The Boston Globe has a new poll out this morning, with the New Hampshire primary just 2 1/2 weeks away. Here are the results:
McCain, the darling of New Hampshire voters in the 2000 primary, has the support of 25 percent of likely Republican voters, compared with 28 percent for Romney. Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani has slid into third place, with 14 percent. A Globe poll of New Hampshire voters last month had Romney at 32 percent, Giuliani at 20 percent, and McCain at 17 percent.Among Democratic voters, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has opened up a narrow lead over Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, 30 percent to 28 percent. That, too, represents a major shift from last month's Globe poll, which had Clinton with a 14-point advantage. Former senator John Edwards of North Carolina remained a steady third at 14 percent.
In short, it looks like John McCain is surging at exactly the right time on the Republican side, while Barack Obama is doing the same on the Democratic side. The first question is, what will happen in Iowa and how will that affect New Hampshire? Let's say Mike Huckabee wins Iowa, followed closely by Romney and McCain; would that hurt Romney or McCain more? (my guess is that it would hurt Romney more) Another big question is which primary New Hampshire independents will choose to vote in, Republican or Democratic. Obviously, John McCain is strong among independent voters, so he's hoping most of them vote "R" on election day.
On the Democratic side, it's so close in New Hampshire that Iowa could determine the winner. If Hillary Clinton wins Iowa, for instance, will Obama be able to hold his slim lead in New Hampshire? If Obama wins Iowa, does that all but clinch New Hampshire for him? And what about the wild card of John Edwards, who certainly has a shot at winning Iowa; if so, who would finish second and third, and how would that affect New Hampshire? Finally, just as on the Republican side, it's important whether independents tend to vote "D" or "R" on election day. In the case of the Democrats, more independents probably helps Barack Obama; fewer independents help Hillary Clinton and probably John Edwards.
Man, my head's starting to hurt. Time for some eggnog? :)
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com...
Obama continues to pick up support from the NetRoots in New Hampshire. Two regulars on Blue New Hampshire, Andy Edwards and Mike Hoefer, have recently endorsed Barack Obama for president.
Andy Edwards is a founding member of the NH Democratic Majority and Andy was elected elected as a State Representative in New Hampshire in November, 2006.
Mike Hoefer is a blogger on Blue New Hampshire and has been blogging on that site since its inception.
Read their endorsements below:
http://bluehampshire.com/front...
if Obama wins Iowa he will NH. If Edwards wins Iowa Clinton MAY win NH. IT may come down to what independents do. If Obama wins Iowa they are likely to vote Dem and vote for him. If Obama finishes third more are likely to vote for McCain rather than in Dem race. If Edwards wins and Obama is 2nd it might be too close to call in NH.
And if Hillary were to win in Iowa (which I do not think she will do) she is likely then to sweep the next 3 - NH, SC and NV - and the race would be over.
So given the short time between Iowa and NH I am far less concerned about newspaper endorsements than I might have been in previous years.
Some of this variation is the purely random sort that comes with doing a survey (the part that the "margin of error" quantifies), and how hard each organization pushes those who are initially undecided, but a large portion also comes from how they define and select "likely caucus" goers. What makes Iowa different is the last source of variability. It is bigger and more consequential than for other types of polls. So if we take into account both the closeness of the Democratic race and all sources of potential poll error, we really have no idea who is truly "ahead" at this point in the race. The polls are simply too blunt an instrument, especially given all the uncertainty about who will participate.
The pushing of the undecided voter will vary with each poll. (They're supposed to follow a script, naturally.) When I was reviewing polls in litigation, it was fascinating to see the differences between response summaries where no pushing was done versus some pushing versus a lot of pushing.
I am excited about the coming weeks. I feel like a high school senior who has been asked by several hotties to go to the prom. And I'm really pitying my friend from the other party who has five invitations but they're all pretty much duds.
Regardless, if the final result is as close as the polls are now, I don't think that the winner by a percentage point or two is going to come out of IA and NH with that big of an advantage. This could turn into a long-range war of attrition between the two camps. If so, it'll be a familiar battle for the Dems, the change agent vs. the establishment candidate (as in Hart vs. Mondale, McGovern vs. Muskie, etc.) My crystal ball is foggy on this one, though right now, the momentum is clearly with Obama.
Meanwhile, the Republican race is starting to resemble the breakup of Yugoslavia -- a complete mess as different factions break off from each other. Romney is the most likely candidate to unite the diverse sides right now, but he better close the deal quickly or he's in big trouble...
"Let The People Rule" -- Andrew Jackson