A lot of people who thought they knew something about the political process woke up with a hangover this morning — their minds muddled by the intoxication of arrogance and the failed belief that they — not the voters — decide elections.
They awoke with the knowledge that last night was not a dream but a nightmare come true — that two candidates won their respective parties’ primaries in New Hampshire the old fashioned way — by getting out the vote and ending the evening with a win that just about everyone said was impossible.
Republican John McCain made it look easy, easily defeating Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee in an election the networks declared won minutes after the polls closed.
It took five more hours before anyone would dare claim the previously-thought impossible: Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton as the upset winner over Barack Obama, edging the predicted winner 39-37 percent.
She did it in typical Clinton style — practically reinventing herself in the five days between the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire vote, dumping her stilted stump speech, taking questions at appearances and even breaking down and almost coming to tears on the day before the election.
Some pundits and polls predicted a double-digit win for Obama but New Hampshire voters don’t listen to pundits — especially women voters who cast their choice overwhelmingly for the new, softer Hillary Clinton. The outcome left pollsters, pundits and pontificators gasping for air and stuttering as they tried to explain how they got it so wrong.
Clinton savored the victory but was gracious in her acceptance, acknowledging her opponents and telling supporters she had learned from her mistakes and from them. Gone from the stage were here polarizing husband — former President Bill Clinton — or others who marked the status-quo underpinnings of her campaign.
By contrast, Republican winner McCain’s acceptance speech was a mess: He stumbled several times as he read his notes, seldom looking up or making eye contact with the crowd.
But victory was still his, a remarkable comeback from a cash-strapped campaign that pundits declared dead five months ago.
Hillary Clinton’s two-point victory over Obama turned the Democratic contest into a two-candidate race. A distant third place finish leaves the campaign for John Edwards in doubt although in this year’s campaign any comeback appears possible.
The Republican side is more muddled. Former front runner Mitt Romney must win in Michigan to stay in the race and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s “ignore the early primaries” strategies might not work. Internet darling Ron Paul’s fifth place finish is not what supporters predicted and actor Fred Dalton Thompson’s 1 percent finish is what people expected.
Reports The Associated Press:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton powered to victory in New Hampshire’s Democratic primary Tuesday night in a startling upset, defeating Sen. Barack Obama and resurrecting her bid for the White House. Sen. John McCain defeated his Republican rivals to move back into contention for the GOP nomination.
“I felt like we all spoke from our hearts and I am so gratified that you responded,” Clinton said in victory remarks before cheering supporters. “Now together, let’s give America the kind of comeback that New Hampshire has just given me.”
Her victory, after Obama won last week’s Iowa caucuses, raised the possibility of a prolonged battle for the party nomination between the most viable black candidate in history and the former first lady, seeking to become the first woman to occupy the Oval Office.
“I am still fired up and ready to go,” a defeated Obama told his own backers, repeating the line that forms a part of virtually every campaign appearance he makes.
McCain’s triumph scrambled the Republican race as well.
“We showed this country what a real comeback looks like,” the Arizona senator told The Associated Press in an interview as he savored his triumph. “We’re going to move on to Michigan and South Carolina and win the nomination.”
The Washington Post’s take:
While pre-election polls in New Hampshire got Sen. John McCain’s margin of victory about right on the Republican side, late polls fundamentally mischaracterized the status of the Democratic race.
Polls released in the two days before the election had Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) with a five- to 13-percentage-point lead over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) in the Granite State, but Clinton defeated Obama, 39 percent to 36 percent.
Most polls accurately reflected the large bloc of likely Democratic voters yet to make up their minds or who said they were open to switching their support in the closing days. On the network exit poll, nearly 4 in 10 said they made their final decision within the last three days; 17 percent said they decided how to vote yesterday. Among those making up their minds on the day of the primary, 39 percent supported Clinton, 36 percent Obama. Clinton did even better among the third of the electorate who settled on their choice a month or more ago.
However, the late polls missed on how votes divided by gender. Pre-election polls from CNN-WMUR-University of New Hampshire and USA Today-Gallup showed Obama and Clinton about evenly splitting female voters and Obama winning men by a margin of 2 to 1. But Clinton won among women by 12 percentage points, exit polls showed, and she lost among men more narrowly than suggested, drawing 29 percent to Obama’s 40 percent.
21 thoughts on “McCain & Clinton: The comeback duo”
Sandra:
Not internet rumors. I first saw this on Countdown MSNBC on TV, not Internet. A guy whose hame I wasn’t paying attention to did investigation going back 20 years and wrote an article on it. Saw actual pages from Paul’s old newsletters on TV. He referred to black people as animals. Although he is now claiming he didn’t all write the articles in HIS newsletters, he is not claiming they don’t exist. And the newsletter was put out by him. So one would think that any content had his stamp of approval.
Yes, I’ve gone off-topic again.
I need to do better.
— Kent Shaw
Kent, If it is true it should NOT be removed.
Like you said above,”Anti-semite” is an epithet often assigned to anyone who would dare criticize the Israeli government. I would also add AIPAC to that also. If people,, and I do not care of which race, gender or orientation they are,, want to further their agenda or write a story about it by using their race, gender, gender orientation, sexual preference or nationality as a tool to further their cause or agenda, then they should be big enough to take hits on that. It seems wrong to voice ones position and then just because someone disagrees with that position to label them. Of course I may question why the thread McCain & Clinton: The comeback duo has descended into a subject about Israel, but there may be good cause.
Hillary proves that this country is now in Sieg Heil Light Mode -It’s all over
Hillary will start strong arming the Democratic Leadership Council to fix it so she beats down any possibility of Obama trumping her any more just like the
Democratic party conspired to kick Howard Dean out of the race when it interferd with its plans to have John Kerry to win the nomination. Democrappers are up to its same old tricks (Hey Seal, I just love that term you came up with -Democrappers!)
The Democrappers Sh*t Stinks -and it is one heck of a WALLOPING STINKING STEAMER
Charges of voter fraud has been asserted by some in NH.
They say the exit polling and the votes reported do not tally in some districts and hints of diebold machine tampering has started.
It seems the exit poll numbers were right on when and where hand counted ballots were used but where electronic voting was used the reverse was true. The exit polls had Obama ahead with a firm lead in a majority of precincts yet where, and only where, electronic voting machines were used they were supposedly wrong. It had been reported that votes for Paul were never counted in some precincts and that he actually had votes thrown out. As one family was reported saying their whole family voted for Ron Paul yet when the votes were added up it was reported Paul got Zero votes. Diebold voting machines also did Congressman Paul no favors last night – compared to hand counted ballots Giuliani gained just short of 0.5% from electronic voting whereas Paul lost over 2%, which was the difference between finishing 4th and 5th
Also Boston.com reported
Campaign volunteers for the Barack Obama and Ron Paul had been kicked out of precincts from Concord to Swanzey for not having the proper credentials, several unrelated sources have witnessed.
In general elections it is standard practice to have poll workers sitting behind the registration table and scratching off names as people sign in. Periodically they take those lists and the campaign gets in contact with those who have voted yet.
But, that is for general elections and everyone who does this a) has to live reasonably nearby (read: state residents) and b.) have letters from the state party to be an “observer”.
Apparently many of these Obama and Paul observers did not have this letter. These same sources say that it is the Clinton campaign that has called foul
New Hampshire Senate President Sylvia Larsen, a Concord Democrat who supports Hillary Clinton, said she saw the Obama observers.
“I knew who they were and what they were doing,” Larsen said.
Neither the Clinton nor Obama campaigns would comment.
Doug, please remove my comment just above yours if you feel that it is inappropriate.
— Kent Shaw
Enough! I see the spam filters have kicked in because anti-Semitic invectives have been used. To quote our comment policy:
I don’t like that kind of garbage on this web site and it stops now.
Heading for the cheap seats now that the invective has begun to fly. None of this helps folks. Name calling, telling each other how stupid one may or may not be. One needs to separate “the Jews” from actions taken by the Israeli government. There are many citizens of Israel that totally disagree with some of the actions of their government. Judaism is a religion. Zionism is a political movement that drove the establishment of Israel. I question the dual loyalties of some of the U.S. “neoconservatives” who hold Israeli citizenship as well as American. Where do their true loyalties lie? There is so much that is kept from us and our press often gives us half-truths at best. “Anti-semite” is an epithet often assigned to anyone who would dare criticize the Israeli government. For example, one may be deemed to be “anti-semitic” for simply pointing out the fact that Israel has been carrying on spying operations inside the United States for many decades, but it is the truth.
Stepping off my little soapbox now.
— Kent Shaw
Please. Ron Paul is not a racist! He is not anti-Semite. Both of you are out of line here! You read some crap on the internet and spread it around as if it is the truth. This is CHB not Free Republic. It is now very popular to blame the Jews for everything. I’m sick of this crap! America is it’s own worst enemy when it breeds this kind of bigotry.
First of all, it’s still very early and this is an election like no other. Expect many surprises to come. One win in NH doesn’t make for being the nominee. But if she is, it’s still 100% better than any of the Republicans. At least we’ll get Bill back and maybe the a budget surplus agaion. Maybe it will turn out to be a Clinton/Obama ticket or an Obama/Clinton ticket or an Obama/Edwards ticket or an Obama/Biden ticket…
Seems like DejaVuallover rant was removed, so I have removed my objection to it.
Comments are closed.