Vision (R) 01/04 - 01/06 600 LV 38 29 19 7 Obama +9.0
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby 01/04 - 01/06 844 LV 39 29 19 -- Obama +10.0
American Res. Group 01/04 - 01/06 600 LV 39 28 22 4 Obama +11.0
FOX News 01/04 - 01/06 500 LV 32 28 18 6 Obama +4.0
American Res. Group 01/04 - 01/05 600 LV 38 26 20 3 Obama +12.0
Concord Monitor 01/04 - 01/05 400 LV 34 33 23 4 Obama +1.0
CNN/WMUR/UNH 01/04 - 01/05 359 LV 33 33 20 4 Tie
Suffolk/WHDH 01/04 - 01/05 500 LV 33 35 14 5 Clinton +2.0
Rasmussen 01/04 - 01/05 1210 LV 39 27 18 8 Obama +12.0
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby 01/03 - 01/05 844 LV 30 31 20 7 Clinton +1.0
v
"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
From what I am seeing , the
January 9, 2008 - 12:07 ET by Right2thePointFrom what I am seeing , the NATIONAL pollsters had it Obama, Hill and then Edwards.
Edwards hit pretty much on the money for final per cent of the vote they forcast.
The LOCAL polls showed almost a tie between Obama and Hill with Edwards ending up with the same percent the nationals showed.
Still working the exit poll data but it shows Hillary picked up more women here than in Iowa...some are putting that due to positions from Edwards about Hill in the last couple of days, but I am not buying it for that big a shift between the two states.
The other area where Hill got a real boost was in single females enrolled in college right now.
I haven't worked through all the cross tabs yet, but even the various exit polls are showing different data in a lot of ways.
Will probably pick up more inconsistencies later.
The biggest inconsistency is
January 9, 2008 - 12:23 ET by BruzillaThe biggest inconsistency is the 80% turnout. You can't get 80% of any American group to do anything! Also, remember that in NH they have open primaries, so anyone can vote for anybody. The statewide breakdowns that I've heard for NH are about 30% Dem, 30% Repub, and 40% indy. So if 80% of the voters turned out, you would expect to see a very unusually high number of republican votes in the same district, and we didn't. And with most of those extra votes going for Clinton, that would mean that she had a groundswell of support from Republicans, and I don't see that happening.
I'me guessing in those 80% precincts, you had about 35-40% turnout from real voters and 40% from "day" voters.
I would have thought that
January 9, 2008 - 12:30 ET by Right2thePointI would have thought that the national poll firms having seen the higher number turnout in Iowa would have been aware of a turnout model change being also likely in NH.
Most of the new turnout was all about the fight on the left, the right side was almost even with what they got in 2000.
I have not yet seen the breakdown for turn out percentages, but anything above 40% in primaries starts to raise eyebrows.
I'm in New Hampshire
January 9, 2008 - 13:02 ET by AJSHOPEI'm in New Hampshire (for a couple more months, originally from Ohio) and WGIR in Manchester had some Democrat on saying that there were a lot of first time registerations yesterday and the people were voting for the first time and that they weren't just young people.
If you've listened to Rush about a month and a half ago, a NH politician called in and said that it's REALLY easy to vote in NH (in the primaries and the general election). Pretty much all you have to do is say that you live in NH and they let you vote. I've lived in NH for about 4 months, but I didn't vote. NH doesn't have any law putting a time requirement on how long you need to live in the state before you can vote.
You are correct, and NH also
January 9, 2008 - 13:06 ET by BruzillaYou are correct, and NH also doesn't place any requirements for you to stay a resident. So you can "move" to NH tuesday morning, register to vote, vote, then decide to move back to Mass or NY where you came from tuesday night... and I'm guessing that's exactly what happened.
Someone's going to blow the cover off this... it's just a matter of time.
I work in Hudson and live in Manchester
January 9, 2008 - 13:13 ET by AJSHOPEAnd I did find it a little unusual that there was a TON of traffic going south on the Everett Turnpike as I was going north to go home. Usually going north on the Everett Turnpike is bad at 5:00 pm but it honestly looked worse going back down into Boston last night.
hmmm...duck anyone? v
January 9, 2008 - 13:18 ET by vrwc13hmmm...duck anyone?
v
Yeah, to give you a little
January 9, 2008 - 13:40 ET by AJSHOPEYeah, to give you a little bit of the picture, Hudson and Nashua are right next to each other and are right on the NH/MA border. In fact I work about a mile from the MA border, but Manchester isn't that far either, it's only about 15 miles from the MA border. Another thing to keep in mind that places like Portsmouth and Rochester are right on the border with Maine. Although I think a lot of people probably went to Nashua and Manchester to vote because they are the largest cities in NH and it would be harder to find people out.
Iowa had the same voter
January 9, 2008 - 13:09 ET by BruzillaIowa had the same voter dynamics as NH, and the polls were just fine. What was different about Iowa is that you caucus with people you know for the most part, and a huge number of strangers you've never seen before is going to get noticed.
Iranian Snowstorm
January 9, 2008 - 11:58 ET by ThisnThatHow about that fierce Iranian snowstorm? Over 3 feet of snow, with more to come. People frozen to death. Lots of traffic accidents. Where's Al gore?
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Do Iranians make "snow
January 9, 2008 - 12:23 ET by Roger the ShrubberDo Iranians make "snow angels"?
I wonder how much gas prices will go up because of this?
I think the correct term is
January 9, 2008 - 13:25 ET by MassConservRoger, I think the correct term is "snow burka".
I see that Karl Rove has
January 9, 2008 - 13:24 ET by Airforce_5_OI see that Karl Rove has agian struck with his deadly weather machine!!!!
DAMN YOU KARL!!!!!!
The bigger question is are
January 9, 2008 - 13:30 ET by taterThe bigger question is...Are they going to blame "Allah" for all this bad weather?
Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns
I can read the Iranian
January 9, 2008 - 13:52 ET by Airforce_5_OI can read the Iranian propaganda rag now.
“21 brothers and sisters were martyred today in the cause of Allah according to the Iranian government. Ayatollah Kismiarse said that Allah has taken them as a sign that the “white devils of the west will be coming soon for your women and children! To hell with the infidels!!!!!”
Russia has set aid to the region in the way of shovels and large bags of salt. Two more traitors to Allah were stoned when they named a snowman Mohammad.”
Regionalism?
January 9, 2008 - 12:04 ET by UnsaneIA: a midwestern state. Not surprising that they voted for Obama, he being a Senator of a neighboring midwestern state.
NH: a New England state. NY is not far away. Not terribly surprising that they voted for Clinton.
I suspect regionalism plays into this more than is being reported...
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
I'm betting the only role
January 9, 2008 - 12:25 ET by BruzillaI'm betting the only role regionalism played was that it was easy to truck in day voters from Mass, NY, and Vermont to come in, register, vote, then leave.
That would be cheating,
January 9, 2008 - 12:28 ET by vrwc13That would be cheating, right? And Hillary and company are completely above board, right?
v
Here's what a friend of mine said about the Hillary "scandal":
"Calling the ashtray chucking, lamp smashing, profane mouthed, cattle futures fraud investing, money laundering, perjury committing, justice obstructing, document hiding, adultery abetting, secret service abusing, Vince Foster cover up aiding, carpet bagging, lying political phony a bitch is too mild a term." November 15, 2007 - by mikej
Not impressed
January 9, 2008 - 12:30 ET by UnsaneConspiracy theories are too easy to embrace.
Regionalism plays a role. Why did Kerry win NH in 2004, for instance, in the general election? He's from MA, a neighbor of NH.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Why did Kerry win NH in
January 9, 2008 - 12:39 ET by Jack BauerOne word:
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.
Good Point, JB
January 9, 2008 - 12:46 ET by MassConservGood point, but I think that word is too articulate. To me it sounded more like a:
YEEEEEEEEOOOOOWWWWWWWAAAAARRRRRRR
;-)
I agree with you. But being
January 9, 2008 - 13:29 ET by BruzillaI agree with you. But being a human performance analyst, I know that people will behave a certain way, given a certain set of circumstances. There are variables, but for the most part they are predictable and measureable. When you see a large deviation from an expected norm, there must be a reason for it.
Large deviations like people saying for a week that they're voting for Obama, then suddenly switching to Clinton, is a big deviation. A conspiracy theory would be that all these folks thought they would get their jollies by lying to the pollsters, but that level of effort would be a deviation in and of itself. Another theory would be that thousands of people walked into the voting booth and changed their minds. Frank Luntz brought that possibility up, but is it likely that enough people did this to effect a 10-point swing? Again, very unlikely... especially given that Obama had nothing but positive momentum going for him and no stumbles.
So, assuming that there was no mass effort to defraud the pollsters, and that there was not massive occurence of changed minds, what else could have caused this large a deviation? The only answer that I can come up with is there was a huge increase in the number of voters, with most all of them voting for Hillary. I admit that's just an assumption, but McCauliffe sure sounded pretty positive that Hillary would be losing by five points instead of 10+, despite every poll showing she wouldn't.
Her own voice?
January 9, 2008 - 12:42 ET by NCConservativeHillary started off near the start of her