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

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

It's called analysis. That is what they are paid for. You have always been free to take it or leave it. If you want some one to validate your own opinion find a mirror, a parrot, or a Fox "news" reader.
Ahccch! Polly wants a talking point! Ahccch!

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:28 AM)

This is the 1st time since I began voting that any of the three Democratic front runners are perfectly fine with me. I was leaning towards Mr. Edwards however after watching his vitreol towards Mrs. Clinton I am more than a little discouraged.Dems need unity to assure no more neocons in the White House. I have always been a Hardball fan but Chris Matthews obvious hatred for all things Clinton have forced me to change the channel more in the last month than in the last two years.

Jim Hayes, Havertown, Pa. (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:30 AM)

Here is some advice I think we can all take after last night:

Polls mean absolutely nothing. Not in Iowa. Not in New Hampshire. And probably not anywhere else.

Congratulations to Senator Clinton. It appears this might be a close race after all.

CitizenJ (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:30 AM)

The famous quote by P.T. Barnum "There's a sucker born every minute" was never more evident than in the NH Democratic primary yesterday. The American public needs to remember the shame and humiliation the "Clintons" caused this country in 1998. The Republicans can only hope "the whatever way the wind is blowing" - "ever changing" chameleon Hillary continues to do well so the Republicans will have any decisive victory in November.

Bill, Macomb MI (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:30 AM)

TO ALL DEMOCRATS IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE REPUBLICAN ADS IN THE ELECTION GO TO NO MORE HILLARY.CO, AND CLINTON S PARDONS AND CLINTONS SCANDALS IF YOU HAVE A STRONG STOMACH

KING OF SMEAR (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:31 AM)

Here's why I think Hillary won New Hampshire.

I see this as a battle within the Democratic Party between those who want to try for a more adult, respectful tone in Washington and those who want to continue fighting the partisan trench wars.

If you look at New Hampshire over the last few decades from that perspective, the state's voters seem to prefer a more belligerent tone. Remember, this is the state Pat Buchanan carried with his "march to the sounds of the guns" line (yes I know that was the other party, but I think it may be a regional characteristic that crosses party lines).

New Hampshire results tend to contradict results from "Iowa nice."

That's not to say New Hampshire voters like ruthless, negative campaigns. But they do seem to reward the more fiery candidates. McCain's "straight talk" is a good fit. Note too how he ramped up his fiery aspects before the primary and then toned it down for the victory speech, which in reality is aimed at the rest of the country.

And from that perspective, if you're looking for a single incident that helped Clinton most, I suspect it was her flash of anger in the debates rather than the emotional moment the next day.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:31 AM)

This Election has always been about the lack of a Woman's Voice in leading the Country. If you don't think a majority of Women resent even the slightest hint of Misogyny among the Candidates, the Media, the Co-Worker, the Man sitting across from them at breakfast, you are wrong. All the Candidates are talking Change. Hillary is the Change that none of the others can offer. If she is elected and gets this Country back on track, we might not see another Man elected for a long time. Sisterhood IS Powerful, whether people deny that or not. Just an Independent Observation

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:31 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.

I hate to see this stuff and it makes me wonder David, TN if you really are a lifelong Democrat. Why would you give up your right to vote and take away one less vote from the Democratic candidate and give an advantage to the republicans. Every vote counts. If you really are 41, then you would know that no candidate is perfect and going to give you everything you want, but I do know a Democrat in the presidency will keep the right from getting another facist Judge on the Supreme court. Wake up and grow up!

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:32 AM)

I think when the postmortems are all done we'll find that a lot of the Undeclareds that were assumed to be voting for Obama instead voted for McCain. Since voters are more easily motivated to vote AGAINST a candidate than FOR one it probably says that the Republican field scares independent voters and they voted for McCain to try to head off Romney, Giuliani, or Huckabee in the general election. I also think the MSM works WAY too hard to tell a story that favors the candidate they like best personally and in the process tell a deceptive story of the campaign. The way Candy Crowley gushed over GW in the 2000 & 2004 campaigns was ridiculous, for example, and the story that GW was "the guy you'd like to have a beer with" was a media construct that became self-fulfilling prophecy. The margin for Clinton was still MUCH closer than was assumed a few weeks ago and clearly the Democratic race is wide open. I remain convinced this race is the Democrats to lose if any of the top 3 Dems gets the nomination.

John B, Des Moines, IA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:32 AM)

I'm happy to see how many are now realizing how much the media tries to infulence the election by either supporting their favorites (which changes like the wind) and attempts to destroy those who don't mirror their own political views. While many will point to Fox News erroneously as the network guilty of this it is becoming more obvious to those who aren't brain dead that MSNBC/NBC/Newsweek are the most guilty of trying to manipulate the American people based on their own political bias.

Looking for the Truth (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:33 AM)

II didn't realized that MSNBC was biased until this election. Chris Matthews is saying the NH voter are racist and lairs and you Chuck are soo over your ego that now you are bashing the Clinton campaign. When are you guys going to give credit for this woman? Just face it, this women can take hundred punch and still can't be knocked out. Shame on you Chuck. When are you going to join Obama campaign?

John, Columbus, OH (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:33 AM)

We are still a divided nation. The Clinton-haters are playing the gender card negatively. Talk radio is saying the crying was staged. It IS going to come down to actual experience. Obama is a good man who needs more "seasoning". His turn will come, but not now. This is Hillary's time. You go girl!

Alan Siegel, Stamford, CT (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:34 AM)

New Hampshire had an extraordinary opportunity to send a resounding message to Washington that America is sick of lobbyist money controlling our government.

Instead, what did some voters do if reports (including self-reports from New Hampshire) this morning are correct?

Certain NH voters registered a "protest" vote against John Edwards' ganging up on her in the debate and Chris Matthews and the mainstream media for "daring to tell us what to think."

Well, you sure showed Chris Matthews but isn't this about electing a new leader of the free world?

Dumbfounded in Des Moines (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:35 AM)

Todd, Murray, and Domenico. Just a quick thanks for all you do. You have the lightest touch, and always have. Don't mind the occasional Bozo, OK?

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:35 AM)

Shadow,

Justt like you claim (and spin) that there were thousands of young youth voters who are kicking themselves now for not voting, similarly the fact is there are thousands of mature grown up intelligent rational logical voters in the age of 40-60 and above who didnt turn up to vote in Iowa. They are kicking themselves too.

Spin is easy and so is hypocrisy. Good to see as an Obama supporter, you excel in both.

Sandeep, CA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:36 AM)

The pundits believe they can push the voters in one direction or another. Neither Iowa nor NH really represent the rest of the country. This is a stupid game to think these two states represent how the rest of the country will go. The sad shame of it all is that the media is really trying to influence the voter based on what they believe. Romney loses big and he is still in it, Rudy is no where, yet he is still in it. Obama is a head of Hillary by a very narrow margin in Iowa and all of a sudden she is supposed to be out of it. A different standard for Republicans and Dems. Edwards declares after Iowa it is now between him and Obama and then gets destroyed in NH. Any of the Dem candidates is better then the Bush wannabees. People forget the biggest challenge facing the new President is getting the dumb Republican congress to start acting for the middle class. Hillary is a better choice because she has been battling those jerks and making changes for years. I do not think that Obama ( although a good 2nd choice can really get congress to make changes.
Edwards and Obama want to put the "status quo" label on Hillary, because they need to scare us, that's a Repulican tactic, scare American to grab their vote.

Republican started the Hate Hillary campaign 8 years ago. Opp's they may have to start a Hate Obama campaign now, and you can bet they will, if he wins.

JR, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:37 AM)

"...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.
..."

A little cheerleading there, I see.
Independents were supposed to swing the primary in New Hampshire last night too.
How'd that work out, eh?
By the way, did Mathews buy a "fifth" after the broadcast last night, polish it off, then beat his wife when he got home?
GEEEEZus, I hope he doesn't turn into a serial killer when Hillary wins her next primary! I never saw anybody that angry with the result of an election they were reporting on. The man's going to have an aneurism if he isn't careful.
Your commentary in "First Thoughts," and the numbers from last night prove (once again) what I've been saying all along.
That, most of Hillary's support comes from registered, mainstream Democrats; while most of Obama's support comes from independents.
They may be able to swing a couple of primaries, and their votes are good to have, along with that of a party's "base" in any "general" election.
But, you cannot win an election with the independent vote representing a larger percentage of your support, than that of your own party's "base" of core voters. Obama's biggest problem in a "general" would-be right along those lines.
That, along with the offense taken by mainstream Democrats (such as myself) with the idea of having independents select our candidate for us, would probably cost Obama, and The Democratic Party the election in November. (Whether his supporters want to admit it or not.)
I think what we saw last night in New Hampshire reflects the attitude of the Democratic "base."
If independents are going to "stuff" the ballot box, then registered Democrats are probably going to come out in greater numbers too. You'll probably see record participation in The Democratic Primaries, and Caucuses from here on out. It's interesting to note that partisan voters won the day for Hillary.
Also, the woman came into play last night. 47% of them voted for Hillary. I think they've been waiting to see 'Hillary-be-Hillary' the way she was in the two days which preceeded the voting, and especially the way she presented herself in the debate Saturday night.
People are also starting to look at Obama much more closely than before. The biggest question we all have is, 'what is he going to change and how is going to change it?'
Nobody really knows. Because most of his speaches (even though they are recited with charm and charisma) contain rhetorical catch phrases, and 'buzz-words' that are delivered in cheerleading fashion.
In short, Obama talks well.
But, he lacks substance, and he talks at you...not with you.
In the end, the polling data was off by as much as 20%. Some said Hillary would lose by 17 points, instead she won by 3. A lot of voters said they hadn't made up their minds until just before they walked into the voting booths last night. Additionally, the younger vote, and the indpendents didn't push Obama over the top as expected. Partisans came out in equally large numbers and made the difference for Hillary. Don't be too surprised if that also happens in these other states where the indy's are supposed to make a difference.
But for today, I'm satisfied with Hillary's win last night, and I look forward to watching Obama supporters whine, cry, bitch, and moan about what happened. My wife and I have a bet going here, as to how many times the buzz words "cold," "calculating," "divisive," and "polarizing" will be used, and how many times (and how many different ways) the catch phrase "Hillary energizes conservatives to vote against Democrats" will be spun.
All things considered, it should be a fun day.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:38 AM)

Question to liberal bloggers: Who is using the GOP talking points now ?

Answer: THE CLINTONS !!

I still think Obama has to be favored for the nomination....

If the Clinton's had to 'mischaracterize' (to quote Obama using a euphemism for lying) Obama's positions...... They've got NOTHING

If the Clinton's threw EVERYTHING THEY G=HAD AT OBAMA
They've got NOTHING

She WON'T WIN CALIFORNIA !!

It's a longer campaign, with a happy ending ....... OBAMA

Keep sniveling about the media, Clintonistas
It's verrrrrry appealing

Obama/Edwards '08

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:41 AM)

Hillary has never said she is the president like someone said here. All three of the top candidates say when they are president. All three of them use emotion to try to win over voters. Obama uses his blackness, Edwards uses families who have suffered medical tragedies and we heard constantly in the last debate how he felt things inside and deep and how personal everyuthing is. Okay, so Clinton showed a few tears. The difference is???? The Hillary haters are just that. There is a double-standard for the good ole' boys. If they something it is okay, if Hillary does the same thing she is called a manipulator or worse. Get over the gender bias. Vote for who you want, but stop the I Hate Hillary rhetoric. Oh yeh. For Bill in MI. Let's us remember what the Clinton's brought to this country. Sound economy, high norale in our country, respected by other countries, should I go own.

Kris, Keizer, OR (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:41 AM)

Wow, it was quite shocking to see the pundit from the Washington Post? on MSNBC pull out the race card when he realized Obama wasn't going to win. I know this guy is just another one of the normal leftwing hacks normally found on MSNBC but it was sad to see how quick it came back to "The white man is keeping me down" view still used so often by many racist minorities in an attempt to continue the race war - soo sad.

jbl in PA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:43 AM)

75% of Democratic voter's yesterday, said, they were concerned about another Terror attack.Mrs. karl Rove on Monday said Exactly That.Mission Accomplished, Mrs. Karl Rove, you singlehandily put Fear into New Hampshire Democratic voter's. Mission Accomplished, Indeed!!!!!!!

Rick,ky (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:44 AM)

The big loser was the media. With their poll results and snide comments. I was happy to see Hillary win for that reason along.The media thinks they can influrence the public and I realize that there are some who just sprout what they hear. I don't think that showing emotions got her the vote. Woman are much smarter than that. I think this shows that the media should stick to reporting the facts, and not what they think will happen or want to happen. Thank you NH for putting them in there place.

JaniceM,Atlanta,GA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:44 AM)

I agree with "redshift"!

I'm really tired of NBC, MSNBC, and First Read bloggers Todd, Murray and Montanaro spinning the election news towards Obama and away from Clinton, et al, rather than simply reporting the facts and letting us do our individual spinning. I say this even though Hillary is not my first choice.

Once again, to First Read, please, PLEASE eschew your use of the "snarky" questions; for that matter, just eliminate your questions altogether.

Stu Hyvonen, Saginaw, MI (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:45 AM)

maybe the great OBAMA should cry..a man crys he,s a wimp..a woman and its cool..NH is the "chicken state" not having the courage to back real change in Obama..a truly establishment & thus stupid state. Obama should be president if America is wise tho HILARY would be good too..anybody but those revolting Republiucans..a view from Europe n god bless AMERICA

JOHN ROGAN LONDON UK (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:46 AM)

Who is the adviser who picked out Hillary's dress for her N.H. victory speech? You could make a joke about which of the "old Clinton guard" threw that thing out. Dress is important when trying to sway young voters.

Ed Mikulski, Daytona Beach, Florida (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:46 AM)

Read This: New Hampshire Democratic Primary
Check out this website. http://ronrox.com/paulstats.php?party=DEMOCRATS It breaks down the number of votes to Machine counted vs hand counted. Notice how Clinton's votes are inflated with Machine votes and Obama's are deflated. This looks artificial and I think it is fraud. If they where not artificially inflated then the poll results would match the outcome from last nights primary. This needs to be exposed. I am just concerned that if this is happening in the primaries imagine what will happen in the general election.

And no I am not some crazed Ron Paul supporter. This is just the only website I found that breaks the data down so clearly. Personally I like Thompson.
Thanks.

Jack Sprat, Fat City, NV (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:47 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)

Mike, the difference is that she got 47% of a female vote that was split between all the candidates. Obama supporters aren't likely to change midstream. But, if Edwards supporters are throwing in the towel so to speak, and giving their support to Hillary, it only strengthens her base.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:48 AM)

pity is not a good reason to vote for a presidential candidate, new hampshire made themselves look ridiculous falling for the 'poor hillary' production, but I suspect that won't be a winning strategy elsewhere, obama and edwards best watch their back, hillary is capable of anything

MK,MO (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:48 AM)

And once again, it is just now becoming fun!

Mark Thieme (Sent Monday, January 07, 2008 3:47 PM)

---------------------------------------------

Enjoy yourself Mark, as tomorrow I do believe Hillary and McCain will be the surprise in Obama's and Romney's eyes! Fun? Interesting? You betcha!
If not another day will surely dawn. As for change....
HP Boston (Sent Monday, January 07, 2008 4:17 PM)

________________________________________________

OH YES it does feel good to best the Mark Thieme!
It is good to be so much smarter than the talking heads, What's the weather outside today boys?
Rain? Snow? Sleet? Feeling swamped? Under the weather?
Hey not to worry you guys make big bucks making this stuff up.

HP Boston (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:48 AM)

I think the media should concentrate on Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton and let the American people decide who will be president!

Bob, Orlando (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:48 AM)

Do tears Help? Ask George McGovern. Why is this even a relevant question? Is the showing of humanity instead of the cookie cutter campaigns of both sides a bad thing for this country? Who cares about the cost of haircuts and who eats hot dogs or tea with honey: Let's keep talking about infrastructure and the self-sustainablity of the country.

Cheryl Germer MN (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:49 AM)

The thing that worries me most is still who is Obama? I heard his dad was sent back to Kenya for burial. That is not root to me or patriotic enough to be President of USA. He never talks about his mum and his whole clan seems to be still rootted to Kenya. Or if he is elected, will he be bringing his whole Kenya clan to US?

Talk is easy. We have seen results produced by Hillary Clinton. I have not heard anything done by Obama. He is a hot celebrity senator now but can he produced the results that he promised with his inexperience? Will be the the replica of Bush? I have not heard anything specific achieved by Obama, so that is my main worry. I can also talk at the podium, promise all things but can I deliver when given the task?

This is a country we are talking about, not just an organization. We really need experience to bring this country back to good stand.

Jackie, California, CA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:49 AM)

HP Boston (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:49 AM)

I am really scared for this country when poeople vote for a candidate to "spite" something or someone else. It is also disturbing that people respond to a candidates "outbursts" like Bill's whining and Hillary's tears. WAKE UP AMERICA, LISTEN, the only things you should be paying attention to are 1)- Is the candidate honest and do they have integrity, 2)- Can they matrix manage congress and 3) What are their plans for the issues and how realistic are their implementation plans. NONE of the candidates have experience as president. I don't care if they watched their husbands in that role they don't have any experience. Vote with your brains not your emotions, this is not your love life, it is the future of this country and your children's future. I always thought the best debate would be to have average ciitzens ask the questions in a debate and if the candidate danced around the issue call them on it and make them answer it.

disgusted,charlotte,NC (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:49 AM)

Congratulations to Hillary. She needed a win and she got it. That being said, I think it was absolutely disgusting the way Bill tried to tear down a fellow Democrat (Obama) with lies and distortions yesterday. I truly hope that it didn't have any effect on the voting.

For me, if there is a candidate of hope or a candidate against hope, the candidate of hope will always be my choice. Especially since I had lost all hope over the past 7 years.

Keep fighting Obama. We will too!!!!

Obama '08

Jesse, Burnsville, MN (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:50 AM)

a pollster ask would you consider a black canidate. my answer is yes.i vote for my favorite and it's not obama i'm a liar and racist. the key word is CONSIDER.

frank harling, saint louis, missouri (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:51 AM)

Bill,Macom MI- the only shame I felt during that time was the amount of money spent on Clintons' Impeachment. I felt shame when we let Bush and his hoods steal the election,I felt shame when we went to war for oil and our standing in the world dropped, I feel shame for having a President is incompetent. Need I go on.

JaniceM,Atlanta,GA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:51 AM)

Hillary's tearful self pity was picked up and played over and over ad nauseum by all the "news" channels. Don't be fooled, this was planned - a very clever and very well orchestrated media coup...we all pity the crying fair sex. Obama would have been mocked for the same thing. We are sexist, she took advantage of it.

John (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:51 AM)

Yesterday my Aunt received the Obama is a Muslim e-mail from a Dem in CA. I am just wondering if there is some really dirty politics going on and where these e-mails are coming from? This is the type of politics most of us hate!

Caryn, Saint Louis, MO (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:52 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)

----------------
Yours and all hillary hater's accusation that the question that prompted Hillary's emotional response, was from a plant was debunked this morning on the news. The woman was interviewed on NBC, and she said she attended both Obama and Hillary rallies, and while touched by Hillary, was moved to tears during Obama's speach, and thus, she VOTED FOR OBAMA! So as usually, the Hillary Hater accusations are proven baseless once again.

Pat Huntington NY (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:53 AM)

Wow. 38% of NH decided in the last three days. Do some research. Your irresponsibility has ruined it for the rest of us who actually understand the issues and the candidate's take on them. You are like children picking teams for 4-square, letting popular opinion drive your choice rather than your own research. Hopefully the other states will have a more mature approach, or at least get informed before polluting the voting pool.

Madpauly, Madison, WI (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:53 AM)

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS OVER. SO LONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

g.w.b., bring it on ! (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:53 AM)

I just watched an interview on msnbc of a Las Vegas bookmaker who took bets on last nights out come. I was suprized to hear he had Senator Clinton picked as the winner last night. When asked why he picked her he said she was the best candidate,if a woman ran for president with as little as two years experience she would be laughed out of that arena refering to Senator Obama. Maybe you people before picking winners in the political arena should check the odds in Vegas

Adam Hazleton Pa (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:53 AM)

Does anybody feel that this win by Hillary may have been at her own detriment? Don't get me wrong, a win is a win. But if she would have lost, she could have just skipped Nevada and South Carolina, which would have made their legitimacy virtually nothing. She could have then just focused on the big states on Feb. 5th.

Now, she must campaign in Nevada and South Carolina and if she were to lose those two states (not saying that she will), I think she will be in much worse shape in the Feb 5th states that if she would have been able to just skip these states.

I don't know, should be interesting.

Jesse, Burnsville, MN (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:53 AM)

as for me, well, i am a 60 year old former marine and vietnam veteran and a formerly republican, but ever since what never transpired after 911 and watching the economy fail, i am a full supporter of hillary clinton.most americans have very short memories and forgot how the clinton administration creat a strong markets in our country and i do feel hillary does really care genuinely and sincerely, so who cares about the personal lifes anymore?

dan (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:53 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
---------------------------------------------- Van,
I never doubted for one minute that Hillary would win NH. People in NH have had their Republican roots shaken to the core these last 7 years. Once a red state it has become blue and as always fiercely independent.

HP Boston (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:54 AM)

So, if Hillary is having discussions with the Iranian leader, and things aren't gong her way, is she going to cry? That will really show USA's resolve.

John Doe, Seattle, WA (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:55 AM)

First Read:

Why aren't there ANY RECENT POLLS for Nevada ?
Do you have any ?

Any new National polls ?
I understand Hillary's lead has COLLASPED
Where's the latest ?

We used to have a guy in this blog who would continually post national polls when his candidate was ahead......

Sierra, SF (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:56 AM)

To Susan in Annapolis - I completely agree with you.

After using her celebrity to become a Senator from New York, apparently now she feels entitled to move up to the Presidency. Entitled - that's her word. However I disagree - those 35 years of experience she talks about - she spent all those 35 years enabling Bill to get away with whatever he wanted.

So, yesterday she used an old trick "Crocodile Tears = Sympathy Votes" and it worked.

Let's make sure that no more of the Clinton tricks are successfull.

Joan Chapman, Cheshire, Ct. (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:56 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)

Great comment Dot. I have been saying that for 15 years now.

Its simple the media wants to produce the candidates for us, that is wrong. Please people vote for who you like do not listen to any of these pundints.

Question for all, why weren't there any early returns shown during the day on any network? That was the biggest joke, come on you and I know they had eary returns why weren't they posted?

John McCain 08

Ron NPR FL (Sent Wednesday, January 09, 2008 10:56 AM)

<< Previous

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