Earlier Polling Showed Obama Ahead, Yet Clinton Won, How Many Lefties Will Think She 'Stole' NH?

Hardly any
47% (1504 votes)
Some
21% (672 votes)
Most
15% (489 votes)
Nearly all
16% (526 votes)
Total votes: 3191

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Clinton won?

January 9, 2008 - 01:28 ET by scamorama

If the name of the game is Delegates, and Clinton and Obama EACH got 9, how did Clinton win?

Spin

Spin

Spin

 

Most interesting

January 9, 2008 - 01:30 ET by Lame Cherry

Polls can not be this wrong unless deliberately manipulated for a result.

McCain was polled with Romney closing and the numbers reflected that. Yet Obama in a 10 point lead lost by 2 points. That is a 12 point spread and it had nothing to do with "independents" of New Hampshire.

I honestly hope Newsbusters runs some features on Hillary as I was listening to her tonight instead of watching. Her speeches say all they should, but if you listen to her "heart" or the sound of her voice it is telling. This is a woman who does not care. She is extremely tired and into that her voice is saying, "I will go through the motions".
She knows something and from a few smiles at the beginning this is a woman who is not pleased with winning.

In contrast, Obama sounds in listening to his voice frequency worried, but trying to project he is a winner but he is scared he has lost.

I will maintain as I stated before, Hillary is trying to loose this thing and the polling was a deliberate attempt to sway the voters. This has nothing to do with Diebold stealing votes or moving things around in conspiracy, but in this coup on her which I believe she is taking part in as she knows the consequences of winning there was a blatant attempt to get New Hampshire voters to tank her. They would not be herded though in good enough numbers.

Charlie Rose was hinting at this last night in "if Obama did not win by as large a margin". Rose knew the polling was different compared to the public numbers.

I would contend this was no different than the fake numbers Democrats put out in John Kerry trouncing George Bush on election night.

As stated, Hillary's voice was bored and tired. It was thinking while she was speaking, "I was supposed to loose here and win a few primaries to save face later.........but now what am I going to do?"

Perhaps she will "black slam" Obama more like she did today along with "massah" Bill terming him a "fairytale" which is making a black male feminine or as blacks would hear it, the white boss man cracking the whip to keep the blacks in line. It was astounding the Clinton's both were doing this today as the backlash which can occur is immense.

There is a reason Republican polls are tracking correctly and Democrat polls are not.

Thankfully if enough borish Democrats keep giving Hillary wins, all that YouTube information is going to be posted in video what Bill and Hillary have been up to.

Can't loose for winning Hillary and can't win for loosing.

 

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

}}---> I wonder Lame

January 9, 2008 - 01:34 ET by Cool Arrow

I think the Weeping Madonna stunt really hit home with the LOLITAS (little old ladies in tennis shoes of America) 

I ♣ My Seal

maybe there are more people like me

January 9, 2008 - 05:59 ET by SouthJersey1953

Maybe people lie to the pollsters (like I have done in the past). I am tired of the media predicting results so, on the few occassions that I have been polled, I lied, just to throw off their numbers.....

It's not Right vs. Left; it is Right vs. Wrong

The left always tries to

January 9, 2008 - 02:04 ET by Crash

The left always tries to cheat it's way into victory. They only cry foul when it comes from those who play by a standard set rules. 

Good Poll Question

January 9, 2008 - 02:06 ET by dodecahedron

Of course Democrats won't turn on each other like they would on a Republican...yet. 

 Vote for "<insert name of conservative who stands up to the media>" for President in 2008.

}}---> dodeca

January 9, 2008 - 02:10 ET by Cool Arrow

But the Republicans will certainly turn on each other as the party splits into two camps.

Social Liberals vs Fiscal Liberals. 

I ♣ My Seal

Quick! Isn't there a judge

January 9, 2008 - 03:37 ET by mastersofdeceit

somewhere that needs to be roused from their sleep?

Can't have it both ways

January 9, 2008 - 05:08 ET by Kuso Jiji

When oBama won Iowa, the MSM proclaimed the nation finally moved beyond race. With oBama losing "The Granite State", are we now to believe we've lurched back into the dark ages.

Reverand Al need to get to the bottom of this.

}}---> Good Question Kusi

January 9, 2008 - 05:49 ET by Cool Arrow

Maybe we're yoyo dieting.

Why am I thinking of turkey?

I ♣ My Seal

Please leave John Lennon's

January 9, 2008 - 10:58 ET by Roger the Shrubber

Please leave John Lennon's wife out of it, will ya?

Looks like Democrats may be

January 9, 2008 - 07:11 ET by Jack Bauer

Looks like Democrats may be closet racists.

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

Democrat-Socialists believe

January 9, 2008 - 07:12 ET by Jack Bauer

Democrat-Socialists believe as an article of faith, that if a Republican wins an election after opinion polls and exit polls indicate the Democrat is leading...

then the election was stolen.

Democrat-Socialists still scream Kerry won in 2004 based on that very point.

Well, the last Reuters/Rassmussen poll had Obama with 13 point lead over Clinton, while the Fox exit polls had Obama winning by 6 percent...

So don't Democrats HAVE to believe Clinton STOLE their primary?

Check out my exclusive edit of BBC News America's interview with Mrs Clinton: It's news to me!

It's simple. Lefties don't

January 9, 2008 - 08:43 ET by Beowulf

It's simple. Lefties don't steal elections - only Republicans do. Just part of the free-pass package all Liberals are handed when they join the rest of the morons... 

The Closed Mind Erects Strong Barriers

Don't you know??

January 9, 2008 - 09:08 ET by true_texan

Obama losing last night in NH is W's fault, as usual (dripping sarcasm).

No Joke

January 9, 2008 - 11:03 ET by mattm

People had better be forewarned.  Don't let her fake tears and other slick tricks fool you.  The Clintonists are NOT going to leave this election to pure chance.

They will do anything to get this nomination, and they will do anything, to win the White House.  They have operatives, like Stephanopolous (whom very few of the 18 to 25 year old crowd knows worked for the Clintons), inside the MSM, they have question screeners and askers, and planned hecklers and pre-fab responses.   (Watch out for a perfectly timed "change of heart" on the part of anyone in the MSM who had been dissing her - Chris Matthews will eventually become Hillary's biggest cheerleader.)

All this is perfectly legal and legitimate in the hardnosed game of politics - albeit sleazy, but everybody had better be on the lookout for outright fraud, and election manipulation.  They will not draw the line at crime: The Clintonists mean business - it's not personal, Sonny.  It's strictly business.

Clinton Revolutionary Guard

January 9, 2008 - 21:17 ET by acumen

"The Clintonists are NOT going to leave this election to pure chance."

Dittos mattm - Enter the dem superdelegates to the rescue.  Inevitablility anyone?

Rio Linda readers - Dem Superdelegates are delegates to a presidential nominating convention who are not bound by decisions of party primaries or caucuses. Superdelegates are elected officeholders and party officials. 

Pssst - According to dem insiders Clinton already had 90% of all dem superdelegates going into Iowa.  That translates into approximately  1800 delegates for Clinton before any primary/caucus was held.

Remember after the 2000 election (Gore won the popular vote, Bush stole the election, yada, yada) many dems were calling for doing away with the electoral college in favor of using only the popular vote?  Yet they aren't about to get rid of their superdelegates in favor of letting dem voters (read peons) decide the candidate in the primaries.  Oh no, the dem party elites can't trust their base to decide who the candidate will be.  And Republicans are the fascists?

Already Happening

January 9, 2008 - 11:46 ET by My Real Name

I flip over to Air America when real radio goes to break.  What's worse, ads or Liberal talk radio?  Is there a difference?  That's another topic.

This morning Ms. S. Miller and her band of conspiracy nuts were already saying the Republicans gave the NH win to Clinton.  They claim NH uses 80% Diebold machines (I didn't verify their statistic), controlled by Republicans, allowing them to make her the winner.

I didn't listen long enough to get the full story as I exceeded my daily lunacy quota in under a minute and had to switch the station.  They did sound upset at the Clinton win.

So, yes, it has already stared.