Official NH Primary Results Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stoney Mason said:
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Hardball is canceled tomorrow due to Chris Mathews committing suicide tonight...
Click to expand...

I like Matthews but he better hide his face tomorrow. His dick riding was simply mind blowing tonight - from the Lawrence of Arabia analogy to essentially hailing Obama as the New Bill Clinton-type politician of the 21st century. What the hell
 
The reasons she won are simple. Women rallied around her because of the media pile-on. Independents felt that Obama didn't need them because of the 10 point lead in the polls and went McCain.

It would have have been a simpler ride to victory from here if Obama had won. Now he has to work for it, and it'll be a tough long battle. I do think, however, that this result could be positive. They know he can win because of Iowa, and now they know he can lose if he doesn't get their support. He's the underdog again, but he's still a dangerous one.
 
topsyturvy said:
if he fallout now, those votes would go both ways.....

if hillary was a republican, she would've won in iowa and NH

if obama was a dem, he would've won in both states also.

in other words, these two candidates are very strong. I don't remember an election when 2 juggernauts battled in the same party. :/
Click to expand...

I don't agree. Edwards and Obama both consider themselves progressives. Clinton is a centrist, on the DLC, and wrong on the war.

People voting for Edwards are certainly more likely to vote Obama than Clinton.
 
People are just using Edwards as a scapegoat. That's all there is to that. Primaries are about several candidates and not two. I'm sure most of you would love a Hilary/Obama face off but that's not how primaries work. If I were Edwards, I wouldn't drop out either. There's nothing noble about politics and he isn't in this race to do others favors.
 
PhoenixDark said:
I like Matthews but he better hide his face tomorrow. His dick riding was simply mind blowing tonight - from the Lawrence of Arabia analogy to essentially hailing Obama as the New Bill Clinton-type politician of the 21st century. What the hell
Click to expand...

As I said earlier his show has been a non-stop Obama parade for the past 2 months. You can't miss it if you watch on semi-regular basis as I do. The media has largely given Obama a pass but Mathews goes beyond that and actively derides one candidate for the other. I have very little respect for our news media but he's been crazy over the top for even that low bar.
 
Stoney Mason said:
As I said earlier his show has been a non-stop Obama parade for the past 2 months. You can't miss it if you watch on semi-regular basis as I do. The media has largely given Obama a pass but Mathews goes beyond that and actively derides one candidate for the other. I have very little respect for our news media but he's been crazy over the top for even that low bar.
Click to expand...
So....why do you watch Hardball on a semi-regular basis?
 
Mandark said:
Dude, TA thinks that Scalia would vote to uphold Roe vs. Wade. You're not gonna get through to him on this.
Click to expand...
:lol

Scalia is a son of fascist. Literally. His father was a Mussolini fan and a member of the American fascist party. And the apple didn't fall far from the tree. Scalia is a real radical. Both Scalia and his follower (Thomas) are itching to overturn Roe v. Wade whenever they get the chance.
 
theBishop said:
I don't agree. Edwards and Obama both consider themselves progressives. Clinton is a centrist, on the DLC, and wrong on the war.

People voting for Edwards are certainly more likely to vote Obama than Clinton.
Click to expand...
He is referring to the vote totals . . . Obama got more votes that McCain.
 
Gruco said:
So....why do you watch Hardball on a semi-regular basis?
Click to expand...

I'm taking care of my dad who had a stroke and he generally has it on that time when we are both in the living room together. Believe me I use to try to get him to switch it to PTI but that failed. :D
 
This is good for all the candidates. Hopefully McCain will ride some cautious momentum and win, as he is the best Republican of the lot. This is great for Obama and Hillary as well, because neither of them should be able to sail a media-anointed coronation to the top of the ticket. I really prefer Obama to win, and I hope they start getting tougher on him because he needs to flesh out his policy positions or else McCain will murder him in November.
 
I hope they do overturn Roe v. Wade. One of the worst examples of legislating from the bench of all-time(and aren't most of the details of Roe v. Wade overturned anyway? The only thing left standing is, unfortunately, the idea that the right to privacy allows for abortion).

It's not like overturning Roe v. Wade would even make abortion banned. It'd just put it back into the State's hands.
 
Branduil said:
If I'm not free to murder my baby, this isn't a free country any more.
Click to expand...

Sorry to sound cold-hearted, but the Constitution states "all persons born or naturalized.."

And legally speaking, a fetus is neither.
 
There's an abortion thread a few pages back. Go there with this debate.

F Hillary. I'm out. ;)
 
Karakand said:
SM you're too restrained. Hillarity ensued! Obomba!
Click to expand...

Well there are definitely those of us who wear their hearts on their sleeves on these issues more than others. I've always said they are roughly the same candidate to me with very minor differences. Although I have a preference I'm not moving to Canada or not voting although others are welcome to those positions. Hell I didn't vote for Kerry (although it very clearly didn't matter in the state I was living in at the time) so I can't really blame others I suppose for taking such a stance. It's a Democracy. Sometimes you get exactly what you want and sometimes you don't.
 
HylianTom said:
Sorry to sound cold-hearted, but the Constitution states "all persons born or naturalized.."

And legally speaking, a fetus is neither.
Click to expand...
Legally speaking, blacks were 3/5ths of a person.
 
1st off disappointing :( This nomination process has been 2 upsets in a row. Now all we need is Edwards to win SC to really confuse the situation! :lol

Juice said:
I'd be interested in a straw poll of Obama-loving GAFfers who would vote for McCain if it came down to a Hillary-McCain showdown in the general.

I think that Obama's magnetism could ultimately amplify a gender war where moderate-to-liberal male voters either refuse to show up or support McCain (I can't see them jumping the fence for any of the other reps) just to keep Hillary out.
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't know. I consider myself independent, I was planning on voting democrat in this election but I HATE Hillary. Maybe I am sexist IDK. :lol There are plenty of good reasons not to like her besides the fact that she is a woman, but to be quite honest you can find plenty of good reasons not to like ANY of the candidates. I can freely admit that my preference for Obama is based entirely on his personality and orating skills. It would be nice if nothing else to listen to the state of the union and not cringe like I do when I hear Hillary (or our current president) speak.

I actually like McCain, I wanted him to win over Bush last time. He is a warmonger but I feel that having actually been to war, shot down and POW for 4 years the guy would not be that quick to start more shit. I also think the dude has been in washington to long and its time for some new ideas.
 
Cheebs said:
Hillary had 29%, Obama had 38%. Thats a landslide. It will be over 10% again tonight.

And again in Nevade
And again in South Carolina (where it could be more like a 20-30% win)>

The Democratic Party has abandoned the Clintons, its obvious.
Click to expand...

Hey, where'd that momentum go? :D
 
Flo_Evans said:
I actually like McCain, I wanted him to win over Bush last time. He is a warmonger but I feel that having actually been to war, shot down and POW for 4 years the guy would not be that quick to start more shit. I also think the dude has been in washington to long and its time for some new ideas.
Click to expand...
You would think that would mean something to him, but then he goes and single handedly constructs legislation that makes torture illegal but gives the president the sole ability to define torture. The man has no scruples anymore. He's been a hollowed out tool since losing the 2000 primary.
 
The best thing to come out of the primaries was this

Total Write-ins GOP 4,039 2%
Thompson , Fred GOP 2,796 1%
Total Write-ins Dem 2,347
Hunter , Duncan GOP 1,191 1%


Wheeee
 
Dreamfixx said:
This is good for all the candidates. Hopefully McCain will ride some cautious momentum and win, as he is the best Republican of the lot. This is great for Obama and Hillary as well, because neither of them should be able to sail a media-anointed coronation to the top of the ticket. I really prefer Obama to win, and I hope they start getting tougher on him because he needs to flesh out his policy positions or else McCain will murder him in November.
Click to expand...

By and large, I agree wholeheartedly, though I don't really think McCain would do that well against Obama in particular. I'm not a fan of McCain in particular, but he definitely needs to lock that nomination up all ready.

Branduil: Take your crap elsewhere. If you want to start another abortion thread, go for it, but don't derail this thread for it.
 
Flo_Evans said:
but to be quite honest you can find plenty of good reasons not to like ANY of the candidates.
Click to expand...
Yeah, to some degree it seems like none of these people can get elected.

Giuliani - Practically booted out of his mayoral job. His big claim to fame is walking around the streets of NYC on 9/11 . . . Why was he walking around? Because like an idiot, he placed the emergency command center in World Trade Center . . . the place that was bombed before. And he is supposed to be good on terrorism? WTF?

McCain - The 'straight-talk express' lost all credibility when he kissed Bush . . . the guy who smeared him with the 'black baby' push-poll crap. He's also older than than the hills . . . most people wouldn't trust their grandpa that old with the TV remote . . . let alone 'The Button'.

Romney - Sleazy flip-flopper that is a Mormon running in a largely fundamentalist Christian party.

Huckabee - A baptist pastor with some fundamentalist religious views and he's completely clueless on foreign policy. Pakistan's eastern border with Afghanistan?

Hillary - Hated by the left as a war-monger and hated on the right for pretty much everything (largely irrational crazy stuff like her (totally bullshit) alleged 'murder' of Vince Foster)

Obama - A pretty young black guy just in his first term as a Senator . . . not enough experience. And did I mention he was black?

Edwards - A one term ex-senator who decided to champion hopeless causes like poverty.

The rest are too far off the radar to have a chance.

I guess one of them has to win but at times it is hard to see how any of them can do it.
 
Stoney Mason said:
She has no chance in NH unless every poll essentially screwed up big time. It's not even really that up in the air.
Click to expand...

New Hampshire's Polling Fiasco

January 09, 2008 12:05 AM

There will be a serious, critical look at the final pre-election polls in the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire; that is essential. It is simply unprecedented for so many polls to have been so wrong. We need to know why.

But we need to know it through careful, empirically based analysis. There will be a lot of claims about what happened - about respondents who reputedly lied, about alleged difficulties polling in biracial contests. That may be so. It also may be a smokescreen - a convenient foil for pollsters who'd rather fault their respondents than own up to other possibilities - such as their own failings in sampling and likely voter modeling.

There have been previous races that misstated support for black candidates in biracial races. But most of those were long ago, and there have been plenty of polls in biracial races that were accurate. (For more on past problems with polls in biracial races, see this blog I wrote for Freakonomics last May.) And there was no overstatement of Obama in Iowa polls.

On the other hand, the pre-election polls in the New Hampshire Republican race were accurate. The problem was isolated to the Democratic side - where, it should be noted, we have not just one groundbreaking candidate in Barack Obama, but also another, in Hillary Clinton.

A starting point for this analysis will be to look at every significant Democratic subgroup in the New Hampshire pre-election polls, and see how those polls did in estimating the size of those groups and their vote choices. The polls' estimates of turnout overall will be relevant as well.

In the end there may be no smoking gun. Those polls may have been accurate, but done in by a superior get-out-the-vote effort, or by very late deciders whose motivations may or may not ever be known. They may have been inaccurate because of bad modeling, compromised sampling, or simply an overabundance of enthusiasm for Obama on the heels of his Iowa victory that led his would-be supporters to overstate their propensity to turn out. (A function, perhaps, of youth.)

Prof. Jon Krosnick of Stanford University has another argument: That the order of names on the New Hampshire ballot - in which, by random draw, Clinton was toward the top, Obama at the bottom - netted her about 3 percentage points more than she'd have gotten otherwise. That's not enough to explain the gap in some of the polls, which presumably randomized candidate names, but it might hold part of the answer.

The data may tell us; it may not. What's beyond question is that it is incumbent on us - and particularly on the producers of the New Hampshire pre-election polls - to look at the data, and to look closely, and to do it without prejudging.
Click to expand...


http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenumbers/2008/01/new-hampshires.html
 
A few of my own observations:

The Races in General: It seems like both the Democratic and Republican races will go the distance. Probably not until Super Tuesday will they both be decided. The GOP race with 4 candidates with a real good shot of winning the race, Romney, McCain, Huckabee, Guiliani, could even go until later. I guess it depends when candidates decide they want to drop out after they realize they won't win. On the democratic side, Hillary only won by 3 points, so they're both still in it. However, if Obama is as dependant on independents (ironic, eh?) as they're saying then once the closed primaries come then Hillary might close the deal rather quickly. Usually after only a few primaries is the thing done. Bush basically clinched after South Carolina in 2000. Kerry basically clinched after New Hampshire in 2004. It's good to see some of the other states have an influence instead of just New Hampshire and Iowa which have a retardedly too large amount of influence in the process.

Mitt Romney: I don't think he technically needs to win any states. With 6 candidates in the race (7 if you count Hunter) as long as he gets 2nd place in every race he'll have the most. Maybe you need an actual majority to clinch it but he'll have a clear plurality. So mathematically he's totally still in it.

Ron Paul: The guy's been campaigning since early last year, he has a lot of money, national recognition (he's been on Leno twice), fervant supporters, huge internet support, etc etc etc and he managed 8% in New Hampshire, the Live Free or Die state, after a 10% showing in Iowa. I think his message simply isn't catching on and won't this election cycle. It sucks cause I'm a Ron Paul fan but his followers have to face the music that people just aren't interested in his message. Hopefully the libertarian movement will get a longterm boost from the Ron Paul candidacy.

Bloomberg 3rd party: If Hillary wins the democratic primary and someone like Romney or Guiliani wins the Republican one, then Bloomberg may have a shot to get into the race. However, if Obama wins or..actually I don't know who on the GOP side would seem non-establishment, but if the Dem and GOP candidates are non-establishment then Bloomberg probably has no shot. But if they are seen as super establishment Washington types then maybe he could make a good run.
 
Synth_floyd said:
A few of my own observations:
However, if Obama is as dependant on independents (ironic, eh?) as they're saying then once the closed primaries come then Hillary might close the deal rather quickly.
Click to expand...
Ack . . . when you think about that, that is a terrible result for the Dems. Dems need independents to win the general election and if Obama is attracting Independents better than Hillary, then he should be their candidate since he would be more likely to win.

In fact, some Zogby polling seems to indicate this.
 
Mercury Fred said:
I wonder if Clinton and Obama could bury the hatchet to the degree that a Clinton/ Obama ticket could happen if she gets the nomination. Subquestion: would Obama in the VP slot sway any Hillary haters?
Click to expand...

I think this would be awesome. I just listen to both of them talk and everything else, and they just seem very similar, but attract very different demographics of voters.

I wanted Gore to run, but since that isn't happening a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton presidency would be fine by me.

They're just so close in the polls, I think they would be very attractive together.
 
tnw said:
I think this would be awesome. I just listen to both of them talk and everything else, and they just seem very similar, but attract very different demographics of voters.

I wanted Gore to run, but since that isn't happening a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton presidency would be fine by me.

They're just so close in the polls, I think they would be very attractive together.
Click to expand...

I've always said if the Dems on a national level were serious about running (like Republicans generally are which is why they win) that is the ticket to win. As I've said before sadly it has almost no chance of happening but like Kobe Shaq I would fault both of them a bit if it didn't. Together they create excitement and record turnout. The Reagan Bush primary before the 1980 election was very hotly contested ( Bush calling Reaganomics "voodoo economics”) as an example but they were smart enough to ticket up. If only Dems were that serious.
 
tnw said:
I think this would be awesome. I just listen to both of them talk and everything else, and they just seem very similar, but attract very different demographics of voters.

I wanted Gore to run, but since that isn't happening a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton presidency would be fine by me.

They're just so close in the polls, I think they would be very attractive together.
Click to expand...

Dennis Miller: More on this from SNL news correspondent, Chris Rock!

Chris Rock: Thank you, Dennis. Now as you know, there's been alot of talk about a black vice president. And I just wanna tell the world that it'll never happen. As long as you live you will never see a black vice president, you know why? Because some black guy would just kill the president. I'd do it. If Colin Powell was vice president, I'd kill the president and tell his mother about it. What would happen to me? What would they do? Put me in jail with a bunch of black guys that would treat me like a king for the rest of my life? I would be the biggest star in jail, alright, people would be coming up to me and I'd be signing autographs: "97-KY, here you go." Guys would be going: "You're the brother that shot Bush. And you told his mother about it huh? I hope my children turn out to be just like you, Man, you know I was getting ready to rape you until I realized who you were. And even if they had a death penalty, what would happen? I'd just be pardoned by the black president. So you see, Dennis, it would not be in George Bush's best intrests to place Colin Powell on the ticket.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Canada's election results are in
8
198
Jaybe replied
WEAPONS | Official Trailer
25
580
Nocty replied
Iron Heart official Trailer
2 3
118
787
jason10mm replied
The Smashing Machine - Official Trailer
19
376
Putonahappyface replied
Tron: Ares | Official Trailer
2
75
3K
Miyazaki’s Slave replied
Top Bottom