Will The NH Primary Be The Indicator To Heed Again?

God help us!

No I don't Sue. As I stated on Don H.'s thread, there has been a large movement of society away from the midwest and northeast regions of the country and they've moved south, central...east...and west. They've done that for a reason and I will say again, when these areas start having their primaries, you will see a shift in the winds.
I'm looking forward to the SC one coming up as well as the Georgia one in February.
Florida I think is going to go Red this year also.

February 5, Big Tuesday shall speak volumes, Sue.

I am an absentee voter, as are many California voters. They mailed our ballots out last week. Think I shall not have my ballot completed in record time.

Guess WHO I shall cast my ballot for. It is time to really get to work, huh?

. . .but I still have not addressed your question, have I?
Hillary shall not win. Hillary shall lose.

John McCain? I do not know. I only hope that Mike Huckabee does not win.

I am not much of a follower of historical roles... and I don't put much stock in what people from New Hampshire (or anywhere else) say or think. I think this whole election will be full of surprises though, and it will be interesting.

For those that do think New Hampshire is (or should be) right... maybe we should just limit the whole election to that state and not waste the rest of the year listening to all these candidates promises of "change".

If it does come down to Hilly and John; we'll have another Republican in The White House!

I don't know, Sue. If it does come down to Clinton and McCain I certainly won't be voting for HER! I just don't know about McCain. Sometimes I think he's just a R.I.N.O. (Republican In Name Only) and then other times I think that he'll be able to work with both parties, which is needed. And he looks like my uncle Floyd McCain. lol

Nalita was the first person I thought of when I heard that Clinton had won.

Maybe the folks in New Hampshire aren't all that impressed with Oprah.

I think it's still too early to tell. But I'm glad that Obama didn't just slide through. Hopefully we'll really start getting to the issues instead of who will go stomping for you.

Thanks, everyone. That's funny, Lera! Hope you're right, Katie.

The pundits are saying that McCain won due to his support from the Independents, and that he will have to concentrate on the same faction on Super Tuesday and any other preceding primaries before the 5th. I don't know how many states allow Independents to vote in the primaries though. Mine doesn't.

Sue I found this interesting...out of the last primaries and caucuses since the 70's only 4 dems that won the presidency were the NH primary winners....Iowa picked only 3....and Iowa has only picked 4 that got the nomination but didnt win the presidency and NH got 3....does that make sense?


Goes to prove it is still anyones game.

Yes, it makes sense, except you're only citing stats for the Democrats.

Sue cause I dont know the stats for the Repubs.....my bad:)

I certainly hope not. I wouldn't vote for neither Hillary nor McCain. If Ron Paul isn't on the ballot, then I'm not voting. I don't see any other candidate from either party who I could find it morally acceptable to cast a vote for. Maybe if the Libertarian Party runs Michael Bednarik again, I could vote for him.
Other than that, this election is just another one where the flock of sheep line up to select which person gets to fleece us and send us to the slaughter.

The pattern is determined after the fact . . . the fact is not determined by the pattern. Any thing else is just attempted fortune telling . . .

I will say this about McCain's pulling the Independents. That may be what hurt Obama the most . . . He normally pulls youth and Independent votes . . . and clearly he needed them in New Hampshire. While (Reddish Icon that looks suspiciously like Oprah) is correct that what used to be known as Super Tuesday (Feb. 5th) will likely end the Primary speculation . . . a leading indicator into that day will be South Carolina on Jan. 26 (The Republican version is held earlier on the 19th). This may well add momentum and impetus to a candidate.

Since the projection based on patterns question seemed to be of interest to you (even though I find it a futile exercise in conjecture), perhaps you'd like to know that the South Carolina Republican Party is proud that since 1980, no Republican has lost South Carolina and then won the nomination. They've challenged the Republicans to win there or lose the nomination.

Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~

This comment is to let you know that this content has reached ten comments, and as such has been removed from Comment Speedway! Congratulations!

I think that Hillary will get the nomination. I am still torn between McCain and Huckabee getting the Republican nomination. But who will win? I have no idea. Its too close, and I can no longer trust the polls.

I think it's all coming down to the convention when it comes to the nominations, and then, I think all bets are off. The Dem races are too close. The Republicans, too fractured.

Record #s of people voted in NH & Iowa. I hope that trend remains.
This is the most important election of *my* lifetime anyway, so I hope people stay active.

NO

I think it's too early to call. We have almost a YEAR to go, after all. A lot can happen in a year..............

No, Lori, not bad, just biased. :)


Steve, I think Ron Paul is a phenomenal choice and the only choice, but not necessarily, a phenomenal candidate. As I said on another thread, he neither has the presence nor the eloquence to put forth his ideas to the status quo without coming off like a kook. Thompson and Romney made him look foolish in the debates on ABC, merely because of their ability to present the usual talking points without any question by their pablum fed constituencies.

Yes, Typhoon, polls are ridiculous. The questions, and the way they are posed, are most always so skewed that they result in inaccurate results. They certainly did this time.

Doyle writes, "The pattern is determined after the fact . . . the fact is not determined by the pattern."

I'd like to think so, but I don't know if there may be a psychological impact that sets the stage for a self fulfilling prophecy, especially with an indicator such as the NH primary that has been such a valid prognosticator for so many elections.

Carter Eskew, a Gore advisor who supports Clinton said, "Once you get out of Iowa and New Hampshire you end the protest phase, and you start to enter a phase where people say, this is decisive."

The SC trivia is interesting. Thanks for that.

Michael, looks like Sutton County needs another look! Scoundrels!

I don't know what I hope, at this point, Michelle!

I hope people vote too, Cat.

I hope Hillary Clinton will be our next President!
If not her, then Obama.
We need them -

I think it's time for another, "God help us" here.

I think this race is far from over. Edwards may have a shot of making it a 3 way race in South Carolina. And the Republican race is still up in the air. I think voters are voting as individuals this time around, rather than as a party. We won't see a quick victory like John Kerry experienced the last time around in either primary.

Even were Edwards not the presidential choice, he would make one heck of a VP. One reason that there is a teensy part of me that would love to see Hillary win is just to watch the neocons implode. Hell, they would be after her from day one frothing all the way. It would be that way even were she very successful and even if she did a lot of good things that benefited the entire country. Don't get me wrong here. I am not saying she would be successful or do good things, I'm saying it wouldn't matter.

I'll leave you all with one thought. For the first time probably in the history of this country we know one thing for certain: No matter who wins and no matter which party they represent, they will have to be better than what we have now.

Carolyn, I think Edwards is out period. There is no way in hell he will get the nomination. And the Democrats already tried an Edwards ticket. They won't make the same mistake again. He is damaged goods. But I think that Hillary is the best chance for a Republican in 2008. She is a very polarizing figure. Few are undecided about her. She cannot draw on undecided or independet voters like Obama can. I am a Republican, and I want her to get the nomination. GO HILLARY!, the best chance for a Republican in 2008

You might be right, Typhoon. A lot of people think she's the choice to beat, but it's a Russian Roulette type risk.

BREAKING (but expected) NEWS: Richardson is out

Those who believe in Obama believe you are wrong!

I think it's anybody's horse race right up until Feb 5th. I like Obama but I'm wondering if there is a hidden race factor lurking about. He won in Iowa but in a caucus people vote with their feet by moving to different lines favoring the various candidates, so everyone can see how they would vote. When votors have a secret ballot as in NH, they might vote differently.

Don't have to read your article to know which side you're on. Look at the pictures. A smiling, joyful Hillary, and a frowning, dire McCain. They say a picture is worth a 1,000 words.

I believe her tears were sincere but it wasn't because she is afraid for our country, it was because she was convinced she was losing.

I'm not a McCain supporter, actually when I took one of those tests to see which candidate was best for me it turned out to be Richardson and I'm a conservative republican with liberal tendencies.

I bet if we at Gather posted only pictures of candidates, we could sway a lot of people by the types of pictures we posted.

Isn't that what the major news media does?

BTW--thanks for the facts--they do tell another story.

Sure glad I read down to the end of those comments before answering this, Mary! Very funny!

The pundits are perplexed, Ruth. Without a clear frontrunner on either side it's definitely a horse race! As far as the race card, I've been waiting for someone to say something and I've looked for clues myself. Both Iowa and NH have around a 95% white population. I looked at other statistics too, like education and income, which are also fairly similar. One state chose him and the other didn't. No explanation there. I did see two opposing A. A. pundits on Anderson Cooper last night, but it turned out to be a disappointing and not very edifying shouting match with no verifiable proof that the race card is a factor. The man who was on the side of possible racism even conceded that his theory, whatever it was, was not positively so. You can bet that if Jesse Jackson saw even a hint of a theory that would stand up on a summer day without the faintest breeze, it would be evident and all over the place.

Yes, David, far from over.
Christine, wrong about what? Do you think that the GOP's easiest win is with Obama at the helm? I doubt that's what you meant.

I saw that, Typhoon. He's a smart guy!

I'm sorry but I don't see Hillary winning this.....I could be wrong but I don't think I am,

If John McCain gets elected, we'll be in Iraq for 100 years, according to him.

I'm an Edwards supporter. He is the only candidate not taking contributions from special interest groups. Even Obama has a lobbyist working for him.

The democrats have a long and distinguished record of picking candidates they like instead of candidates that can win in November. This year that candidate is HC.

As a NH voter (Guiliani with McCain leanings) I'm surprised by how accurate NH seems to be at picking the person who ends up as President. I don't think we (as a rule) represent the rest of the country, or even New England for that matter.

But man, am I sick of the political ads on TV!!! And the mail pieces!!! And the phone calls!!!

And the election isn't until November, the conventions not until late August and September... this is gone to be a LONG year. Kinda makes you wish NH did just pick the nominee and we voted two weeks later, huh?

Thanks for some good laughs, you guys are great!
Sue

Politics are too crazy to know.