The exit polls in New Hampshire showed that even in defeat, Barack was viewed favorably by over 80 percent of Democrats and that 46% of voters thought he was the candidate most likely to win in November versus 36% who said that about Hillary. And here's where I think he now has an opening: some 28% of the Democratic voters in New Hampshire thought Hillary could unite the country but about half felt the same way about Barack.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What I have sensed in California is that people are hugely eager to find a president who can bring the country together again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barack has made the case for change. Hillary has made an effective counter argument that she is the only one experienced enough to know how to change. What I see in California -- and what polls from New Hampshire suggest -- is that Barack now has an opening to argue with great effect: yes, but I am the only one who can bring the unity that actually makes change possible.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Mitt Romney
General
mitt romney
Mitt's Zingers
Mormon Speech
MSM Coverage
Polls
September Dawn
Uncategorized
YouTube Debate
Archives
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
Donate
Feed My Blog
Meta:
RSS
Comments RSS
Valid XHTML
XFN
Contact:
BlogsForMitt AT Gmail DOT com
Search this blog:
» Blogs that link here
Recent Posts
The Palmetto State Debate
Leaving New Hampshire
Michael Moody’s Sinking Swift Boat
Game Day In Granite State
But For Religion
What To Do Post Iowa
And So It Begins
Huck’s Bizarro Press Conference
Monday News Roundup
Huck’s Apology Policy
Blogroll
Article6
Blogfather Hugh
Californians For Romney
Canadians For Romney
Charlotte Conservative
Coloradans for Romney 2008
Commonwealth PAC
Delawareans for Romney
Eagle Scouts for a President Mitt Romney
Elect Mitt Romney President in 2008
Floridians for Romney
Illinoisans for Romney
Iowans for Mitt Romney
Iowans for Mitt Romney
Jews For Mitt
Kentuckians for Romney
Law Students For Romney
Massachusetts for Mitt
Michiganders for Romney
Mississippi for Mitt
Mitt Report
Mitt Rocks!
Mitt Romney - President in 2008
Mitt’s YouTube Site
Moms 4 Mitt
New Hampshire For Mitt Romney
New Yorkers For Mitt
North Carolinians for Mitt
Nutmeggers For Mitt
Official Mitt Romney For President Site
Ohioans For Mitt
Oregonians For Mitt
Organization For Mitt Romney
Planet Romney
Romney Experience
Romney Ramblings
Romney Report
Run Mitt Run
Show Me Mitt (Missouri)
South Carolinians for Romney
Tennesseans for Mitt
Texans for Mitt Romney
The Romney Brothers
The Romney Report
The Word Drum
Utahns for Mitt Romney
Utahns for Mitt Romney Blog
Virginia For Mitt
Vote For Mitt!
Washingtonians for Mitt Romney
Women For Romney
Search
I'm a
Flippery Fish
in the
TTLB Ecosystem
The Palmetto State Debate
January 11th, 2008 by Jon
So there was a debate last night. There’s plenty of analysis about it from all sorts of different sources. The consensus that I’m getting is that Big Fred did quite well – and I agree with that assessment. If you’ve been wondering where Fred’s Super Nova in the Belly was – it was on display last night.
Despite what you might read from Phil, Mitt did a fairly decent job last night despite the fact he didn’t get as much camera time as he’s gotten in debates past. His answers were well thought out and based in fact – not hyperbole. Even his detractors ended up admitting that Mitt gave the best informed answers of any candidate last night. It wasn’t his best performance, but he got the job done. I can live with that.
I, for one, was glad to see Big Fred go after the Huckster. Fred basically took Mitt’s comparison ads and beat Huck over the head with them. Huck tried (and failed) to beat back Fred’s onslaught. Additionally, Huck’s answer to Chris Wallace’s question on taxes gave a new definition to Extreme Waffling.
As long as I’m on the Huck Bashing Bandwagon, I’d like to point you to a very well written post by Article VI’s John Schroeder. Schroeder is a member of the demographic Huck is counting on to catapult him into the Oval Office. The only problem is, Schroeder would just as soon see Huck catapulted into History’s Dustbin. Opines John:
Other candidates do not look good to me for a variety of reasons, but Huckabee is repulsive because of his appeals to bias and bigotry. That cannot be allowed to prevail. Romney should play to win and not merely beat Huckabee, but beat Huckabee he must at the bare minimum. (Emphasis Added)
I’ve stated this before, but just to reiterate the point – Mike Huckabee is dangerously naïve, completely unprepared, and enormously unqualified to sit in the Big Chair. Those facts and his record give me more than enough reason to vote against him. The singular fact that he has gone to the anti-Mormon well and has – as Schroeder already illustrated – appealed to religious bias and bigotry has brought me to the conclusion that I can never vote for a ticket with Huckabee on it. His latest ad in Michigan is typical – long on rhetoric, short on details, and ends with a poll tested line saying that “Americans want a president like the guy they work with, not the guy who laid them off.” Sigh.
Memo to Huck: I want a president whose capitalist principals have made him and those around him extremely wealthy. I’ve never gotten a job from a poor person – or a governor for that matter. End Memo.
Mitt has stated that he’s in this race for the long haul. Of the GOP candidates, he’s the best suited for the long march. Most everybody else is strapped for cash. The democrats are, through their willing accomplices in the MSM, doing everything they can to remove the one conservative from the republican field with the best shot at getting the nomination. Mitt will stay in this race until he either wins or himself decides to get out. Nobody else will make that decision for him.
Sphere: Related Content
Posted in 2008 presidential campaign | No Comments »
mitt romney
Mitt's Zingers
Mormon Speech
MSM Coverage
Polls
September Dawn
Uncategorized
YouTube Debate
Archives
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
Donate
Feed My Blog
Meta:
RSS
Comments RSS
Valid XHTML
XFN
Contact:
BlogsForMitt AT Gmail DOT com
Search this blog:
» Blogs that link here
Recent Posts
The Palmetto State Debate
Leaving New Hampshire
Michael Moody’s Sinking Swift Boat
Game Day In Granite State
But For Religion
What To Do Post Iowa
And So It Begins
Huck’s Bizarro Press Conference
Monday News Roundup
Huck’s Apology Policy
Blogroll
Article6
Blogfather Hugh
Californians For Romney
Canadians For Romney
Charlotte Conservative
Coloradans for Romney 2008
Commonwealth PAC
Delawareans for Romney
Eagle Scouts for a President Mitt Romney
Elect Mitt Romney President in 2008
Floridians for Romney
Illinoisans for Romney
Iowans for Mitt Romney
Iowans for Mitt Romney
Jews For Mitt
Kentuckians for Romney
Law Students For Romney
Massachusetts for Mitt
Michiganders for Romney
Mississippi for Mitt
Mitt Report
Mitt Rocks!
Mitt Romney - President in 2008
Mitt’s YouTube Site
Moms 4 Mitt
New Hampshire For Mitt Romney
New Yorkers For Mitt
North Carolinians for Mitt
Nutmeggers For Mitt
Official Mitt Romney For President Site
Ohioans For Mitt
Oregonians For Mitt
Organization For Mitt Romney
Planet Romney
Romney Experience
Romney Ramblings
Romney Report
Run Mitt Run
Show Me Mitt (Missouri)
South Carolinians for Romney
Tennesseans for Mitt
Texans for Mitt Romney
The Romney Brothers
The Romney Report
The Word Drum
Utahns for Mitt Romney
Utahns for Mitt Romney Blog
Virginia For Mitt
Vote For Mitt!
Washingtonians for Mitt Romney
Women For Romney
Search
I'm a
Flippery Fish
in the
TTLB Ecosystem
The Palmetto State Debate
January 11th, 2008 by Jon
So there was a debate last night. There’s plenty of analysis about it from all sorts of different sources. The consensus that I’m getting is that Big Fred did quite well – and I agree with that assessment. If you’ve been wondering where Fred’s Super Nova in the Belly was – it was on display last night.
Despite what you might read from Phil, Mitt did a fairly decent job last night despite the fact he didn’t get as much camera time as he’s gotten in debates past. His answers were well thought out and based in fact – not hyperbole. Even his detractors ended up admitting that Mitt gave the best informed answers of any candidate last night. It wasn’t his best performance, but he got the job done. I can live with that.
I, for one, was glad to see Big Fred go after the Huckster. Fred basically took Mitt’s comparison ads and beat Huck over the head with them. Huck tried (and failed) to beat back Fred’s onslaught. Additionally, Huck’s answer to Chris Wallace’s question on taxes gave a new definition to Extreme Waffling.
As long as I’m on the Huck Bashing Bandwagon, I’d like to point you to a very well written post by Article VI’s John Schroeder. Schroeder is a member of the demographic Huck is counting on to catapult him into the Oval Office. The only problem is, Schroeder would just as soon see Huck catapulted into History’s Dustbin. Opines John:
Other candidates do not look good to me for a variety of reasons, but Huckabee is repulsive because of his appeals to bias and bigotry. That cannot be allowed to prevail. Romney should play to win and not merely beat Huckabee, but beat Huckabee he must at the bare minimum. (Emphasis Added)
I’ve stated this before, but just to reiterate the point – Mike Huckabee is dangerously naïve, completely unprepared, and enormously unqualified to sit in the Big Chair. Those facts and his record give me more than enough reason to vote against him. The singular fact that he has gone to the anti-Mormon well and has – as Schroeder already illustrated – appealed to religious bias and bigotry has brought me to the conclusion that I can never vote for a ticket with Huckabee on it. His latest ad in Michigan is typical – long on rhetoric, short on details, and ends with a poll tested line saying that “Americans want a president like the guy they work with, not the guy who laid them off.” Sigh.
Memo to Huck: I want a president whose capitalist principals have made him and those around him extremely wealthy. I’ve never gotten a job from a poor person – or a governor for that matter. End Memo.
Mitt has stated that he’s in this race for the long haul. Of the GOP candidates, he’s the best suited for the long march. Most everybody else is strapped for cash. The democrats are, through their willing accomplices in the MSM, doing everything they can to remove the one conservative from the republican field with the best shot at getting the nomination. Mitt will stay in this race until he either wins or himself decides to get out. Nobody else will make that decision for him.
Sphere: Related Content
Posted in 2008 presidential campaign | No Comments »
Success is testing the Huckabee campaign
Success Is Testing the Huckabee Campaign
By LIBBY QUAID
The Associated Press
Thursday, November 29, 2007; 6:31 PM
WASHINGTON -- The tiny campaign of former Gov. Mike Huckabee is growing so swiftly, some have scrambled to buy winter coats so they can volunteer for him in Iowa.
"Our campaign is not about high-paid consultants," Huckabee said Thursday in an interview with The Associated Press. "It's about ordinary people who've come from as far away as Oregon and Florida to get to Iowa, many of whom are coming up there from Southern states where they're having to buy a coat so they can survive going door-to-door, answering phones, getting out material and signing up people for the caucuses."
Republican Presidential hopeful, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, is interviewed by the Associated Press after a lunch with journalists in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 29, 2007. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) (Charles Dharapak - AP)
TOOLBOX
Resize Text
Save/Share + DiggNewsvinedel.icio.usStumble It!RedditFacebook Print This E-mail This
COMMENT
No comments have been posted about this item.
Comments are closed for this item.
Discussion PolicyDiscussion Policy CLOSEComments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging» Links to this article
Huckabee has climbed to second place in Iowa polls despite having millions fewer dollars than his rivals. The former Arkansas governor is doing so well, his aides wonder if his campaign can keep up with the momentum.
"I think the organization has to catch up to the candidate and the candidate's message," said Eric Woolson, Huckabee's Iowa state director.
Huckabee, speaking with reporters in Washington, said: "Is momentum enough? No, but if momentum turns into the ground game, the money and everything else, then yes, it is."
"We tend to forget that at this stage of the game in 1979, Ronald Reagan was flat broke and was in fourth place," Huckabee said, recalling a recent encounter with campaign strategist Ed Rollins, who worked for Reagan.
"He said, 'We were so broke, we were sleeping three to a room in New Hampshire and eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches,'" Huckabee said.
Reagan had angered the GOP establishment by challenging President Ford four years earlier, and he wasn't expected to win, Huckabee said.
"Now he's the icon, and everybody wraps themselves up in Ronald Reagan, and he's the standard bearer, you know, he's the gold standard of the Republican Party," Huckabee said. "He was anything but that, prior to his election and his term."
Huckabee's fundraising is eclipsed by that of Mitt Romney; the former Massachusetts governor has raised more than $62 million, while Huckabee has raised about $5 million.
So while voters are seeing Huckabee's first television commercials this week, they aren't seeing other typical signs of activity.
"I don't know that there will be any direct mail in the next 38 days" from the Huckabee campaign, Woolson said.
For now, the focus is on personal contact with voters and building support one precinct at a time. Huckabee pointed to a Washington Post-ABC News poll indicating that his supporters are more enthusiastic about their candidate. Nearly half of his supporters said they definitely would vote for him, while 29 percent of Romney's supporters said they would definitely vote for Romney.
"We've got to have people who, no matter how much snow is on the ground, no matter how good the Orange Bowl is, they're going to still come out and be there with us on caucus night," Huckabee said.
___
Associated Press writer Ron Fournier in Des Moines, Iowa, contributed to this report.
By LIBBY QUAID
The Associated Press
Thursday, November 29, 2007; 6:31 PM
WASHINGTON -- The tiny campaign of former Gov. Mike Huckabee is growing so swiftly, some have scrambled to buy winter coats so they can volunteer for him in Iowa.
"Our campaign is not about high-paid consultants," Huckabee said Thursday in an interview with The Associated Press. "It's about ordinary people who've come from as far away as Oregon and Florida to get to Iowa, many of whom are coming up there from Southern states where they're having to buy a coat so they can survive going door-to-door, answering phones, getting out material and signing up people for the caucuses."
Republican Presidential hopeful, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, is interviewed by the Associated Press after a lunch with journalists in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 29, 2007. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) (Charles Dharapak - AP)
TOOLBOX
Resize Text
Save/Share + DiggNewsvinedel.icio.usStumble It!RedditFacebook Print This E-mail This
COMMENT
No comments have been posted about this item.
Comments are closed for this item.
Discussion PolicyDiscussion Policy CLOSEComments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging» Links to this article
Huckabee has climbed to second place in Iowa polls despite having millions fewer dollars than his rivals. The former Arkansas governor is doing so well, his aides wonder if his campaign can keep up with the momentum.
"I think the organization has to catch up to the candidate and the candidate's message," said Eric Woolson, Huckabee's Iowa state director.
Huckabee, speaking with reporters in Washington, said: "Is momentum enough? No, but if momentum turns into the ground game, the money and everything else, then yes, it is."
"We tend to forget that at this stage of the game in 1979, Ronald Reagan was flat broke and was in fourth place," Huckabee said, recalling a recent encounter with campaign strategist Ed Rollins, who worked for Reagan.
"He said, 'We were so broke, we were sleeping three to a room in New Hampshire and eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches,'" Huckabee said.
Reagan had angered the GOP establishment by challenging President Ford four years earlier, and he wasn't expected to win, Huckabee said.
"Now he's the icon, and everybody wraps themselves up in Ronald Reagan, and he's the standard bearer, you know, he's the gold standard of the Republican Party," Huckabee said. "He was anything but that, prior to his election and his term."
Huckabee's fundraising is eclipsed by that of Mitt Romney; the former Massachusetts governor has raised more than $62 million, while Huckabee has raised about $5 million.
So while voters are seeing Huckabee's first television commercials this week, they aren't seeing other typical signs of activity.
"I don't know that there will be any direct mail in the next 38 days" from the Huckabee campaign, Woolson said.
For now, the focus is on personal contact with voters and building support one precinct at a time. Huckabee pointed to a Washington Post-ABC News poll indicating that his supporters are more enthusiastic about their candidate. Nearly half of his supporters said they definitely would vote for him, while 29 percent of Romney's supporters said they would definitely vote for Romney.
"We've got to have people who, no matter how much snow is on the ground, no matter how good the Orange Bowl is, they're going to still come out and be there with us on caucus night," Huckabee said.
___
Associated Press writer Ron Fournier in Des Moines, Iowa, contributed to this report.
Letter From former presidential candidate, Bill Richardson
It is with great pride, understanding and acceptance that I am ending my campaign for President of the United States.
When I entered the campaign, it was clear that we, as Democrats, had the most talented field of candidates in my lifetime running to change the direction of our country. And in the end, one of them will.
Despite overwhelming financial and political odds, I am proud of the campaign we waged and the influence we had on the issues that matter most to the future of this country. A year ago, we were the only major campaign calling for the removal of all of our troops within a year's time from Iraq. We were the only campaign calling for a complete reform of education in this country, including the scrapping of No Child Left Behind. And we were the campaign with the most aggressive clean energy plan and the most ambitious standards for reducing global warming. Now, all of the remaining candidates have come to our point of view.
I am honored to have shared the stage with each of these Democrats. And I am enormously grateful to all of my supporters who chose to stand with me despite so many other candidates of accomplishment and potential.
Now I am returning to a job that I love, serving a state that I cherish and doing the work of the people I was elected to serve. As I have always said, I am the luckiest man I know. I am married to my college sweetheart. I live in a place called the Land of Enchantment. I have the best job in the world. And I just got to run for president of the United States.
It doesn't get any better than that.
When I entered the campaign, it was clear that we, as Democrats, had the most talented field of candidates in my lifetime running to change the direction of our country. And in the end, one of them will.
Despite overwhelming financial and political odds, I am proud of the campaign we waged and the influence we had on the issues that matter most to the future of this country. A year ago, we were the only major campaign calling for the removal of all of our troops within a year's time from Iraq. We were the only campaign calling for a complete reform of education in this country, including the scrapping of No Child Left Behind. And we were the campaign with the most aggressive clean energy plan and the most ambitious standards for reducing global warming. Now, all of the remaining candidates have come to our point of view.
I am honored to have shared the stage with each of these Democrats. And I am enormously grateful to all of my supporters who chose to stand with me despite so many other candidates of accomplishment and potential.
Now I am returning to a job that I love, serving a state that I cherish and doing the work of the people I was elected to serve. As I have always said, I am the luckiest man I know. I am married to my college sweetheart. I live in a place called the Land of Enchantment. I have the best job in the world. And I just got to run for president of the United States.
It doesn't get any better than that.
What happened in New Hampshire?
So, what did happen in New Hampshire?
On Monday night, the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama was preparing for a blowout day as they would defeat Sen. Hillary Clinton, dealing a serious blow to her chances of winning the Democratic presidential nomination.
By Tuesday night, everyone was left stunned as a nine-point lead - one poll had it at 13 - evaporated and it was Clinton giving a victory speech and Obama thanking her on a job well done.
So, was it Clinton's tears causing women to come out and prop her campaign up? Was it an over-confident, some say cocky, Obama campaign getting humbled? Did Bill Clinton pull it out for his wife like he did in 1992 when he came in second here and declared himself the Comeback Kid?
Let's go inside the numbers.
UNDECIDEDS MATTERED
All of the polls had Obama gaining 37% and Clinton winning 30%.
The final results? Obama got 37% and Clinton 39%. What happened? Undecided voters spoke.
Exit polls show that 15% of the voters on Tuesday made up their minds as they headed to the polls that day. And with a record number of voters, nearly 300,000, that means you had 40,000-plus who cast ballots that had not made their feelings known. If you assume Clinton won 60% of those voters, that's about 24,000 to Obama's 16,000. What was her margin of victory? About 8,000.
TEARS FOR FEARS
Clinton was down three points to Obama among women prior to the vote. After the vote, she beat him by 13 points. Many believe her newfound sensitivity, especially with the choking back of tears on Monday, caused women to be more sympathetic to her and vaulted her over the top.
TRADITIONAL VS. NON-TRADITIONAL
Obama took the risky strategy of going after independents, the young vote and Republicans. Clinton? She went after labor, older voters, women and blue collar. The result? She won the key categories, especially single females. She also dusted Obama in the big cities, winning by wide margins.
The Bill Factor
I'm not sold that he pulled it out for her. I think he was used wisely, but it was her overhaul of her message that won the day.
White flight from Obama
There is some speculation that New Hampshire, 97% white, said Obama was the guy, but once they got into the booth, changed their minds. Not sure if that was the case, and it's hard to quantify. Maybe New Hampshire just gave her the close victory.
WHAT'S NEXT
Nevada on Jan. 19, where Obama has picked up two huge union endorsements. Then the battleground of South Carolina, where the Clintons and Obama will duke it out for black votes. The key? BLACK WOMEN. They are 40% undecided. Bill will pour on the charm to get them to back his wife. The Obama campaign should unleash his wife, Michelle, and let the mother of two, professional lawyer from the South Side of Chicago rally sisters to her husband.
Then Tsunami Tuesday, when 23 states go to the polls on Feb. 5. Among them? California, New York, New Jersey, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Virginia and Arkansas. Who dominates here will likely be the nominee.
On Monday night, the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama was preparing for a blowout day as they would defeat Sen. Hillary Clinton, dealing a serious blow to her chances of winning the Democratic presidential nomination.
By Tuesday night, everyone was left stunned as a nine-point lead - one poll had it at 13 - evaporated and it was Clinton giving a victory speech and Obama thanking her on a job well done.
So, was it Clinton's tears causing women to come out and prop her campaign up? Was it an over-confident, some say cocky, Obama campaign getting humbled? Did Bill Clinton pull it out for his wife like he did in 1992 when he came in second here and declared himself the Comeback Kid?
Let's go inside the numbers.
UNDECIDEDS MATTERED
All of the polls had Obama gaining 37% and Clinton winning 30%.
The final results? Obama got 37% and Clinton 39%. What happened? Undecided voters spoke.
Exit polls show that 15% of the voters on Tuesday made up their minds as they headed to the polls that day. And with a record number of voters, nearly 300,000, that means you had 40,000-plus who cast ballots that had not made their feelings known. If you assume Clinton won 60% of those voters, that's about 24,000 to Obama's 16,000. What was her margin of victory? About 8,000.
TEARS FOR FEARS
Clinton was down three points to Obama among women prior to the vote. After the vote, she beat him by 13 points. Many believe her newfound sensitivity, especially with the choking back of tears on Monday, caused women to be more sympathetic to her and vaulted her over the top.
TRADITIONAL VS. NON-TRADITIONAL
Obama took the risky strategy of going after independents, the young vote and Republicans. Clinton? She went after labor, older voters, women and blue collar. The result? She won the key categories, especially single females. She also dusted Obama in the big cities, winning by wide margins.
The Bill Factor
I'm not sold that he pulled it out for her. I think he was used wisely, but it was her overhaul of her message that won the day.
White flight from Obama
There is some speculation that New Hampshire, 97% white, said Obama was the guy, but once they got into the booth, changed their minds. Not sure if that was the case, and it's hard to quantify. Maybe New Hampshire just gave her the close victory.
WHAT'S NEXT
Nevada on Jan. 19, where Obama has picked up two huge union endorsements. Then the battleground of South Carolina, where the Clintons and Obama will duke it out for black votes. The key? BLACK WOMEN. They are 40% undecided. Bill will pour on the charm to get them to back his wife. The Obama campaign should unleash his wife, Michelle, and let the mother of two, professional lawyer from the South Side of Chicago rally sisters to her husband.
Then Tsunami Tuesday, when 23 states go to the polls on Feb. 5. Among them? California, New York, New Jersey, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Virginia and Arkansas. Who dominates here will likely be the nominee.
Top 3 Reasons why barack Obama lost in New Hampshire
1. John Edwards. Before it's all said and done tonight, 60,000+ voters in New Hampshire will have cast ballots for one of three candidates: John Edwards, Bill Richardson, and Dennis Kucinich. The vast majority of these votes will have gone to Edwards, the most progressive candidate in the race except for Kucinich (whose voters account, incidentally, for only about 3,000 of those 60,000 votes). Hillary Clinton defeated Barack Obama in New Hampshire by about 6,000 votes. Does anyone in America doubt that without Edwards, Richardson, and Kucinich in the race, those 60,000 almost-entirely-progressive voters would have favored Obama over Clinton by a wide enough margin to give Obama a win in New Hampshire? No, no one doubts that--but because Edwards finished with a disappointing (yet not entirely unpredictable, given previous polls) 17% in New Hampshire, no one thinks to consider the importance of Edwards tonight, and point out that in a two-person race Obama would have actually (as those same polls once predicted) have blown Hillary's doors off in the Granite State. Today's result was devastating for Edwards; he was hoping for a Hillary loss, such that he could soldier on, watch Hillary drop out, and go into hand-to-hand combat mode with Obama. The joke, of course, is on Edwards, and those of us who support him, as his continued presence in the presidential race only ensures that he'll never see his best-case scenario materialize. John Edwards has become the biggest obstacle to John Edwards' own ambitions--strategically speaking--which is what tells me, sadly, that it's time for him to drop out of the race. The penalty for all of us, if he fails to do so, is the eminently beatable Hillary Clinton as the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.
2. The media. Nothing is worse for a candidate than a premature coronation, and that's what the media saddled Obama with yesterday. Undoubtedly, the media effectively calling the race for Obama yesterday--all but saying to America that the only issue left was how much he'd win by--depressed turnout for Obama while raising it for Clinton. Obama voters had every reason to believe, because they'd been told this by every poll and every pundit, that Obama no longer needed their vote. And Clinton supporters knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that their preferred choice needed them as never before. Obama's surrogates, particularly Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, made a last-ditch effort today, on the airwaves of New England, to emphasize to Obama voters that their vote was still desperately needed. That message was too little, too late, and as it turns out the Obama bump from his Iowa victory was, if anything, too big. So big the media salivation turned into overreaction, which turned into smugness and complacency among precisely those voters Obama's Iowa bump should have energized. As with the John Edwards effect, there's an undeniable irony here--almost a paradox--in that it was Obama's very success in Iowa (where he outpolled Hillary by 9%; compare that to Hillary's squeaker of a win tonight <2%>) that cost him New Hampshire. Yet, once again, was this Obama's fault? No. His only failure was not realizing that the national media was, and is, and always will be, more powerful than any single campaign's GOTV machine.
3. The "diner" moment. Hillary's close-to-tears confession in a New Hampshire diner yesterday that this race was "personal" for her had countless effects on the electorate, all of them positive for Hillary. And yet I'm not saying the moment was contrived or false; in fact, I believe it was genuine, and well-timed but not in a schemed-out way (well-timed in the same way fate is well-timed; it's no surprise, really, that 24 hours before the New Hampshire primary, as Hillary faced the probable end of her national political career, she would feel so exhausted and harried and depressed and disappointed that her voice would crack for all of ten seconds. That's just the way life, and the human psyche, works). Women realized, when Hillary teared up, that she was not merely a machine, or a woman ashamed of her femininity and trying to "be a man" in a man's world, but that she was a woman like them, trying to do the hardest thing any woman in American history has tried to do (quite possibly): become the most powerful person in the known universe. And it's no surprise, then, in a sense, that women went for Hillary overwhelmingly today in New Hampshire, and gave her a clear (albeit narrow) victory. Likewise, Hillary's tears at that diner brought out two types of television pundits and on-the-ground activists--bigots and cynics--and both these groups can't help but push voters toward precisely those candidates they most vehemently oppose. Thank the man who raised a sign saying "Iron My Shirt!" at a Hillary rally for Hillary's win; thank pundits like Chris Matthews, and other old, chauvinistic white men on the boob tube, who openly wondered whether a) Hillary's tears were contrived (I don't think the voting public felt they were, generally), and b) whether those tears signaled she somehow wasn't ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth. That unparalleled, bald-faced assault on the very humanity of a tough and courageous woman couldn't have had any other effect than to turn out voters for her. That, and the moment in that diner really was touching; I've never felt so warmly toward Hillary, though admittedly that's not saying much.
....
2. The media. Nothing is worse for a candidate than a premature coronation, and that's what the media saddled Obama with yesterday. Undoubtedly, the media effectively calling the race for Obama yesterday--all but saying to America that the only issue left was how much he'd win by--depressed turnout for Obama while raising it for Clinton. Obama voters had every reason to believe, because they'd been told this by every poll and every pundit, that Obama no longer needed their vote. And Clinton supporters knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that their preferred choice needed them as never before. Obama's surrogates, particularly Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, made a last-ditch effort today, on the airwaves of New England, to emphasize to Obama voters that their vote was still desperately needed. That message was too little, too late, and as it turns out the Obama bump from his Iowa victory was, if anything, too big. So big the media salivation turned into overreaction, which turned into smugness and complacency among precisely those voters Obama's Iowa bump should have energized. As with the John Edwards effect, there's an undeniable irony here--almost a paradox--in that it was Obama's very success in Iowa (where he outpolled Hillary by 9%; compare that to Hillary's squeaker of a win tonight <2%>) that cost him New Hampshire. Yet, once again, was this Obama's fault? No. His only failure was not realizing that the national media was, and is, and always will be, more powerful than any single campaign's GOTV machine.
3. The "diner" moment. Hillary's close-to-tears confession in a New Hampshire diner yesterday that this race was "personal" for her had countless effects on the electorate, all of them positive for Hillary. And yet I'm not saying the moment was contrived or false; in fact, I believe it was genuine, and well-timed but not in a schemed-out way (well-timed in the same way fate is well-timed; it's no surprise, really, that 24 hours before the New Hampshire primary, as Hillary faced the probable end of her national political career, she would feel so exhausted and harried and depressed and disappointed that her voice would crack for all of ten seconds. That's just the way life, and the human psyche, works). Women realized, when Hillary teared up, that she was not merely a machine, or a woman ashamed of her femininity and trying to "be a man" in a man's world, but that she was a woman like them, trying to do the hardest thing any woman in American history has tried to do (quite possibly): become the most powerful person in the known universe. And it's no surprise, then, in a sense, that women went for Hillary overwhelmingly today in New Hampshire, and gave her a clear (albeit narrow) victory. Likewise, Hillary's tears at that diner brought out two types of television pundits and on-the-ground activists--bigots and cynics--and both these groups can't help but push voters toward precisely those candidates they most vehemently oppose. Thank the man who raised a sign saying "Iron My Shirt!" at a Hillary rally for Hillary's win; thank pundits like Chris Matthews, and other old, chauvinistic white men on the boob tube, who openly wondered whether a) Hillary's tears were contrived (I don't think the voting public felt they were, generally), and b) whether those tears signaled she somehow wasn't ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth. That unparalleled, bald-faced assault on the very humanity of a tough and courageous woman couldn't have had any other effect than to turn out voters for her. That, and the moment in that diner really was touching; I've never felt so warmly toward Hillary, though admittedly that's not saying much.
....
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)