First thoughts: Game on

Posted: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:12 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: First Thoughts

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
MANCHESTER, NH -- Yesterday, we noted that second place in New Hampshire could spell trouble (and perhaps be the beginning of the end) for Clinton. So what did she do? She one-upped Bill in 1992 and finished first, becoming the Comeback Gal and shocking every pollster in the country -- probably including her own. So now after the first two Democratic contests, which she and Obama have now split, we’ve now got a true race on our hands for the Democratic nomination. That’s also true on the GOP side, where McCain beat Romney in their single elimination match, keeping the Arizona senator’s chances alive. In fact, after last night’s GOP results, almost every Republican’s chances of winning the GOP nomination are better than it was a day ago. That is, except for Romney…

*** The Gender War: Here’s the question that has to be on everyone’s minds: Did Clinton tearing up on Monday change the dynamics of the race? One thing is for sure -- women flocked to her in droves. The fact is, Clinton partisans had just as little clue about their actual chances as the rest of us. They are pointing to the choking up moment, as well to the ABC debate in which Edwards ganged up on her. We noted yesterday the anecdotal evidence from our mini-focus group of professional Democratic women, who were not happy with how quickly this race was ending. Well, apparently, these anecdotes were telling. Clinton pointedly noted in her victory speech that New Hampshire helped her "find her voice." The more emotionally open Clinton is probably the Clinton we'll see for the rest of this primary. Are we looking at a battle between Clinton and her army of women versus Obama and his army of independent crossover voting men?

*** Mac's back: Lost in the excitement of the surprise Democratic result was McCain's decisive victory. It wasn't just fueled by independents; he also beat Romney among registered Republicans. McCain is leading a hand-to-mouth campaign, and since they decided NOT to take matching funds and instead borrowed money to fund New Hampshire, he can live off the internet land. Every state for McCain is probably must win, especially if he's running in states where he won the primary eight years ago -- Michigan whose contest is just six days away. The lack of action on the Democratic side in Michigan (the candidates are boycotting) means McCain can attempt to woo both Dems and indies to his cause. Romney has to pull out all the stops, but with Huckabee contesting the state as well, Huck could pull enough conservative votes to propel McCain and put the final nail in Romney's campaign coffin.

*** Pulling out all the stops: Hillary’s win last night will be something pundits and political junkies will remember for a long time. To win, however, Team Clinton pulled out all the stops: calling Obama a flip-flopper on Iraq and the Patriot Act, accusing Obama in a mailer of wanting to raise a trillion dollars in Social Security taxes, and playing the 9/11 card. (Question to liberal bloggers: Who is using the GOP talking points now?) Obama said last night, per NBC’s Ben Weltman: “And we will never use 9/11 as a way to scare up votes, because it is not a tactic to win an election. It is a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the 21st century.” That line seemed to be a direct response to Clinton warning about Al Qaeda targeting new world leaders like Gordon Brown in London. And then there was Bill -- the bizarre cellphone display, selectively quoting Obama in 2004 on Iraq, the “fairy tale,” saying he couldn’t make Hillary taller or change her gender. And what about the supposed shakeup? The knives were out; folks were cutting each other in background chats with reporters all over New Hampshire and Washington. So now what? Are the knives gone? Does the shakeup continue? Are Maggie Williams and Doug Sosnik enough change? Morale is good, but does the Clinton team leave New Hampshire with trust in each other?

*** What else happened? One other question, as the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson raised on MSNBC last night: When you lose a lead like that, does anyone else think of what happened to Tom Bradley in California? Did race play a role in a double-digit or high single-digit lead evaporating over night? In fact, we can only think of three races in which the public polls and the final result were SO off, and they all involved African-American candidates: Bradley's '82 gubernatorial campaign in California, Doug Wilder's surprisingly narrow '89 victory for Virginia governor, and Harvey Gantt's surprise loss for North Carolina Senate. There is no poll question we can find that can truly measure this phenomenon. But African-Americans are thinking this, and the difference between Iowa and New Hampshire is a voting curtain: Democrats didn't have one in Iowa; they had one in New Hampshire.

*** So how did the polls get it so wrong? It's likely a confluence of events: 1) the emotional Clinton; 2) the ganging up factor from the debate; 3) the stubborn nature of NH voters to reject what Iowa recommends; 4) race; 5) more independents going to McCain; and 6) complacency among young voters. Could one of these factors erase a double-digit lead? Probably not. Could each of six cost two points each? Perhaps.

*** The biggest losers: Last night’s loss to McCain was a devastating blow to Romney. He spent million upon millions in Iowa and New Hampshire. And what does he have to show for it? Two silver medals, as he likes to put it. He now heads to Michigan, to pull out a victory in the state his father once governed. His back is truly against the wall. But the biggest loser last night? It was Edwards. As everyone pored over each and every vote last night, Edwards was an afterthought, even though he did pull in 17%. But did that 17% cost Obama a potential win? Or did the “status quo” pile-on do the trick? Many people thought that Edwards delivered the coup de grace to Hillary at that Saturday debate. But did he instead let her back into the race by crossing a line that woke up the silent majority of Democratic women? No matter the answer, this is what Edwards has to show for the first two contests: second place (in Iowa) and a distant third (in New Hampshire).

*** Looking ahead to Nevada: The caucuses there, which take place on Jan. 19, work very similarly to Iowa’s. Voters from all around the state walk into 1,754 precincts (gyms, libraries) and take sides. They publicly choose their candidates and then they realign if a candidate does not reach a 15% threshold. At stake are 25 pledged delegates apportioned proportionately based on statewide vote to candidates from 10,466 total precinct delegates. The all-important Culinary Workers Union is sticking with Obama, and the campaign also announced last night that Nevada SEIU is backing the Illinois senator. Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign holds a conference call at 12:30 pm ET to announce a major endorsement in the state.

*** The Indie vote: Given the Democratic/independent breakdown from last night -- per the exit polls, Obama defeated Clinton among indies, 41%-34%, but Clinton won the Dem vote, 45%-33% -- independents could very well determine the outcome on Feb. 5. Fifteen out of the 22 Democratic contests on that day are contests in which independents can potentially vote; only seven of them are closed to party members.

*** The New Hampshire exodus now begins: Want to see what everyone’s post-New Hampshire strategy is? Look no further than their travel schedules today. Clinton is back in New York and attends meetings in DC (after last night shocked everyone, including her own staff); Edwards heads to South Carolina (the state he won in 2004 and where he was born); Giuliani goes to Florida (which he’s banking the house on); Huckabee stumps in South Carolina; McCain travels to Michigan (a state he won in 2000); Obama holds a rally in New Jersey (a Feb. 5 state) and fundraises in New York City (also Feb. 5 state); Richardson heads to his home state of New Mexico (another Feb. 5 state); and Romney campaigns in Michigan (which very well could be his last stand) and before that holds a “national call day” fundraiser in Boston.

Countdown to Michigan: 6 days
Countdown to Nevada and SC GOP primary: 10 days
Countdown to SC Dem primary: 17 days
Countdown to Florida: 20 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 27 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 300 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 377 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.

Text 622639 to get First Read alerts to your cell phone.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Well, well; looky, looky here!
Seems like New Hampshire said, "NO-bama!"

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:22 AM)

We have ourselves a race. It shouldnt be decided by two small states and thankfully it was not.

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:30 AM)

Sorry to have to inform you guys....but the biggest loser last night was the media. You piled on like something I have never seen. You got it so completely wrong. And yet you want to say it was all the fault of the pollsters. If that was the case why did Tom Brokaw find it necessary to lecture Chris Mathews on the air last night? (I loved it so)!!! I could not be happier this morning, not only that Hillary won but that everyone of you has egg dripping from your chin. Could someone get me a napkin please?

Elliott, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:36 AM)

There are thousands of young voters in NH who thought Obama had already won who are kicking themselves right now; however, it's important to keep things in perspective.

The problem for Clinton is twofold. One, those young voters will be motivated again to turnout for Obama now that the race is competitive again. Two, even if Clinton can maintain the same voting coalition in future states, most states have more African Americans than NH, and that would be be enough to push Obama over the edge in the majority of them. The entire establishment-underdog dichotomy in modern Demcoratic primaries has included the new ideas underdog not getting substantial African American support; you add that to the underdog vote, and it's simply a matter of arithmetic that they win.

Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:37 AM)

As a NH voter who decided in the last three days along with 38% of other voters here, it's disturbing to see the implication that race played a huge factor. The smiling, then angry Hillary of the debate, coupled with her, "I care" moment on Monday were decisive, as was the fact that NH voters don't like to be told who we'll be voting fore, we like to decide ourselves.

Also--as a voter who was getting 8-10 calls a day for the last week, about half of which were polls, don't discount the fact that people were just sick and tired of the harassment as we got closer to election day.

Bob, Manchester, NH (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:39 AM)

Hillary Clinton won last night because 1)she borrowed word for word John Edwards speech about "I care - it is personal" and when 2)told she looked "cute and soft" when told voters in New Hampshire liked Obama more she changed to look soft got weepy (to quote Bill "give me a break", 3)Pundits did not hold her feet to the fire: when Clinton campaign thought she had Iowa locked up, she was not even going to talk or meet with the press or common people of NH and "I will run my campaign as I see fit" and the Clintons went to the elite of NH at first and Obama went to the common folk, 4)her patting Chris Matthews on the cheek to show likability and softness: have any of you ever watched her body language? She does to the men what they do to her: if they pat her on the shoulder - she pats them on the shoulder, if they touch her cheek, she touches their cheek: Hillary is still very 60's - Bella Abzug, etc. Hillary will always cater to special interests and wealthy - and only appear to change. The common woman is not someone Hillary cares to hang with - only at election time - if forced to do so, 5) Attacks in the press, ads against Obama even if they were lies - Bill Clinton stating Obama brought in voters from Illinois even while the Clintons were trucking in thousands of people from Mass. as Chris Matthews said a guard told him most of the people in her first rallys in NH were not even from NH - the guard said look at the license plates in the parking lot they are all from Mass. They were brought in at first to make it seem she was packing them in and sure enough everyone bought it. Hillary and Bill have not changed. I live in Arkansas when they were there and as a result they left a decimated middle class - raised taxes 12 times. Huckabee cleaned up a ton of their bureaucratic mess.

Cecelia C. Monge, Seabrook, Texas (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:40 AM)

I think that First Read seriously underestimates the real reason that Clinton won. It wasn't just that Hillary displayed that she is human after all, but that she also got voters talking about substantive issues like policy, direction of the country, and the difference between rhetoric and real change. First Read sounds a little more than sexist in its post primary analysis of why Clinton won. And by the way, women (and some forward thinking men) have begun to notice the media bias for Obama and against Clinton and there was a backlash vote against Obama because of it. This should put the media on notice that the public does not like being spoon fed a sugar coated candidate. One more BIG POINT: The media got it wrong when it made light of (and under reported) the incident where two men held up those signs that read "iron my shirt." Had that been Obama and two people held up a sign that read "shine my shoes" the media would have been indignant in its disgust over a display of racism (and rightly so). All of the women (and forward thinking men) in NH who saw those two men try and humiliate Clinton said ENOUGH.

Rob, Phoenix, AZ (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:41 AM)

<--a woman AGAINST hillary and glad to be, so no, i'm not part of that "woman army" you mention. and am a bit offended by a bit of sexism pitting "all" women into voting for hillary. i tend to think for myself and will vote for ABH (anyone but hillary) because what she represents to me is NOT what this country needs. we do not need a third term for Bill and if you think differently, then you should rethink "what will bill do?"

susan annapolis md (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:42 AM)

While it may be convenient for the media to say that the polls were so wrong because of Senator Obama's race, I think that is far from the truth. Whether Senator Obama wins or loses, it will not be because of his race.

I think the biggest force at play yesterday was a backlash against the media for attempting to usurp the voters of New Hampshire before the polls even opened. Judging by many of the headlines this morning, that is a lesson that the media still has not learned. Many media outlets are now swinging sharply from the "Clinton is dead" storyline to the "Obama lost because he is black" storyline. Both of these storylines do a huge disservice to the American people.

This election is not about the media, who cries, or who voted for the Patriot Act. This election is about who do we want to lead America into the future. My answer remains the same: Barack Obama.

Senator Obama has demonstrated the same grace and resolve regardless of what the polls say or how the vote turns out. This is the kind of strength of conviction that appeals to me - his message has not changed from day one and he handles adversity the same way that he handles success - with determination and dare I say it, hope.

I'm sure many in the Clinton campaign wishes they could erase much of the mean spirited flailing they put on display yesterday. I again congratulate Senator Clinton on a tremendous win in New Hampshire, but I would feel better about her as a candidate if she (and her husband) could be just as gracious when she is down as when she is up.

Obama '08

Nashville_fan (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:42 AM)

Do not underestimate the voters of NH! They were not fooled by Romney, they saw first hand the crap he pulled in Mass. Do not over think the fact that people will see the he is buying his way across America.
Do not keep reaching for an "EXCUSE" why Hillary was the winner. People do like her, people do trust her, people do KNOW she has experienced. Not just women.
Stop the negative spin boys, you cooked your own goose!

HP Boston (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:43 AM)

Cheers to the Democrats and the way we turned to vote yesterday in NH. Whoever you're rooting for, you got to love it. It bolds well for us in the Novemeber election. The more time we take to choose our candidate and not let the media do it for us, the better off our candidate will be come November. All of our candidates need to be tested and toughend up for the Republic attack machine. Go Hillary!

Hey, Chris Matthews, how does that crow taste? If Obama fans want someone to blame, you should direct it toward MSNBC and the blantent sexism from Matthews! It brought the woman out after he and the other MSNBC pundits piled on Hillary and kicked her when she was down after Iowa.

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:45 AM)

The most important thing is to get the Republicans out of the Whitehouse and the House & Senate. To restore opportunitiy to the people. Obama is truly inspiring. I hope he gets the nomination. I'll vote for whoever the Dems tap. The Republican criminals have all but destroyed our Democracy. George W Bush & Dick Cheney are a disgrace. Any of the Republican candidates would be very much the same. I watched McCain's speech last night, if you could call it a speech. Whatever word is the opposite of dynamic. Please think for yourself and don't believe the lies being spread about Barack. Look into it for yourself. He's a good honest man who truly has the BEST INTERESTS of this country at heart. Look ahead, what's best for our future?

JohnnyU, WA State (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:46 AM)

I think a lot is being made of the tearing up MOMENT. If it had an affect, I think it was the reaction, not the action.

The Clinton Haters came out and made fun of her, after praising President GHWB for publicing sobbing his heart out over his son's political misfortunes.

Calling a woman who simply wells up while talking about her love for America a "crybaby" is not going to help. In fact, I saw a Fox blog where commenters were describing the moment as Clinton being "uncontrollably emotional."
Then we all saw the video -- over and over and over. She was obviously well in control of herself.
So, just another double standard.

Edwards, after arrogantly claiming he had knocked Clinton out of the entire race with his Iowa "win" (beating her by .04%!)...
And then showing no emotion while knocking her about for showing some emotion...
He got CREAMED by Clinton at barely 17%!

So I don't think it was Hillary Clinton's action, as much as it was the Good Old Boys' reaction, that pissed off a lot of our old "Status Quo" women up here in Independent New Hampshire.

Jan, Nashua, NH (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:47 AM)

It is rediculous to say woman flocked to Hillary in droves because she "teared up". Are woman the only ones in our species capable of producing tears?? If her male competitors think tears work---Why don't they try to produce some?

g.eglesias'nepa~ (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:47 AM)

Did the split victories for Iowa and New Hampshire recalibrate this race? If Clinton was inevitable two weeks ago and Obama was inevitable two days ago, do we have a level playing field now?

In pulling out all the stops to win New Hampshire the Clinton campaign stooped a little low in their accusations (you didn't note the accusation questioning his pro-choice record) and drew some unflattering comparisons about the value of Martin Luther King's soaring rhetoric versus LBJ's ability to get things done that are still making their way around the blogs. What will this mean for their campaign as they campaign in states with African American electorate greater than the small percentage found in New Hampshire?

In how many states does Bill Clinton have to "ride to the rescue" and become the attack dog? Won't that diminish her candidacy among women in the long run?

By what measure will WE now determine who is up and who down in the next few weeks, since the media's track record of predications going into New Hampshire is tarnished. National polls (they had already started to tighten after Iowa, and will Ms. Clinton's lead open up again)? How about fund raising (I hear that Obama's 4th quarter numbers will once again surpass Clinton's - but then again, this time yesterday I heard that he would win New Hampshire by double digits)?

Ray in Maryland (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:55 AM)

Are we looking at a battle between Clinton and her army of women versus Obama and his army of independent crossover voting men?
------------------------------------

Depends--does the media intent to make it one? Is this reporting the news or editorializing?

Dot, Illinois (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:57 AM)

Isn't the campaign process about seeing how our candidates react under pressure:

Does Senator Clinton get a pass on this? She exploded when others dared to question her on Saturday night and then seemed to be overcome by the pressure of the campaign on Monday. Were either of the moments Presidential? Millions of Americans (men and women) are scratching their heads this morning.

I understand women are looking at this as the "hear us roar" moment of the campaign but did NH just shoot it's party in the foot? Most Americans did not react the way the "die-hards" in NH did to the two "big moments" of the past 4 days.

Scott, California (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:01 AM)

Hey, cool. The Culinary Workers endorsed Obama anyway. I thought it was a little odd what was being reported - how their endorsement was dependent on another state's results. I'm disappointed the media got New Hampshire wrong, but glad the media got the Culinary Workers wrong.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:03 AM)

The Clinton Haters came out and made fun of her, after praising President GHWB for publicing sobbing his heart out over his son's political misfortunes.
Jan, Nashua, NH (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 9:47 AM)

Jan LOL....

There is a BIG difference between crying over a member of the family and crying over how your campaign is going....

But then again, Hillary seems to have always thought her campaign was more important then her family to begin with....

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:05 AM)

Hey, hey, hoe, hoe who's laughing now. I guess the voters decided that the Media wasn't going to be the ones who decided for the people. No experience and a simple word "change" along with no one asking exactly what that means or what is he really for may be good enough for the media, but the people aren't going to let this guy go unchallenged. It’s about time someone said “where’s the beef”, and wait “I’m not letting an immature generation who base their unrealistic view of the world through the Colbert Report or John Stewart show decide the fate of this great country.

Looking for the Truth (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:07 AM)

I agree with the Clinton supporters about others (mostly the media, but supporters of opposing campaigns are guilty, too) that too much was made of the "great tearing." Get over it - it wasn't that bad.

I'm a little put off, however, by the seeming contradiction of this experienced candidate, with 35 years of trench battles, who is ready to lead on day one, even if al Qaeda were to attack again... just now "finding her voice."

That's kind of a head scratcher.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:09 AM)

Does anybody else find the leading question that preceded Clinton's "spontaneous" tearing-up moment a bit suspicious? Didn't Clinton's campaign have a gaff not too long ago for planting a question from a staffer in the audience??

Evan Sloane, Boulder, CO (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:09 AM)

The Clintons used every dirty trick in the book, including tearing up, and it worked. Is Karl Rove runnign their campaign? Whether its Dem or Pub, its the same pile of ****.

I guess if you vote for her, you deserve what we'll all get stuck with, 4/8 more years of divisive, partisan politics.

Thanks New Hampshire. Thanks a lot.

Paul, Annapols, MD (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:09 AM)

The media has crucified Hillary, Obama has also been very erogant to her..The "Your likable enough" and the "all she did was have tea" comments were very "Macho" and uncall fo- type comments and not only disrespectful to Mrs. Clinton but it truly demonstrated how he can treat women. Mrs. Clinton is the most experience and the most qualified. He talks about Hope and change. You need experience to bring change, you need experience to bring hopes to a reality! How can we possibly put our country in the hands of an inexperienced! After all this is our Nation's future. Our Country will be facing crucial challenging times and we need someone like Hillary to bring about the changes and make our hopes a reality. The media should give her some respect and give her a break!! it's time. Sean Hannity and Dick Morris are the worse!!!they have torn her down with no mercy and frankly it's just to much. There were no tears, but yes there was exhaustion and sorrow... Hillary will make it to the White House> why? She has experience, perserverance,conviction and has her heart and soul in this.

Nora Iliadis. Woodland Hills (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:09 AM)

New Hampshire: is the message that we're to reward the nasty, divisive, misleading trash politics that we saw in the past 48 hours from BOTH Hillary and Bill?

Is that what we still reward? It seemed as if we had a chance to see how the "Hillary and Bill" team would react under pressure. And what we saw was Rovian tactics (trying to scare people about Al Qaeda) and dissembling (Bill twisting Obama's record).

A Stunned Independent (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:09 AM)

You gotta love it. The pundits, pollsters and armchair "experts" are irrevelent. The people have proven that they will vote their own mind and are not going to be hearded like goats.

Pacheck, Huntington Beach, Ca. (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:10 AM)

lmao, msnbc, the dumb and dumber crew of mathews and oberman, is crawling back to hillary, matt laur and brokaw are probably sending contrbuitions to Hillary now, this was total non professional reporting leading up to the vote ... now post this will ya Chuck

Hillary 4 Prez (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:10 AM)

Looking for the Truth,
I'm baffled. Was this how New Hampshire voted? To say, "don't tell US what to do. Stick it."

Doesn't seem to be the way to pick a President.

Independent Voter in CA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:11 AM)

Clinton won because she's the best on the issues.

Why is it okay for first read to state tears counted and appealed to women, but not okay to say Barrack isn't black enough so he doesn't appeal to African-Americans?

Tuck,Realityville,Ks (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:12 AM)

I have to say that I was shocked to see a win for Hillary, as her entire campaign has changed its look, feel and approach. I shouldn't be, however, as she has played in to the hands of those of us asking to see who she is as a person. On so many fronts, from the 'Well that hurts my feelings' comment during Saturday nights' debate to the tears and the cell phone call to Bill, we have seen a whole new side of Billary. I would say that is EXACTLY what gave her an advantage at the eleventh hour. She knows well how to manipulate the thinking of the voters...she is a strong woman who did not learn recently how to appeal to the public! I think she must be reading our blogs, as she has several times played into our pleas.

Kathryn in Bham (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:12 AM)

I am a 41 year old lifelong democrat who is an Obama supporter. I didn't know that Hillary was the President, then Senator for 35 years, but that is what she is claiming. She also said she doesn't want the country to go backwards in her little teary eyed moment.I guess going back to the 90's is forward in her mind. I will not vote for her. If she is the Democratic candidate, I will stay home. If the choice is her or a republican, I don't see any difference.

David in Tallahassee (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:13 AM)

Who couldn't love mathews and olberman both sitting there with dumbfunded looks as their boy obama wasn't declared the immediate winner...what we have now is msnbc shilling for obama and fauxnews shilling for romney...great stuff

Rick, WS, NC (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:14 AM)

The way Chris Matthews hates Hillary and runs his mouth he should be working for Fox.

Blue state baby (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:14 AM)

I hear folks saying Hilary won in New Hampshire because she, rather than Obama, won the votes of women. However, it looked to me like Obama got just about the same percentage of women in New Hampshire as he did in Iowa (35% vs 34%) -- is that correct? If so, it looks like the increase it women's votes for Hilary came at the expense of Edwards.

Mike, New York (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:14 AM)

As for Hillary showing emotion and the press going crazy over it, where was the press when Mitt Romney teared up 3 times over the past two months? Talk about a double standard.

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:15 AM)

I am so shocked that the state of New Hampshire fell for another Clinton lie. I have a six year old grandson that can cry on cue just like she did. The only thing that woman understands is how to lie. She will do anything and be cute for anyone who she thinks can do her some good. I truly believe we are ready for a woman president, I just pray it is not Hiliary. We have a wonderful chance to elect a man who see's good for our future. I hope we don't through this chance away just because Hiliary knows how to cry on cue.

Barbara Mortson Ardmore, OK (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:16 AM)

The reason the polls and pundits got it "so wrong" is because of clowns like you: Todd, Murray,and Montanaro
Your job is to put out the facts. The readers and voters will make up their own minds. Don't give us your own spin and opinions on what is happening.

redshift, spokane wa (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:17 AM)

she hasnt one the nod yet folks, just one battle, albeit a small one really. Its a race to the end, and either candidate we choose is a win for the democratic party.We get GWB out and back to Texas and we get either barack or hillary, either of which is better than W. Be proud. By the way, was there a GOP primary last night? oh yeah there was....

Lynette, NYC (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:18 AM)

Obviously it takes crying when things start to get tough to get people to vote for Hillary.Seriously John mcCain took enough of the independent votes from Barack Obama to give the pollsters a wake up call. independent voters went for McCain before and this should have been spotted long before the outcome last night.But the Ice Queen can't cover her facade with tears forever!

Greg, Wisc. (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:19 AM)

Hillary's not my first choice, but I was thrilled with her win last night. It represented a total repudiation of the media narrative that had gleefully declared her dead and buried. At a time when this country is wrestling with important economic and security issues, the press and the pollsters could find nothing more important to do than work out 20 years of personal animosity toward Bill and Hillary Clinton. Thus, all of the talk about Hillary's emotional demeanor, her cleavage, her pantsuits, her alleged propensity to clap like Chairman Mao, her shrillness and whether or not she sounds "like a stereotypical bitch" in the words of Chris Matthews. You add nothing of value, so the voters ignored you. The only question is whether you're smart enough to learn your lesson. Personally, I doubt it.

Jersey Tomato, Metuchen, NJ (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:19 AM)

I had forgotten that during Bill's "I did not have sex with that women" episode Hillary defended him with the "vast right wing conspiracy" comment.

Now, when Hillary was down, Bill was able to say "I love you" publicaly on his cell phone to her.

These folks know how to morph themselves into the form required at the moment to hold and retain power.

The question is will the public buy into the soap opera or are they at a stage where the want substance?

Only the future will tell...........

George Hagen, Flagstaff, AZ (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:19 AM)

Congrats to Hillary, but like your supporters said before Tuesday night 'it ain't over till it's over'....

SEE, Hillary-lovers, it IS possible to accept minor defeats without blaming the system/voters/polls/media in the process!

OBAMA '08!

JJ Jax, FL (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:20 AM)

This is presidential election. We are not electing a preacher.

Hussain Obama will be shredded to pieces by same corporate media and republicans if he wins the nomination. They hate people who stand up to them and slap them in the face with help of people.

Seed of Change, Philly (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:22 AM)

Looking for the Truth (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:07 AM)
"unrealistic view of the world?"

You just defined Project for the New American Century and the root of just about everything wrong with the current Administration and the precarious mess they will leave us in. You haven't had enough of the "grown-ups" yet?

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:24 AM)

I don't even care anymore. After all the racist and xenophobic attacks against Barack Obama by rival "DEMOCRATS" or shall I say "Dixiecrats", if Hillary is the nominee, I'm voting for Huckabee or anyone on the Republican ticket. The Democratic party will be a party no more. This would be their third Presidential election loss.Sen Obama has made a name for himself, he has nothing to lose-
No one should be gloating at this point. A candidate needs to earn the party's nomination-
What Sen Clinton and her supporters don't understand is, if she wins the nomination ,WE, the rest of the Democratic Party are going to vote Republican, we hate her that much. What Sen Clinton easily forgets is this is the Primary Election, not the General Election.
Though I support Obama through the primaries, if Sen Clinton wins the primary, my vote and support will be needed by her. The same goes for all other supporters.
Remember Hillary supporters, you might need us, if Hillary wins. Also, Obama attracts a lot of independent voters to vote democrat, so if you treat us like dirt, those independent voters might stay home or Vote Republican on election day

Dee, Plano,TX (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:24 AM)

Obama fans, can you answer me a question? I have yet to get a straight answer. Why did Obama vote "Present" on every bill that came up in the the Ill. Senate having to do with a woman's right to choose? I know one thing, Hillary would never vote "Present" on any woman's right to choose bill. Why would any Democrat vote for a person who doesn't have the conviction to vote for a bill concering a woman's right to choose? And the media wants to talk about Hillary Trianglelating? I'm serious, I would like an answer to that question and expect Hillary to bring it up over the next few weeks.

Also, why would any Democrat vote for Cheney's energy bill, that was written by Enron, like Obama did? You know the bill that gave billions of tax breaks to the oil companies. Hillary did not vote for it, for that reason. I have still yet to hear an explanation for that vote and why hasn't the media talked about that either?

You Obama fans can bring up her Iraq vote, we all know about that and I don't agree with that either. But Obama fans, please give me an explanation.

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:25 AM)

I feel the media played a big part in skewing this primary with their constant opinions and contrived narratives. If they had not built Obama up so much prior to this, a mere 3 point loss would not have seemed so disappointing. It is actually quite an amazing showing considering the Clinton's entrenched support in this state.

I am still 100% for Obama. Whatever sympathy I felt for Hillary would not have been enough to sway my vote, if that is actually what happened out there. I want someone new. I'm tired of theatrics, political maneuvering and people who are more concerned with their legacies, than their country. And don't give me the experience crap. I'm looking for character and class and so far I've only seen that in Obama.

AP from IL (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:27 AM)

This election cycle is exciting..for the first time in a long time I can't wait for our primary Feb5.
Clinton is not a come back kid..seeing as she has held front runner status since she announced. Obama is scaring the crap out of the Clintons.
I will not vote for Clinton.I do believe America has more choices then two families (Bush/Clinton)..Haven't we had enough of this monopoly?.
Also a reminder to all those voting for Clinton..She is NOT Bill, she is not as charismatic nor is she as likable as her husband also she hasn't really done squat..Her touting her 35 year career of change..what specifics did she give? Oh yeah..her healthcare plan..we all know how successful that was!.If she does win the nomination you can sit back and watch the republicans defeat the democrats in the fall..
If America truly wants change then they must look to a different candidate other then Madam Clinton

Connie, Chicago (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:27 AM)

On my way home from NH, anything interesting happen here? lol It was WILD here last night! The first time a woman has ever won a presidential primary election, now THAT'S historic!

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:28 AM)

WOW GIVE HER CREDIT A FAKE PHONE CALL FROM BILL WHO CHELSEA DOESNT HAVE HIS NUMBER

2 GUYS WITH HUGE SIGNS THAT SECURITY COULDNT MISS, THAT READ IRON MY SHIRTS HILLARY AND SHOUTED IT OUT AND HILLARY SAYING THE MALE CHAUVENTIST SHOWED UP LMAO

AND THE HOLLYWOOD CRYING ACT

GOOD LUCK OBAMA YOU RE UP AGAINST SOME IGNORANT GULLIBLE WOMEN BY WAY IM A REPUB TG

KING OF SMEAR (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:28 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=563117