Let's have a primary open thread. I am watching Chris Matthews because he will be most inappropriately euphoric if Obama wins. (And hey, it is ten after eight and where is my landslide?).
I do love Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, who were chatting with
Frank Rich before the polls closed. Paraphrasing:
CM or KO: So, is this a rejection of Hillary and the Clinton machine?
FR: Honestly, I think it is a rejection of George Bush.
And Karl Rove - don't forget Karl Rove! And Dick Cheney! And Halliburton!
John McCain is the projected winner on the Rep side - if I hadn't called that I meant to!
MORE: Geez, didn't Thompson run in NH? He is not even getting a flicker on the televised poll results, but I see at the Times that he has drawn 1%.
SPEECHES: I thought McCain's was draggy and oddly structured - we had people chatting and it was hard to follow McCain's double negatives - he wasn't going somewhere to not do something, and other people weren't going to Washington to not do something - baffling.
Huckabee may have provided a pleasant introduction to folks who had not seen him before.
Edwards is now the candidate for homeless veterans living under bridges? Are times that tough for John Kerry?
YES WE CAN: Obama surely can speechify. I wonder if he remembers that "Yes we can" was the slogan for the 1979 Angels, who ultimately could not. Oh well, its an excuse to reprise one of my favorite baseball stories.
And I am now informed that Hillary has come to New Hampshire and finally found her voice, after a mere 35 years of public service. Contra Hillary I have miraculously lost my voice, so my burbled "Kill me now" is not producing any result.
Golly, under Hillary there will be no more invisible Americans. That will spare me a lot of unexpected and embarrassing bumping-into, I guess.
And she is going to end the war in Iraq "the right way". Since victory is not an option I am left guessing.
OK - I am going to go join her at HillaryClinton-dot-commie.
You sure that was a paraphrase?
Posted by: Uncle Pinky | January 08, 2008 at 08:15 PM
Thanks Jane. This is unbelievable--Hillary 40% and Obama 35%-- 13% reporting.
Posted by: glasater | January 08, 2008 at 08:22 PM
I am going to be so disappointed if I have to stop my dancing in mid-stride. And McCain. Damn Huckabee. He caused me to root for McCain.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 08:25 PM
Hillary is 2,000 ahead with 13% reporting.
Very heavy turnout for the Democrats.
McCain seems to have been a beneficiary of that, because the more liberal independants voted Democrat.
It may be, though that the precincts reporting are more conservative. Hillary, presumably will get the more conservative of the Democrat votes than either Edwards or Obama.
Edwards is hurting, it would seem to me.
Hillary may be able to use the "comeback kid" approach used so effectively by Billy Boy.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 08:26 PM
I think the McCain people are a little over-confident, and I don't think Romney is the least bit out of it. And all that talk about a "neighboring state governor" is ridiculous. NH and MA are not tied together politically in any way. N.H is about 50 times more conservative and thinks the rest of us next door are idiots. People in NH come here to steal our services, and sometimes to work.
Posted by: Jane | January 08, 2008 at 08:28 PM
Drudger:
13.08% IN: CLINTON 40; OBAMA 35; EDWARDS 16; RICHARDSON 4; KUCINICH 2...
11.96% IN: *MCCAIN 37; ROMNEY 28; HUCKABEE 12; GIULIANI 9; PAUL 8; THOMPSON 1...
CLINTON 40%
OBAMA 35%
*MCCAIN WINS
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 08:28 PM
3 states so far, 3 winners for the republicans. (Huck in IA; Mitt in WY; McCain in NH) And since WY is pretty minor, let's project Mitt as the winner in MI.
It may be wishful thinking to think of a Fred win in SC, but play the game with me here (while I keep hope alive!)....and then Rudy in FL.
End January with 7 states won by 5 different candidates.
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 08:31 PM
Jane,
::grin:: My 2 NH buddies call your state Massa2shits.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 08:31 PM
On the positive side, we'll have them all to kick around for a while longer.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 08, 2008 at 08:31 PM
oops, forgot NV. Give it to Mitt if you want...8 states 5 candidates.
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 08:32 PM
Yay McCain for me.
Fox had Obama winning the exit poll, but the MOE was too close for them to want to call it.
Posted by: MayBee | January 08, 2008 at 08:38 PM
ABC affiliate coveragehere
Hillary Clinton 17,385 40%
Barack Obama 15,565 36%
John Edwards 7,298 17%
John McCain 9,952 38%
Mitt Romney 7,673 29%
Mike Huckabee 3,236 12%
Damn.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 08, 2008 at 08:39 PM
I like your game Hit
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 08:40 PM
I have MSNBC on also, because Matthews shares my dislike of the Clintons. But I am paying a heavy price, having to watch that lemon-sucker Katrina VandenHuevel and the Mary Lou Retton wannabe, Rachel Maddow.
Posted by: MayBee | January 08, 2008 at 08:40 PM
I think the weather helped Hillary. It was nearly 60 degrees today, and the foot of snow on the ground melted away all day long. That's good weather for old ladies to get out for the shrew.
Posted by: Jane | January 08, 2008 at 08:40 PM
Well, I guess the war isn't so unpopular. 2 war voters are ahead.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 08:42 PM
On the plus side, a Hillary win saves me my $100.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 08:43 PM
From Geraghty, FWIW:
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 08:43 PM
GACK!!!GACK!! Barone says it's possible Hill beat Obama!!Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Posted by: clarice | January 08, 2008 at 08:58 PM
MORE: Geez, didn't Thompson run in NH?
Where ya been TM? Not really. Allah's advice to Fred at the last debate was for him to stand up, take off his mike, and say he was heading to South Carolina and leaving this dog and pony show behind.
---
Was someone sneezing repeatedly in the background behind Michael Barone on Foz --> I am in in the kitchen and just having a snit of a time typing standing up!
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 08:58 PM
Do you think the discrepancy in polling and the actual voting might be people telling pollsters one thing but when in the privacy of the booth doing another? And yes, I'm referring to race.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 08:58 PM
Brit Hume: "The Huck has just appeared on the stage."
Posted by: Elliott | January 08, 2008 at 08:59 PM
See this from Lowry?
If those are true and complete numbers, 'twasn't independents pushing McCain over the top...messes up some of the speculated spin Mitt would use -- those darn independents did it, get me some real republicans and I can win.
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 08:59 PM
I heard Barone say that and my eye started twitching...
Posted by: RichatUF | January 08, 2008 at 09:00 PM
Beat me to it, Clarice. The operative word is "possible". But Barone is very astute.
I fear the angry rhetoric drove some Edwards folks into the Hillary! camp.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:01 PM
Sue:
Do you think the discrepancy in polling and the actual voting might be people telling pollsters one thing but when in the privacy of the booth doing another?
Interesting question.
also, someone noted on the Corner that beware the exit polls because they are all modeled on turnout levels probably commensurate with what the pre-primary ballot counter planners were planning on counting on.
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 09:02 PM
Top,
I just told my husband that I wished whoever that was would leave the room. It was very distracting. And continuous. Poor thing.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:03 PM
Don't sweat it, Clarice--if she does win, the dream scenario becomes more possible: Hillary energizing the GOP, and Af-Ams staying away in droves.
Posted by: Other Tom | January 08, 2008 at 09:03 PM
I left the room, cuz the "Huck" as Brit called him is rhapsodizing.
I just hate that McCain wins anything!
Clarice - you're gonna thwack and thwack at me, but I hope Shrillary wins. Our side has a much better chance to bring down the Clinton dynasty, than we do the Obama beatification.
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:05 PM
H&R,
It could also be Hillary knows how to stuff a ballot box. Something happened with all those extra ballots they were calling for. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:07 PM
If I eat another jelly belly or tic tac(cig replacements)tonight, my tongue is going to fall off.
Posted by: clarice | January 08, 2008 at 09:08 PM
Thanks Sue,
I couldn't hear that well, but I knew something was up. The people in the background and Michael Barone did a really stoic job. I woulda busted out laughing at some point.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:09 PM
"And yes, I'm referring to race."
There will be some of that, to be sure. Plus antipathy towards Mormons on the other side. What screwed up the turnout models of the polling companies was the appearance of, lets say 'non-youth', in numbers far greater than anticipated.
"my eye started twitching..."
I heard horses whinnying...
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 08, 2008 at 09:09 PM
30% in and the strident strumpet is holding her 40% to 35% lead.
I am beginning to suspect a sandbag. Someone simultaneously pumping up the Obama bandwagon and dampening the Shrillary! expectations.
It they pulled that off, it was an artful political coup -- and without any sleazing of Obama. You've got to tip the hat if that is what happened.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:10 PM
Alas, it appears my schadenfreude may have been left at the station. It certainly lives to fight another day though.
Posted by: JM Hanes | January 08, 2008 at 09:10 PM
A 2-point Obama win would be pretty helpful. In my opinion, it would encourage Hillary to go negative and it would make a drawn out fight for the nomination more likely.
Posted by: Elliott | January 08, 2008 at 09:10 PM
If I eat another jelly belly or tic tac(cig replacements)tonight, my tongue is going to fall off.
Time for frozen grapes?
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:10 PM
Does anyone know if Other Tom is okay? I fear he might slit his wrists if she pulls this one out.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:12 PM
TM:
Geez, didn't Thompson run in NH?
Oh good grief.
Come on.
I mean, really. Are you not paying attention?
Fred doesn't run anywhere.
He saunters.
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 09:12 PM
it's getting tighter...
CLINTON 39%
OBAMA 36%
so perchance that Manchester biz up-thread is about right.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:12 PM
Should be 40/36 -- about 3,000 votes.
Now 34%, still 40/36 and about 3500 votes.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:13 PM
Why is McCain reading his speech?
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 09:13 PM
I think it's weak that McCain is "reading" a speech.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:14 PM
Top -- which is the fastest reportage? Your numbers are a bit quicker.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:14 PM
I'm not bothered by it being close, and I think I would even survive a Shrew win - just to see what she does next. The more of Hillary and Obama that gets exposed, the better I think.
That's my silk purse and I'm clutching it.
Posted by: Jane | January 08, 2008 at 09:15 PM
Well, since Fred! has been campaigning in SC since at least the 1st of Jan. I guess you could say he pretty well wrote NH off. Who could blame the guy?
Posted by: Pofarmer | January 08, 2008 at 09:16 PM
Latest Geraghty:
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 09:16 PM
McCain is having problems reading his speech. His age is showing.
Posted by: Jane | January 08, 2008 at 09:16 PM
I must say he reads a bit better than W, but I agree he pales in comparison with Romney, Fred, Rudy and even Huck.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:16 PM
vnj
Drudge has those numbers
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:18 PM
Or Obama.
He might squeak by The Red Witch.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 08, 2008 at 09:18 PM
That was my suspicion when the CW swung so hugely in Obama's favor right after Iowa. Set up for a Comeback Kid scenario.
I'm with the folks who want Hill to win now and lose later. I've been promised coverage of Clinton scandals all year long which I don't wish to be robbed of. It'll be a lot more fun firing those thirty-two pounders into the Hillary hull than lobbing "inexperienced lightweight" grenades at Obama. (sorry for the mixed metaphor, I'm deep into Patrick O'Brien these last few months)
And no joke about the energized GOP. Fundraising comes a lot easier when Hill is the nominee.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 08, 2008 at 09:19 PM
Maybe the Edwards people are breaking to Hillary instead of Obama.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:20 PM
Pathetic. John is reading his long winded speech, word by word (and flubbing some of them)! Must think he's back in the Senate!
Where is the hook?
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:20 PM
If by chance McCain were to win the nomination down the the road--a very big if--his running mate would gain significant scrutiny just from the age factor.
Posted by: glasater | January 08, 2008 at 09:21 PM
I don't think McCain expected to win. He had to read his speech because he didn't prepare one. Just a guess.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:22 PM
Much too long and boring, I agree.
Get on with the campaign. Please.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:23 PM
Note to McCain speechwriter -- he's on the Stump, not on the Senate floor, we don't need Kennedy-esque gas bag blow-hardness or a SOTU address you lamo.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:24 PM
Okay, I am drunk. Took a swig every time he said "my friends!" Good Lord - even his crowd wanted him to shut up!
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:26 PM
Fox News is showing 42% in, 39 for Hillary 37 for Obama. It is tightening.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:27 PM
42% 39/37 Clinton about 2300 votes
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:27 PM
****I smelled a whiff of brimstone and saw a flash ....
Posted by: clarice | January 08, 2008 at 09:27 PM
A truly stunning speech. Like a single jack against a steers skull.
Porchlight,
Wouldn't it be great to have a Jack Aubrey running?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 08, 2008 at 09:27 PM
Let him win by a handful of votes and let her take it to the Supreme Ct. (HEH)
Posted by: clarice | January 08, 2008 at 09:28 PM
Uh oh. Shrillary and Obamamessaiah are tightening up.
McCain, mercifully, finally shut up.
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:29 PM
McCain better get ready for prime time on the stump.
Rhetoric unexciting; delivery pitiful. Must improve.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:29 PM
I just want the Obama/Clinton race to finish CLOSE (a percent or two either way). That will keep them both in the race.
BTW, saw a new epithet for Hill today (I forget where, or I'd give them credit):
Mrs. Beelzebubba.
Posted by: Ralph | January 08, 2008 at 09:29 PM
Wouldn't it be great to have a Jack Aubrey running?<.i>
Wouldn't it though? I guess McCain's our Navy guy, but the contrast is stark. Thank fortune we have O'Brian to escape to.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 08, 2008 at 09:30 PM
43% down to 2100 votes separate Clinton from Obama.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:30 PM
RalphL, I love it!
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:30 PM
oops
Posted by: Porchlight | January 08, 2008 at 09:30 PM
The CNN exit polls have the gender breakdown as 57%-43% female in the Democratic Primary and 56%-44% male in the Republican Primary. That would explain a lot.
Posted by: Patrick Tyson | January 08, 2008 at 09:30 PM
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:31 PM
Good Lord - even his crowd wanted him to shut up!
Talk about tone deaf...his supporters were pumped and he just kept droning on and on...shut up and sing!
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:33 PM
45% back to 3,000.
Posted by: vnjagvet | January 08, 2008 at 09:33 PM
FR: "Honestly..."
That's a dead giveaway.
JMH, I guess we'll have to disagree on how effectively Obama's record can be revealed as hard left. You say he won't flinch at the L word, but there's a reason why Dems run from the Scarlet L. We'll have to see if this year is different.
I agree on the pol v. pol scenario--senators have for many years now been disasters as presidential candidates, probably due to the nature of their voting records--the horse trading they're involved in makes them all look like snakes. Of course, if you're looking for an experienced governor to pit against the Obam' phenom, Huckleberry was a governor for 10 years and he has the common man touch, but I don't like his chances in a general election. I see the Huckster and Obama as both well outside the mainstream. I think the GOP was hoping Obama would knock Hillary off.
Posted by: anduril | January 08, 2008 at 09:34 PM
Patrick,
Any age splits?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 08, 2008 at 09:34 PM
Clinton 39%
Obama 37%
44% reporting, per CNN
Posted by: Ralph | January 08, 2008 at 09:34 PM
Okay, I really wanna go into a Monastery (if I knew how to spell it)! NRO is raving over the fabulous speech McCain just gave.
They must all be drunk too.
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:35 PM
--Mrs. Beelzebubba.--
I am dumb, need dummies version...don't get it.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:36 PM
OK Patrick Tyson, what about the Hill is finished stuff you were handing us a day or so ago?
And for all of you buying the slick packaged movement BS, shame on you. How is it that the movement with record temperatures, anecdotes of ballot shortages, is behind with almost 1/2 the ballots counted? The only movement was the bovine bowels.
Obama is just a slightly better speaking John Kerry, with less experience and possibly even more liberal. If Hill can beat him, how about a grown up?
Sheesh
Posted by: GMax | January 08, 2008 at 09:37 PM
They must all be drunk too.
I pulled out my bottle of Starbucks liqueur and am well into my 3rd cup of coffee. Bring on the
witchI mean winner.Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:38 PM
Top,
Slick Willie = Bubba
Posted by: Ralph | January 08, 2008 at 09:38 PM
centralcal:
NRO is raving over the fabulous speech McCain just gave.
They must all be drunk too.
Oh, crap. I was about to post that too (and include Geraghty as one who loved the speech) -- and I was going to proclaim my unwillingness to reconsider my position and also blame their drunkeness.
But then I realized.
I'm sober.
My judgement may be impaired afterall.
Posted by: hit and run | January 08, 2008 at 09:39 PM
As I've been saying for the last several days, McCain always finds a way to lose. He's essentially a third party--his positions, the profile of his supporters, etc. To me, his supporters are like Perotistas.
This post at FR helps to explain it:
I've just looked at the exit polls. It's very simple and not surprising, except I didn't realize that NH has gone liberal at a fast rate since 2004.
Romney got 42% vs. McCain's 19% of the very conservative vote, which was 20% of the total (according to the exit poll data); McCain 38% to Romney's 35% of the conservate vote (33% of the total). McCain got 44% to Romney's 26% of the moderate vote (35% of the total), and McCain won the liberal vote 47% to 12% (11% of the total).
Fred got 3% of the very conservative vote. Paul got 19% (second place!) of the liberal vote.
Posted by: anduril | January 08, 2008 at 09:39 PM
--NRO is raving over the fabulous speech McCain just gave.--
OK, I agree, but after I thought about it I thought the "words" were good and he needed to cap on the message in the spotlight.
Most people were like me and in the kitchen (struggling of course to keep up) but they aren't news junkies like me - us.
So that may be what the NROers are commenting, otherwise they are drunk and tone deaf too.
Op -- Barone back on -- is the sneezer gone?
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:40 PM
AH Larry
Thanks. Slow on the uptake.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:43 PM
Back to the original post, if Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and Frank Rich were shipwrecked on a desert isle, and their programs/columns were just repeats, who would notice?
Posted by: SPQR | January 08, 2008 at 09:43 PM
GMax,
Patrick used the conditional "if she loses in double digits". She didn't. What "movement"? Ballot provision is generally the responsibility of the county clerk rather than the party.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 08, 2008 at 09:43 PM
GMax,
You should read more carefully. I declined to make a prediction regarding either contest in New Hampshire. What I wrote was that a double-digit victory for Obama would be the end of Hillary.
Rick,
Two-thirds in both 40+. She polled by 8 to 15% better in the three splits. McCain polled better in every age group except 65+.
Posted by: Patrick Tyson | January 08, 2008 at 09:44 PM
MORE: Geez, didn't Thompson run in NH? He is not even getting a flicker on the televised poll results, but I see at the Times that he has drawn 1%.
I know the 2 people who voted for Fred. ::grin:: They changed their minds at the last minute about Ron Paul. I was not involved in that decision, but applauded it, I assure you.
Posted by: Sue | January 08, 2008 at 09:45 PM
There is some pekinese shouting to Chris Wallace about how Shrillary was fated to win this thing!
Come on, Shrillary!!!
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:45 PM
Well you also derided Jay Cost, which was the while reason I brought this back up to begin with. Seems like Jay was dead on. She just recovered even sooner than Jay thought.
Posted by: GMax | January 08, 2008 at 09:46 PM
Could this FR poster have it right:
I am picturing carloads of aging hippie women in birkenstocks crossing the state border from all directions and voting for hill.
Posted by: anduril | January 08, 2008 at 09:47 PM
OMG! Hillary is still using that hag Anne Lewis?
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:48 PM
Anduril, I opined earlier today that they were truckin in people from other states to fill her venues, so why not have 'em hang around and vote for her too!
Never put anything past the Clintons.
Posted by: centralcal | January 08, 2008 at 09:48 PM
51% IN: CLINTON 39; OBAMA 37; EDWARDS 17; RICHARDSON 5; KUCINICH 2...
46% IN: *MCCAIN 37; ROMNEY 31; HUCKABEE 12; GIULIANI 9; PAUL 8; THOMPSON 1...
CLINTON 53,127 [39%]
OBAMA 49,587 [37%]
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:48 PM
2 birds, 1 stone centralcal?
Posted by: anduril | January 08, 2008 at 09:50 PM
Obama people are "cloistered" trying to figure it out, Fox quotes bloggers, did I hear that right? ---> Deibold,
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | January 08, 2008 at 09:51 PM
MayBee:
Well, I'm glad somebody I respect is pleased with the McCain win. You're now all that's standing between yours truly and despair!
On the Democratic side, if they dub Hillary the Comeback
KidGurrl Redux, I think I may have to swear off politics till the conventions. I'll content myself with contemplating the number of people who have been added to the Clinton grudge list between Iowa and NH and the fact that, just as the opposite was true, it's probably better for Republicans if Hillary takes out Obama, than for the GOP nominee to do it.Posted by: JM Hanes | January 08, 2008 at 09:51 PM