New Hampshire
8:42 p.m. - Safe to say that even though it's very early (just 52 of 301 precincts reporting), that Hillary Clinton has a surprising lead. It's somewhat staggering to me that anyone in the party could vote for her, but she's got roughly 2,000 more votes right now.
8:45 p.m. - A reader at Talking Points Memo notes that it's possible some Democrats switched to backing Clinton to reject a media narrative that Democrats were rejecting the Clintons. If that's a reason some have, I'd argue that's a rather stupid reason to back a particular candidate. For me, aside from the obvious appeal that Obama has an agent of change, part of my vote is a rejection of the Clintons' influence in the party.
8:55 p.m. - I have to note, and this will upset some John Edwards backers, but it seems apparent that having two candidates offering a similar message, representing the 'change' element of the election season, is detrimental to the overall 'change' cause. Granted, I do like Edwards, but it seems evident that his path to the nomination is not necessarily impossible, but a long-shot at best. Based on his defense of Obama during Saturday's debate, one would have to think that eventually he'll come to the conclusion that backing another candidate of change rather than dividing the support is more beneficial to the overall cause.
9:02 p.m. - I'm even more puzzled in light of these exit poll numbers.
9:24 p.m. - Apparently, the Clinton strongholds are in, while Obama's are mostly out. He's pulled within two percent (less than 2,000 votes).
9:27 p.m. - Hanover is still out, where Dartmouth is, and they had 6,000 votes cast, which is 2,000 more than the Clinton campaign expected. Also, the Culinary Union is expected to endorse Obama, which is a boost in Nevada.
9:41 p.m. - It'll be crass, but I think it's fairly obvious that Clinton crying yesterday morning, and the resulting criticism of it by the media and Edwards, ultimately swung a large number of women back into her camp. It's fairly ridiculous to base a vote on that, but I think it's true.
9:54 p.m. - In addition to the more progressive northern end of the state, Hanover and Durham, two communities which saw higher than expected turnout, have not turned in any votes yet. Both are Obama strongholds. Related to that, the returns to date are in line with the final University of New Hampshire poll.
10:14 p.m. - Good Lord. Leading off with a mill worker reference Elizabeth Edwards? Kudos for enabling the Clinton Machine to live one more day.
10:15 p.m. - Or, as Tim puts it, 'Edwards is to mills what Rudy is to 9/11.'
10:21 p.m. - Jerome at MYDD calls it for Clinton, which I don't disagree with. Winning Nevada and South Carolina are imperative now and still very probable because she just got a new life heading into Super Tuesday.
10:26 p.m. - Yeah, looking at this, even with the Obama strongholds not reporting, I find it hard to believe he can make up what is now a 5,000-vote deficit (and the Associated Press is calling it for her). Needless to say, this is rather disappointing. Still, it's important to understand that this is a marathon in the grand scheme of things. He's got a strong lead in South Carolina and figures to win in Nevada, but it's back to being an uphill road.
10:48 p.m. - It's Clinton. I still contend 'The Tears' got her the women vote, which she lost to Obama in Iowa, and that, coupled with a strong showing in Manchester, propelled her to a win. Next to that, again, I point to Edwards opting to stay in the race. It's 34,000-plus votes that, one has to figure, would break for Obama in overwhelming numbers and give him a comfortable win.
8:45 p.m. - A reader at Talking Points Memo notes that it's possible some Democrats switched to backing Clinton to reject a media narrative that Democrats were rejecting the Clintons. If that's a reason some have, I'd argue that's a rather stupid reason to back a particular candidate. For me, aside from the obvious appeal that Obama has an agent of change, part of my vote is a rejection of the Clintons' influence in the party.
8:55 p.m. - I have to note, and this will upset some John Edwards backers, but it seems apparent that having two candidates offering a similar message, representing the 'change' element of the election season, is detrimental to the overall 'change' cause. Granted, I do like Edwards, but it seems evident that his path to the nomination is not necessarily impossible, but a long-shot at best. Based on his defense of Obama during Saturday's debate, one would have to think that eventually he'll come to the conclusion that backing another candidate of change rather than dividing the support is more beneficial to the overall cause.
9:02 p.m. - I'm even more puzzled in light of these exit poll numbers.
9:24 p.m. - Apparently, the Clinton strongholds are in, while Obama's are mostly out. He's pulled within two percent (less than 2,000 votes).
9:27 p.m. - Hanover is still out, where Dartmouth is, and they had 6,000 votes cast, which is 2,000 more than the Clinton campaign expected. Also, the Culinary Union is expected to endorse Obama, which is a boost in Nevada.
9:41 p.m. - It'll be crass, but I think it's fairly obvious that Clinton crying yesterday morning, and the resulting criticism of it by the media and Edwards, ultimately swung a large number of women back into her camp. It's fairly ridiculous to base a vote on that, but I think it's true.
9:54 p.m. - In addition to the more progressive northern end of the state, Hanover and Durham, two communities which saw higher than expected turnout, have not turned in any votes yet. Both are Obama strongholds. Related to that, the returns to date are in line with the final University of New Hampshire poll.
10:14 p.m. - Good Lord. Leading off with a mill worker reference Elizabeth Edwards? Kudos for enabling the Clinton Machine to live one more day.
10:15 p.m. - Or, as Tim puts it, 'Edwards is to mills what Rudy is to 9/11.'
10:21 p.m. - Jerome at MYDD calls it for Clinton, which I don't disagree with. Winning Nevada and South Carolina are imperative now and still very probable because she just got a new life heading into Super Tuesday.
10:26 p.m. - Yeah, looking at this, even with the Obama strongholds not reporting, I find it hard to believe he can make up what is now a 5,000-vote deficit (and the Associated Press is calling it for her). Needless to say, this is rather disappointing. Still, it's important to understand that this is a marathon in the grand scheme of things. He's got a strong lead in South Carolina and figures to win in Nevada, but it's back to being an uphill road.
10:48 p.m. - It's Clinton. I still contend 'The Tears' got her the women vote, which she lost to Obama in Iowa, and that, coupled with a strong showing in Manchester, propelled her to a win. Next to that, again, I point to Edwards opting to stay in the race. It's 34,000-plus votes that, one has to figure, would break for Obama in overwhelming numbers and give him a comfortable win.
posted by Jmac at 8:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home