New Hampshire Prediction and Results Thread

I've spent a week in New Hampshire now, so I have no excuses for not calling this election right. Below, my predictions and explanation why.

The Democrats
1. Barack Obama (42 percent)
Obama failed to blow me away at either speech I saw. I started to sense that he was blowing it, that he was becoming cautious and question-shy and arrogant (showing up 90 minutes late for one event) and not capitalizing on his momentum. And then I saw Hillary's smaller crowds and far nastier speeches and realized that Obama was putting together a second historic win.

2. Hillary Clinton (32 percent)

Someones you do man on the street interviews and find people befuddled when you ask about the hot political story of the day. That's not the case with Hillary's tears: People in bars and outside polling booths mention it unbidden. There's a lot less sympathy than there is eye-rolling, and the first person I talked to who said it made her like Hillary more was a Republican who'd already absentee'd for McCain. When I've spotted Clinton hacks like Lanny Davis and Terry McAuliffe, they've looked weathered and pissed off.

3. John Edwards (19 percent)
He's running a far stronger race than 2004, when he tied Wesley Clark for third place. Big crowds of lower-income Democrats and anti-corporate voters who don't quite trust the frontrunners.

4. Bill Richardson (5 percent)

Just hasn't broken through, and a lot of his vote bled to Obama.

5. Kucinich (1 percent)
6. Gravel (0.5 percent)
7. Write-ins (0.5 percent)

Similiar thing happening here: Anti-war, outsider Democrats see Obama and Edwards as acceptable, credible candidates. Also, Mike Gravel failed to attend the only campaign event I stopped by.

The Republicans
1. John McCain (34 percent)
He surged and surged for weeks and plateaued over the weekend. Huge, worshipful crowds, tons of independents saying they'll vote for him, and he's doing better with Republicans than he did eight years ago. Amnesty is basically forgiven, since Romney and the rest never convinced people they were more credible on immigration.

2. Mitt Romney (28 percent)
He's got a great GOTV operation and a really bored base. Earlier today he was already spinning a second place finish by saying, truthfully, that he'll have the most delegates after today, and that Michigan is next week. If it's a couple points closer he'll claim some kind of victory, and if it's a blowout he'll keep running anyway, because he's already blown millions.

3. Mike Huckabee (13 percent)
Before Iowa I think he would have come fourth or fifth with single digit support, but he got a burst of attention after that win. His crowds were about as big as Edwards' crowds; plenty of Republicans who don't like the mudslinging frontrunners have decided to give him their protest vote.

4. Ron Paul (12 percent)

With the right luck and enough college kids resisting Obamania he could come third, but I think he's going to fall a little short. It's really important to the Paul people that they defeat Rudy again, though.

5. Rudy Giuliani (9 percent)
Total meltdown. Everyone's making fun of his ridiculous TV ads and notices that his polls started dropping when they went on the air.

6. Fred Thompson (2 percent)

He's not even in New Hampshire tonight.

7. Duncan Hunter (1 percent)
He's insane.

8. Others (1 percent)
Go Vermin Supreme!

Put your own calls in the thread. I'll be in Concord tonight at the Ron Paul party.

UPDATE, 10:45: I ran around banking interviews for a post I'll put up later (and an article for tomorrow a.m.) but, uh, wow. If you trust the RealClearPolitics averages, the polls were dead-on in the GOP race and 10 points off in the Democratic race. Polls aren't just 10 percent off. Something changed in the final day -- maybe the crying shored up the female vote, maybe a final day of "Obama's so gonna win this shit" headlines moved independents out of the Dem primary, maybe the lackluster Obama rallies I saw were the norm and everyone was too swept up to notice.

As to the GOP race, quick post coming in a bit.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Obama by 15+ points.

  • ||

    Exit poll stats from NBC Nightly News in the GOP race:

    38% independents, 49% Angry at the Bush administration.

    Both are very good for Dr Paul.

  • VM||

    I'll take "Penis Mightier" for $300.

  • Ann Althouse||

    I'll be in Concord tonight at the Ron Paul party.

    You guys burning a cross?

    Don't spill salsa or red wine on your white robe.

  • Flow||

    Will a strong Paul showing be enough to outweigh the New Republic allegations? Or will a strong Paul showing hurt the movement at this point. :(

  • RBM||

    Hunter link is hilarious. A point!

  • ||

    The New Republic is a bastion of accuracy and editorial scruples...

  • ||

    Flow,

    People voting for Paul couldn't hurt the movement.

  • Fluffy||

    CNN says "Candidate personal qualities" were the most important factor in the Republican election, so that to me smells like they're telegraphing a McCain victory.

    McCain is a dishonorable political whore, but he's got the NH electorate fooled.

  • ||

    Obama in the mid 30s, with Hillary two points behind him. Edwards 15 points down from Obama.

    On the Republican side, McCain in the low 30s, Romney second place five points behind him. Ron Paul makes third place thanks to a high turnout, at 16%, with Huckabee at around 11 or 12. Rudy gets a mere 7 percent and whines "just you wait 'til Florida!"

  • ||

    Been out of the loop all day; just emerging back into the world here. How much buzz has there been today -- online and real-world -- about the New Republic stuff?

  • ||

    Tom,

    Only about six threads and 45,000 comments.

  • ||

    OK, how about outside the Reason-world? :-)

  • Flow||

    Heard about it on Neal Boortz, as well as a barely tolerable minute on Hannity.

  • KJ||

    http://news.aol.com/elections/primary/state/nh

  • ||

    New Hampshire only really cares about which candidate performs the most cheerful fellatio on the electorate. Same thing with Iowa.

  • ||

    Really? I thought Mike Gravel really made a splash.

  • ||

    Obama by double-digits.

    The polls are going to undercount him, because they are of likely voters, and he's drawing large numbers of people who would not have otherwise voted.

  • Anthony Cartouche||

    You're going to a party for this asshole? Gee, have a good time.

  • ||

    Anthony,

    Hello and welcome to Reason Magazine's blog. You may notice that today there have been a few posts here with stuff like "Ron Paul" and "newsletters" in their titles. You might want to consider reading the posts, if not the comment threads, before posting. It would make you look a bit less ignorant.

  • Eric Dondero||

    If Rudy somehow manages to beat Ron Paul today in NH will Reason-oids say that there's been a "total meltdown" in Paul's campaign.

    I'll admit, Rudy doesn't look like he's got a great shot today. But that's only because Rudy and Mitt supporters are one in the same. We occupy the same Fiscal Cons ground.

    But if Rudy does somehow gain more than Ron Paul, despite many of his supporters going over to Mitt, that will be a tremendouse achievement. And they'll be a lot of red faces here at H&R.

  • ||

    ZOMG!!!!1!!eleven!!1!!

    Anthony, where did you find that?!?

  • ||

    Rudy supporters are not fiscal cons, they're 9/11 ghouls and cheetos-stained warbloggers. Why would Keyboard Kommados support Mitt Romney?

    The guy who responded to his prostate cancer by signing every kid in NYC up for SCHIP is not a fiscal conservative by anything buy NYC standards.

  • ||

    David,

    I'd be curious to read a summary of what the Ron Paul afterparty is like, how the Ron Paul rank and file in NH are responding to the TNR article, where they see both Paul and the movement going from here and so forth.

  • ||

    It doesn't look good for Obama so far.

  • ||

    If Ron Paul doesn't come in second place in SC, it's over.

    Calling my shot in the primary.

    That last sentence was so I can find this thread if needed.

  • ||

    Man, Dondero, you sure know how to pick the losers, don't you?

  • ||

    There's a live tracker at Politico.

    With 9% in, Paul is in fifth place with 8.2%, behind McCain, Romney, Huckabee, and Giuliani. This might be a bad night.

  • Um, Huh||

    "That last sentence was so I can find this thread if needed."

    Um, huh?

  • ||

    Obama, but not by double digits. Let's not get carried away.

  • ||

    Cesar,

    Less than 10% of precincts are reporting and, as always, bigger cities report last.

  • ||

    Um, huh?

    Google search, baby.

  • Um, Huh||

    Um, browser "bookmarks," baby.

  • ||

    Um, browser "bookmarks," baby.

    Curses! Foiled again!

  • ||

    Paul is 88 votes behind Ghouliani at this point. Might be the closest he gets, might be a harbinger of things to come.

  • ||

    Gawd, if Clinton wins and Paul ends up as low as he is so far, what a double whammy of poo.

  • ||

    McCain wins according to MSNBC. Its very weird how the Republican polls are accurate, the Democratic polls don't seem to be so far.

  • beetlejuice||

    What's the deal with some counties grayed-out at the Politico tracker?

  • ||

    Make it 99 votes.

    Gray counties I'm still confused about as well. I assume those are the counties that are part of the free-state project.

  • ||

    Cesar,

    I think the Democratic polls systematically undercount Obama's support, because they are based on "likely voters," and Obama is attracting people who would otherwise not vote.

  • ||

    Say there, dondero.. What did Ron fire you for again? Refresh our memories.

    -jcr

  • ||

    "Other" is beating Thompson?

    Tancredo?

  • ||


    I think the Democratic polls systematically undercount Obama's support, because they are based on "likely voters," and Obama is attracting people who would otherwise not vote.



    I meant the polls have overcounted--not undercounted--his support according to the results so far. Shouldn't it be a blow out if the polls undercounted him?

  • ||

    "The Associated Press does not provide specific results from some jurisdictions (in grey)"

  • beetlejuice||

    el profesor erotico,

    Did they give a reason for this?

  • ||

    I think Paul will do worse than expected on account of the unusually warm weather. This means more people who weren't going to vote will actually vote, and they'll choose one of the "first tier" candidates.

  • ||

    They didn't give a reason that I can see, sorry.

  • beetlejuice||

    el profesor erotico,

    Thanks for looking. I'll guess that they don't have a local affiliate in those counties.

    Now, where did I lay my character map? :-)

  • Eric Dondero||

    I pick losers?

    Mitt Romney won Wyoming Big! over the weekend, in case you missed it.

    8 delegates for Mitt, 2 for Thompson, 1 for Duncan Hunter.

    Mitt placed 2nd in Iowa, and he's probably going to get 2nd tonight in NH.

    I wouldn't call that "loser."

    Rudy is set for a Florida win.

    Yes, my other pick Fred Thompson has not done so well. I'll admit that.

  • ||

    2nd is the first loser.

  • Eric Dondero||

    To refresh your memory, Ron Paul did not fire me. That is a bold-faced lie, and those who repeat it are subject to charges of slander.

    My advice to you, is to retract your statement above.

  • ||

    Eric, your party doesn't know what the hell its doing. Its in disarray right now.

    Oh yeah--Huckabee is ahead in Florida. Have fun choosing between Huckabee and McCain.

  • Eric Dondero||

    Again, Romney won Wyoming. Yes, it would have been better if he won Iowa, and if he wins in NH, but he has one win - Wyoming.

  • Eric Dondero||

    I do agree. There is chaos in the GOP right now. No argument there. But it is kind of fun. Wouldn't it be great if we went all the way to the convention?

  • ||

    I do agree. There is chaos in the GOP right now. No argument there. But it is kind of fun. Wouldn't it be great if we went all the way to the convention?



    Yeah, that'd be fun to watch especially since people assumed the days of brokered conventions are over. If that happens, I bet they nominate Newt Gingrich.

  • Eric Dondero||

    No, Cesar, not Gingrich, but could be David Patreaus?

    All the pundits are saying right now that McCain is winning NH cause of the success of the Surge. Why not go for broke and draft the General?

    Or, at least put Tommy Franks on the ticket.

  • ||

    Mitt Romney won Wyoming Big!

    Is such a thing possible? I mean, just how big can one win in Wyoming?

    What were the vote totals among the electorate? Oh, right, I forgot - they don't let registered voters vote in Wyoming.

    Gee, that IS impressive.

  • ||

    During my 6-year stint with him, I served as his only Jewish staffer. He regularly touted me as proof against allegations that he wasn't an Anti-Semite, even one time ordering me to wear Jewish clothing and attend a press conference of his Democrat opponent who was exposing his links to Anti-Semitic groups. I felt used.


    Surely you have photographic evidence of this.

  • rho||

    To refresh your memory, Ron Paul did not fire me. That is a bold-faced lie, and those who repeat it are subject to charges of slander.



    This is true. Dondero actually picked up that flesh eating bacteria from a hooker and he sought to substitute his corroded penis with big talk about bombing primitives.

  • ||

    "My advice to you, is to retract your statement above."

    Hahahahaha! You should have a little chat with Edward regarding how threats of legal action on blog comment threads make you look. The operative word is "tool."

    Also, if you claim half the primary field as "your guy" then blather about how good you are at picking winners, you just look even more like a tool. I bet you totally knew that either LSU or OSU would win last night, didn't you? Good call, Toolie McToolington!!

    So I fergit - why'd Paul fire you? Was it cuz you're a tool? Or did it have more to do with your wanker status?

  • ||

    I'm pretty sure its not good for Obama. Either Clinton wins (dear God no!) or she comes within two or three points and gets to be "Comeback kid 2". If she uses that phrase I will throw up a little in my mouth.

  • beetlejuice||

    Sparky,

    Do you have a link to this? It sounds like it might be quite funny.

  • ||

    To refresh your memory, Ron Paul did not fire me. That is a bold-faced lie, and those who repeat it are subject to charges of slander.

    So, why haven't you sued Dr Paul yet?

  • ||

    "I'm pretty sure its not good for Obama."

    I keep waiting for him to close the gap, but it's slowly getting bigger. Anyone have any knowledge or theories about whether late returns will favor him or Clinton?

    "If she uses that phrase I will throw up a little in my mouth."

    From your lips to Clinton's ears (or shoes, hair, mouth...whatever).

  • ||

    No, this is a bold-faced lie: Eric Dondero makes a great deal of sense.

  • beetlejuice||

    Sparky,

    A link to Edward's legal threats, I should have said.

  • beetlejuice||

    joe,

    Now I have to clean soda off of my monitor! Thanks! :-)

  • ||

    "Do you have a link to this? It sounds like it might be quite funny."

    You mean about Dondero being fired by Paul? I don't actually have any idea what happened; I was just making a stupid but well-deserved joke. I will say, however, that if Paul _didn't_ fire him that's just one more revelation about his poor judgment (at least I hope it's just poor judgment).

  • ||

    Sparky,

    Bigger cities report later than small towns because they have a larger number of votes to count per precinct.

    Obama will do better among populations that are younger, more liberal, and more heavily minority - meaning in cities and college towns.

  • ||

    Joe-

    Hes getting his ass kicked in Manchester, the biggest city in the state.

  • beetlejuice||

    Sparky,

    No, I meant a link to Edward's legal threats.

  • ||

    Sparky,

    Remember Iowa - it started out as a three-way tie, and Obama's lead grew throughout the evening.

    Right now, MSNBC has a graphic "too close to call," with Hillary and Obama.

  • ||

    "A link to Edward's legal threats, I should have said."

    Oh, sorry, I didn't review before I posted. I was just going from his 8:33 post, with its ever-so-subtly implied threat of legal action:

    "That is a bold-faced lie, and those who repeat it are subject to charges of slander.

    My advice to you, is to retract your statement above.

    Also, I am a wanker and a tool. I'm pretty sure that's why Ron Paul fired me."

  • ||

    Cesar,

    I suspect that only the smaller outlying precincts of Manchester would have reported by now.

  • ||

    Oh, I'm a terrible reader! _Edward's_ legal threats! They were against Urkobold, and occurred on multiple past threads. Wait a sec....

  • ||

    I suspect that only the smaller outlying precincts of Manchester would have reported by now.



    Maybe you're right, you're the New Englander not me. But if the polls turn out to be completely wrong(a la Wilder down here in '89) I never ever want to hear from any yankee ever again about how horribly racist the South is.

  • Eric Dondero||

    John-David, that press conference was covered by the Victoria Advoacate, and the local Vict. CBS New affiliate. I'm sure there's a story on the event with photo from the '96 campaign. I'm almost certain there is. Probably August or September of 1996.

  • stephen the goldberger||

    The reason obama's lead grew though is because he was so many nonviable candidates' 2nd choice. This is shaping up to be a big win for clinton.

  • ||

    beetlejuice,

    Here's the first example I came across, from this thread: http://www.reason.com/blog/show/123216.html

    "Edward | October 29, 2007, 4:27pm | #
    And a note to the Urkobolds: slander my name on your blog one more time and, you have my word on this, there will be legal ramifications."

    It went on for a while, and Edward actually filed a formal complaint with the server (or whatever it's called) that hosts the Urkobold page - or at least he pretended to. They used to have some of Edward's greatest hits/threats compiled at urkobold.blogspot.com, but I don't know if they're still there.

  • beetlejuice||

    Sparky,

    Thanks, I'll have to check that out later. Bet The Urkobold still keeps them ;-)

  • Eric Dondero||

    Let me revise my remarks. I want to be very precise on this.

    Lew Rockwell was 80% the Ghost writer for Ron Paul's Newsletters. Again, key word "Ghost writer."

    I'd say Ron himself authored about half the Newsletter.

    He'd have a yellow pad, and every time we traveled by car, he'd break it out while I was driving and scribble on it for hours.

    When we got back from Houston, he'd either giver it to his daughter Lori in Clute, or Jean McCiver in Houston. They were the only two who could interpret his hand-writing. If it was Lori, she'd fax the draft to Marc Elam at his office on Fuqua in south Houston.

    Jean McCiver worked out of that office directly for Elam.

    She was the one who edited and put the Newsletter together. She would gather all the various items faxed from Rockwell, and faxed from Ron to input into the word processing program.

    Let me also say, that there were many times Ron and I had to drive directly to the Fuqua office to meet the deadline, to get his "yellow-pad scribblings" to Jean.

    Again, while Rockwell had a very heavy hand in the writing of the Newsletter, keep in mind Ron himself wrote a great deal of it as well.

  • ||

    joe, your small town/big city prediction makes sense, and I hope it pans out. But so does stephen's Iowa caucus explanation for Obama's late win.

    And Clinton's lead keeps getting bigger - it's over 5 points now! Say it ain't so, New Hampshire! "Live Free or Clinton"?!?!

  • ||


    And Clinton's lead keeps getting bigger - it's over 5 points now! Say it ain't so, New Hampshire! "Live Free or Clinton"?!?!



    Yeah, thats going to be horrible. HORRIBLE.

    The Democratic Party is dumber than I thought if this happens.

  • ||

    Woohoo! It just closed to under 3 1/2 points! I probably shouldn't follow the reporting updates quite so closely! It's causing me to abuse exclamation points!!!

  • Rutter||

    even one time ordering me to wear Jewish clothing
    Jewish clothing?

  • ||

    Yeah, good point about the nonviable candidates. Still, Obama is gaining as the night goes on.

  • ||

    Wow, Duncan Hunter is tied with that Cox guy. I guess he's caught the Dodd-ertia.

    And hey, Weigel! Duncan Hunter is not crazy. Who the hell does Chris Matthews think he is, acting like a sitting US Congressman and Senior Member of the Armed Services Committee is some homeless guy bugging him at a table?

  • ||

    Joe, "gaining?" Its been stuck at 39-36 the entire night just about.

  • Eric Dondero||

    If anyone is interested, Lew Rockwell is explicitly identified as "Ron Paul's ghost writer" in the November 1988 issue of American Libertarian edited by former LP News Editor Mike Holmes of Houston.

  • ||

    Cesar, I don't think you're getting very good numbers.

  • ||

    Where are you getting your numbers, joe? I've been following http://www.politico.com/, and 39-36 is roughly where they've been (within 1-2 points) all night.

    Right now they have it at 39.1-36.4 Clinton-Obama, so he's slowly chipping away at the lead she slowly built up earlier tonight.

  • ||

    MSNBC. They've got 45% reporting. What's Politico up to?

    I may have spoken too soon.

  • Fluffy||

    So now Dondero is backing away from being a Giuliani guy, to being a Giuliani / Romney / Thompson / McCain / Hunter / Huckabee guy?

    Guess what, guys? I'm looking forward to the NFL playoffs, because I'm rooting for New England, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, San Diego, the Giants, Dallas, Seattle, and Green Bay.

  • ||

    Ooh, I just checked after I hit send, and now it's 38.7-36.7 Clinton-Obama! Go Obama! I mean Gobama! I mean Go Bama! Crimson Tide rules, mutherfuckers!

  • ||

    Politico.com has Paul in 5th place, behind Giuliani, with 8% of the vote -- in the state with Paul's most fervent campaign contributors.

    Short of meteoroids simultaneously taking out McCain, Huckabee, Romney, and Giuliani, I think it's time to unofficially call it: time date of death of Paul's campaign, 1-8-08, though I imagine he'll hang in until the big primaries on 2-5-08 before he goes back to trying to get reelected to his day job in Congress.

    Please don't shoot the messenger. :(

  • ||

    Joe-

    MSNBC has Clinton ahead by the same margin just about all night. I'm watching it too. Even if Clinton finishes 2-4 points behind it will be "Comeback Kid the Sequel!" (vomit)

  • ||

    politico.com also has 45% reporting as of this post, with 39.1-36.5.

  • ||

    P.S. Go Obama!

  • ||

    They've got a name for the winners in the world
    I hope my guy doesn't lose!
    They call Barrack Obama the Crimson Tide
    Call me joe the Blue!

  • beetlejuice||

    In other words, Dondero is backing away to being an anybody but Paul guy.

    Dondero, if Ron Paul won the nomination, would that drive you to vote Democrat?

  • ||

    MSNBC just had some polling. Clinton is dominating among women, which she didn't do in Iowa.

    I also suspect (which should probably tell you it's bullshit at this point) that a lot more independents are voting Republican (ie, for McCain) than in Iowa.

    Iowa is a particularly anti-war state, and not just among the left.

  • beetlejuice||

    Wait a second, did Ron Paul's total vote count just drop?

  • ||

    Joe-

    So you admit he may loose?

  • ||

    Oh, Jeebus, Chris Matthews says "you have to think that the emotion shown by Mrs. Clinton yesterday" is why she's neck-and-neck.

    Chris Matthews is good at telling you what you have to think, especially if it involves stereotypes about gender.

  • Ewick Dondewo||

    In other words, Dondero is backing away to being an anybody but Paul guy.




    And so who the fuck are you? I've never run into you out on the petitioning trail for the Libertarian Party or the libertarian movement. Never heard of you before.

    Who the fuck died and made you boss?

    What makes you think you're suddenly King of the Libertarians, able to decide who is and who is not a "Real Libertarian."

    Hey buster, I've got 22 years of hardcore libertarian activism under my belt. I've been called "America's Greatest Libertarian Political Activist."

    Don' you fucking dare try to tell me who is and who is not a "real libertarian."

    I'll compare libertarian resumes with you any day of the week.

    Bring it on mother-fucker. Bring it on...

  • ||

    Cesar,

    Yeah, it looks too close to call, and he's climbing up from behind. Still about half the votes to count, though.

  • ||

    "Iowa is a particularly anti-war state, and not just among the left."

    I was very surprised when I heard this recently. I confess, I find Iowa fairly confusing, and I've lived just south of it (in the great state of Missouri - go Cardinals!) for more than half of my life. Maybe I'm just out of the Iowa loop (or Iooop).

  • Someone Who Doesn\'t Want to L||

    prolefeed:

    You are probably correct. The last week or so's disturbing news about Paul probably did a lot of damage. I know that the evolution thing and the racist articles (not written by Paul, granted) curbed some of my hope about what Paul might turn out to be. (That hope was relatively limited anyway, as I'm one of those PNVs you sometimes hear about.)

    Actually, though, I never expected Paul to be the nominee, so I guess that could be an argument for a stillbirth rather than a death now.

  • Eric Dondero||

    No, I am where I have been since July.

    A Mitt Romney/Rudy Giuliani/Fred Thompson supporter.

    I'm very lukewarm on McCain. And I can't stand Huckabee! If Huck wins, I'm definitely voting Libertarian, even if it's Kubby or Phillies.

    But hopefully, it will be Wayne Root, Libertarian for President.

  • ||

    Did Clinton really say this?

    "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act. It took a president to get it done."

    That's from one of the headline stories at politico.com. It seems so incredibly stupid on her part from both a strategy point of view and a reality/causation point of view. I hope she keeps saying really, really stupid shit.

  • ||

    Face it, Joe. The Clintons really do own your party.

  • Eric Dondero||

    The Ron Paul story on the Newsletters just broke at Michelle Malkin's HotAir.com and Pajamas Media, both.

    PJ has much more in-depth quotes than TNR from the Ron Paul Newsletters. IMHO, the stuff at PJ is far more damaging.

  • ||

    "No, I am where I have been since July. A Mitt Romney/Rudy Giuliani/Fred Thompson supporter."

    Say, Eric, would you care to provide a link to any evidence that you were doing anything other than creaming your shorts over Giuliani in July, or August, or...well, really any time before a few weeks ago?

  • ||

    Sparky,

    I'm not sure, but that could be even worse than calling Dr King a gay pedophile.

  • ||

    Uh, yeah, Cesar. To win over 35% of the vote and have a margin of victory of 2 entire percentage points really would demonstrate that they own the party.

  • ||

    Joe, considering Obama was so far ahead in the polls going into election day, they own your party.

  • ||

    Uh, yeah, people who own parties are always losing polls.

    You certainly are in love with this meme, and you're basing it on maybe she's gong to win a state she was winning by almost 20 points in December?

  • ||

    crimethink,

    It's pretty damn stupid, but I don't think it's "gay pedophile" stupid. And I'd prefer not to see Paul or his ghost writers engaged in a contest to try to out-stupid Clinton. That's like trying to out-something someone who's really good at that thing you're trying to beat them at, but it turns out that thing sucks. (That's all the energy I have right now; I can't fucking believe that Clinton is winning NH.)

  • ||

    Not maybe. She will win New Hampshire. After losing Iowa in a blowout, being behind 8-12 points in the polls, and having a very, very bad media coverage the past few days, that says she owns the Party.

  • ||

    The big news in the polling is that Hillary is absolutely spanking him among women. Sympathy vote from yesterday?

  • ||

    Very bad media coverage? Huh?

    The last two days have been the positive coverage of Hillary Clinton I've seen since the Lewinsky days.

  • ||

    "Sympathy vote from yesterday?"

    Or maybe they're all on their periods?



    I can't believe you just said that, Dondero, you classless wanker of a tool.

  • ||

    @Cesar

    ugh "far ahead"? I don't know what crack poll you saw or when but the half dozen polls (plural) I saw had Obama leading between 1 and 9% depending on the pollster and the phase of the moon with +- 4 to 6% margin of error. Clinton really came up from behind with ... what a whole 2% lead right now? Yea - those "far ahead" polls really prove your point.

  • ||

    Yoshi, according to RCP Obama was ahead by an average of 8.3%.

  • Eric Dondero||

    Sparky, sure.

    Go to my Blog at www.libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com

    Go back to the archives. You'll see articles praising Fred Thompson, and Romney. Specifically, you'll see a piece on Romney being endorsed by Bill Weld. I believe it was in July.

    Also, one on Romney coming out against censorship of porn.

  • Eric Dondero||

    BTW, you'll see a bunch of stuff on Wayne Root, Libertarian for President dating back to December of 2006.

    www.libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com

  • ||

    People who own parties aren't up at 11 PM wondering if they're going to pull out a victory in the state they concentrated on as their firewall.

    People who own parties don't see their numbers cut in half in the two months before the election.

    People who own parties start out way ahead, and then they stay way ahead.

  • ||

    I'm so confident shes pulling it out, I'll say it.

    Clinton defeats Obama.

  • ||

    And MSNBC just vindicated me.

  • Someone Who Doesn\'t Want to L||

    Cesar,

    As did the AP.

  • ||

    I would just like to point out that, assuming she actually wins New Hampshire, I commented on a thread earlier today that I didn't count Hilary Clinton out of the race, unlike the vast vast vast vast majority of the press.

  • Rhywun||

    For those of us who are New-Hampshire-challenged, what was so ridiculous about Giuliani's TV ads?

  • Someone Who Doesn\'t Want to L||

    I'd like to point out that I have made no correct predictions about this primary on either side so far!

    Go me!

  • Someone Who Doesn\'t Want to L||

    CNN just called it for Hilary Clinton.

  • ||

    Ron Paul is at fifth behind Rudy Guiliani. I guess all the staff at Reason (save the man in the leather jacket) is guilty of adding a few percentage points for wishful thinking.

  • ||

    Winning by 3% in one state vindicates "She owns the party?" Um, ok.

  • ||

    Today sucked.

  • ||

    It appears that I will have many interesting things to say about DONDEROOOOO!!!s claims tomorrow.

    Many interesting things indeed.

    Goddammit.

  • ||

    Let's get a little perspective, people.

    If I told you two years ago that I'd gone to the future, and a libertarian had won 8% in the New Hampshire primary and 10% of Iowa, and that Hillary Clinton had lost Iowa and barely won New Hampshire, you'd be popping champagne.

  • ||

    HRC wins, but the delegates split 8 and 8 between HRC and Obama. My prediction, the pundits will change tunes so fast that you'll get whiplash watching. HRC was going to win NH long before the Obama win in Iowa... so, of course, the media overplayed the Obama bounce from Iowa. The talk was of an Obama sweep and HRC on the ropes. Now, they'll say HRC is like Rocky coming back in the later rounds. Of course, she'll founder in the next primary and the press will rush back to Obama.

    Is asking "Ron who?" going to get me a 15-yard penalty for taunting?

  • Pepe||

    Hillary "wins" by getting the same number of delegates as Obama and barely finishing first in a race she was all-but-guaranteed to win a few weeks ago.

  • ||

    Joe, Joe, Joe...

    Libertarians are the Charlie Brown's of American politics. No matter how many times Lucy pulls the football, deep down they believe this time they are going to kick it. Sure, if libertarians were mostly sane, they would be happy with eight percent from a (now wounded) candidate that talks about the gold standard. Oh, no. Let's not be sane and hope for eight percent. It's the "Ron Paul revolution" gonna change the world. So, of course, the true believers are looking so bereaved and so bereft (to borrow from Dire Straight). This is why I will continue to maintain that libertarians are the smartest, most politically inept people on the planet.

  • ||

    "No, I am where I have been since July.

    A Mitt Romney/Rudy Giuliani/Fred Thompson supporter."

    So, when did you quit pretending to be a Libertarian?

    -jcr

  • ||

    It's funny how someone can be both inevitable and score an upset.

  • Sam Grove||

    Fred's gonna have to quit.

  • ||

    "My advice to you, is to retract your statement above."

    Dr. Paul says he fired you, and somehow I find him rather more credible than I find you. So, I'm not retracting anything. Now, if you think you can intimidate me with your huffing and puffing, then you don't know me very well.

    -jcr

  • ||

    It's funny how someone can be both inevitable and score an upset.



    Hey. Leave it to the Clintons to make that possible.

  • ||

    It's funny how someone can be both inevitable and score an upset.

    Yet somehow she managed.

    Anyone else notice that this time, during her victory speech, she had young color-wearing people in the background?

    Boy, I'd say she learned her lesson eh?

    Also, I predict that her support nation-wide rises because she is now more of a sympathetic character than before.
    Brilliant

  • ||

    Pepe,

    She did win, even if it's a squeaker. We'll have to wait a while longer before we celebrate the end of her political career.

    -jcr

  • ||

    I don't think it's going to work that way. She was only sympathetic because she was looking at defeat.

  • ||

    oh, and joe, were you quoting Warren with that whole "she owns the party" bit? I don't remember saying that.

  • Sam Grove||

    Jose,

    Well, there's this difficult. Who wants to put their heart and effort into 8% of a win? How do you sell 8% of a win?

    In order to take a risk, you have to believe in the possibility of 100%.
    The variables have to include that possibility.

    Unfortunately, the world is not fair, and in the world of politics, 'fair' is a word used to buy guilt votes.

    It would be insane to try to build a movement on 8% hope.

  • Ayn R. Key||

    So Huckabee and McCain traded places, and Giuliani and Thompson traded places. Romney and Paul held steady.

    That, and Hilldebeat beat Obama this time.

    Does the rest of the USA want fascism as much as Dondero does?

  • Sam Grove||

    Giuliani's not looking too good, he would've had to come at least second, maybe third, to give donors a reason to give him more dough.

  • ||

    Joe,

    I couldn't agree more. If RP accomplishes nothing else, the fact that he's made tens of thousands of people realize that the IRS and the federal reserve aren't immutable facts of nature...

    Well, that's not bad for one election cycle.

    The first Republican candidate I remember advocating the abolition of the income tax was Lamar Alexander, back in 2000. This time, we have two contenders (Ron Paul and Huckabee), both calling for the abolition of the income tax. In four more years, we might have it in the republican platform.

    Rolling back a century of government expansion isn't going to happen overnight. That's no reason to quit.

    -jcr

  • ||

    "Go to my Blog at www.libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com"

    Thanks Eric. Now I wonder if you'd indulge me a bit more and provide links to specific articles, or much better, specific quotes, where you praise a GOP candidate other than Rudy? Cuz I don't really feel any need or desire to search through your website, and I haven't seen you praise anyone but Rudy here at H&R until very recently; so I hope you'll forgive if I'm rather skeptical of your claims.

  • ||

    100 percent is not hope... it's hijacking the mule train of 'shrooms heading toward Burning Man. Eight percent of NH isn't much but eight percent of the electorate is the ability to broker national elections to the right or to the left based on pragmatic libertarian policies.

  • ||

    Reinmoose,

    I was quoting Cesar. Winning a state by 3% demonstrates that she owns the party, or something.

    I don't get the "wearing color" thing.

  • ||

    "President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act."

    LBJ had the power to legislate? Why didn't I hear about this in my high school history classes? All I heard about was the way he tormented his poor little doggies.

    -jcr

  • ||

    oh, just that they were youthful and colorful instead of old and drab.

    I just said "wearing color" to make sure I wasn't mistaken as meaning "people of color" or something.

  • ||

    Oh oh oh.

    Yes, Hillary is showing a remarkable capacity to grab onto what works for her opponents.

  • ||

    Joe-

    Hillary wins the Democratic nomination. Quote me on that.

  • ||

    OK. I will.

  • Pepe||

    "She did win, even if it's a squeaker. We'll have to wait a while longer before we celebrate the end of her political career."

    Well yes. She won a plurality of the overall popular vote. But NH isn't winner take all. So she ends up with the same number of delegates as Obama. Getting 2-3 percent more of the vote doesn't really mean much of anything except what the media and the campaigns will spin it to mean.

    You actually win the nomination by getting the most delegates. Looking at it in this narrow way, it's a tie. But of course it doesn't really work that way in American politics. It's all about "momentum" and media driven expectations.

  • ||

    As a matter of fact, I'll do it now. Ahem:

    Quote Cesar, "Hillary wins the Democratic nomination."

  • Xanthippas||

    That's not the case with Hillary's tears: People in bars and outside polling booths mention it unbidden. There's a lot less sympathy than there is eye-rolling, and the first person I talked to who said it made her like Hillary more was a Republican who'd already absentee'd for McCain. When I've spotted Clinton hacks like Lanny Davis and Terry McAuliffe, they've looked weathered and pissed off.

    I think you talked to the wrong people. Some other prominent bloggers (Drum, Yglesias, Sullivan) seem to think that the media castigating her over and over again about her "tears" drove some voters to vote FOR her. Also, posts that accuse of her of "doing and saying anything for power" probably don't help people get the impression she's getting a fair shake. Just saying.

  • ||

    Cesar -- It kinda hurts to side with joe, but ferchrissakes, get a grip. HRC and Obama are running neck and neck -- either one could win it at this point.

  • ||

    If I had to bet on the democrats' nominee right now, I'd put my money on Obama. Hillary has a lot of baggage, and a smug sense of entitlement that are not going to serve her well in the months to come.

    -jcr

  • ed||

    I have only this to say to the polls:
    Liar! Liar! Pants on fire!

  • ||

    Here's some interesting results. Hillary's final margin was 7700 votes out of 282,000 cast.

    Of those 7700, 5200 came from Manchester and Nashua, the two largest cities in the state. That's ground game right there. That's face-to-face, my-God-it's-Bill-Clinton-on-a-streetcorner campaigning. Given the uniqueness of Iowa and New Hampshire in that regard (*sniff* I won't vote for any candidate I haven't met face to face *sniff*) compared to the big-state primaries coming up and the national campaigning necessary for February 5, the relative importance of such tactics is going to decline.

  • ||

    The polls were wrong because they polled New Hampshire voters only. They should have included the New Yorkers and Massachusites who've been filling out Hillary's events and apparently voting.

  • ||

    And the illegals. Don't forget the illegals. If you don't like the way a vote went, it's probably tha illegals.

  • ||

    I doubt many of those fat, underfucked feminists were illegal.

  • ||

    Jose Ortega y Gasset,

    I think we're about 5-10 years from using our percentage vote to broker elections. It'll require a change in thinking. Where we're at right now - increasingly on the outs with the major parties, only half-heartedly interested in the fate of our own Party, and accustomed to thinking of ourselves as political pariahs - I doubt a lot of libertarians would feel much enthusiasm about the idea of committing to a longer battle and all of the headaches of bloc organization.

    I'm tempted to say that the best thing thusfar about the Paul campaign has been the way it's made clear that we aren't completely silent in the American electoral din, just muffled. The outcome of that, in the long run, will probably be positive in terms of pragmatic work for the cause of liberty. However, being realistic about ourselves, we have a ways to go.

  • ||

    I think we're about 5-10 years from using our percentage vote to broker elections.

    How do you figure? You have to actually win electoral votes in order to be in a position to broker an election -- and that means getting more votes than either the Democrats OR the Republicans in at least one state.

    The LP can keep getting 5%, 10%, even 25% of the vote and it just won't matter one little bit. It'll just create more situations (as the Reform Party did in '92 and '96) where the President ends up being elected with a plurality instead of a majority.

  • mw||

    "You have to actually win electoral votes in order to be in a position to broker an election..." - db



    Not necessarily. It does require a whole series of conditions to exist, so that Republican and Democratic pols recognize a libertarian swing vote as determinative which party will get the electoral votes. Think of the libertarian swing vote as a Political Interest group, a target of pandering by the major parties, much as the evangelicals are for Republicans or the Unions for Democrats.

    Those conditions include:

    * The libertarian swing vote to be recognized as a political interest group willing to vote either R or D.

    * A libertarian swing vote organized sufficiently that they will vote in a predictable way.

    *A polarized, partisan roughly balanced electorate comprising 80% or so of the voting population.



    Boaz et.al at Cato has shown that the libertarian swing vote exists, and that it was a major factor in the Dem victory in 2006. The missing piece is an organizing principle for 2008. With the failure of the Paul candidacy, absent any organizing principle, the vote will split between R and D, rendering itself impotent again.

    My suggestion for an organizing principle in 2008 is voting for divided government. Divided government is the only historically documented way to at least limit the growth of the state. This means that libertarians inclined to assert a little political mojo, must vote for whatever piece of shit is nominated by the Republicans in 2008. If the libertarian swing vote determines the election outcome in 2008 as it did in 2006, we can expect some serious pandering by both parties in 2010 and beyond.

  • DB||

    You didn't mean "broker", then, you meant "influence". That being said, there are two big flaws in your plan.

    First of all, it requires a large body of libertarians willing who are willing to vote as a bloc, and who are sufficiently well organized that it is possible to negotiate with them for votes. Such a group of libertarians has never existed, nor is there any sign that it will exist in the future. The largest libertarian political organization, the LP, can't even get its OWN act together most of the time, and it doesn't represent anything close to a majority of libertarians.

    The second problem is that your scenario require that libertarians be willing to vote D or R. Small problem: few libertarians are willing to vote for Democrats, since the Democrats don't even *pretend* to support any libertarian principles. It is not realistic to expect libertarians, as a group, to vote for the greater of two evils as part of some long-range plan to scold the lesser of the two evils into throwing us a bone.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement